This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
its crew and 40 passengers. Most of the passengers were members of an amateur Uruguayan rugby team en route to a game in Chile. The plane never arrived. It crashed in snow-covered mountains, breaking into several pieces on impact. The main part of the fuselage slid like a toboggan down a steep valley, finally coming to rest in waist-deep snow. Although a number of people died immediately or within a day of the impact, the picture for the 28 survivors was not much better. The fuselage initially offered little protection from the extreme cold, food supplies were scant, and a number of passengers had serious injuries from the crash. Over the next few days, several of the passengers became psychotic and several others died from their injuries. Those passengers who were relatively uninjured set out to do what they could to improve their chances of survival. Several worked on “weatherproofing” the wreckage, others found ways to get water, and those with medical training took care of the injured. Although shaken from the crash, the survivors initially were confident they would be found. These feelings gradually gave way to despair, as search and rescue teams failed to find the wreckage. With the passing of several weeks and no sign of rescue in sight, the remaining passengers decided to mount several expeditions to determine the best way to escape. The most physically fit were chosen to go on the expeditions, as the thin mountain air and the deep snow made the trips extremely taxing. The results of the trips were both frustrating and demoralizing; the expeditionaries determined they were in the middle of the Andes Mountains, and walking out to find help was believed to be impossible. Just when the survivors thought nothing worse could possibly happen, an avalanche hit the wreckage and killed several more of them. The remaining survivors concluded they would not be rescued and their only hope was for someone to leave the wreckage and find help. Three of the fittest passengers were chosen for the final expedition, and everyone else’s work was directed toward improving the expedition’s chances of success. The three expeditionaries were given more food and were exempted from routine survival activities; the rest spent most of their energies securing supplies for the trip. Two months after the plane crash, the expeditionaries set out on their final attempt to find help. After hiking for 10 days through some of the most rugged terrain in the world, the expeditionaries stumbled across a group of Chilean peasants tending cattle. One of the expeditionaries stated, “I come from a plane that fell in the mountains. I am Uruguayan . . .” Eventually, 14 other survivors were rescued. When the full account of their survival became known, it was not without controversy. It had required extreme and unsettling measures; the survivors had lived only by eating the flesh of their deceased comrades. Nonetheless,
their story is one of the most moving survival dramas of all time, magnificently told by Piers Paul Read in Alive (1974). It is a story of tragedy and courage, and it is a story of leadership. Perhaps a story of survival in the Andes is so far removed from everyday experience that it does not seem to hold any relevant lessons about leadership for you personally. But consider for a moment some of the basic issues the Andes survivors faced: tension between individual and group goals, dealing with the different needs and personalities of group members, and keeping hope alive in the face of adversity. These issues are not so very different from those facing many groups we’re a part of. We can also look at the Andes experience for examples of the emergence of informal leaders in groups. Before the flight, a boy named Parrado was awkward and shy, a “second-stringer” both athletically and socially. Nonetheless, this unlikely hero became the best loved and most respected among the survivors for his courage, optimism, fairness, and emotional support. Persuasiveness in group decision making also was an important part of leadership among the Andes survivors. People in organizations rarely, if ever, work entirely alone. People belong to all sorts of different groups-both formal and informal-and these exert a very strong influence on behavior. It has been also studied that what motivates people can be very diverse and this sets a problem for management in organizations-how do you get the best out of people. The link is LEADERSHIP. Throughout the history it has been argued that the difference between success and failure, whether in war, business, protest movements or football, can largely be attributed to leadership.
Good leadership has a profound impact on organizations, government, society, and everyday activities because leadership allows organizations to achieve their goals. Excellent managers are usually expected to have a reasonably high level of leadership skills, and effective leadership is a necessary ingredient in successful companies (Bennis and Nanus, 1985).
One measure of leadership is the caliber of people who choose to follow you.
—Dennis A. Peer, Management Consultant
What Is Leadership? Leadership “is the ability to influence, motivate and contribute towards the effectiveness of the organizations of which they are members” Good leadership has a profound impact on organizations, government, society, and everyday activities because leadership allows organizations to achieve their goals. Excellent managers are usually expected to have a reasonably high level of leadership skills, and effective leadership is a necessary ingredient in successful companies (Bennis and Nanus, 1985). In order to meet the responsibilities of an organization and protect its welfare, leaders must pursue a common goal. Leadership is a complex phenomenon involving the leader, the followers, and the situation. Some leadership researchers have focused on the personality, physical traits, or behaviors of the leader; others have studied the relationships between leaders and followers; still others have studied how aspects of the situation affect the ways leaders act. Some have extended the latter viewpoint so far as to suggest there is no such thing as leadership; they argue that organizational successes and failures often get falsely attributed to the leader, but the situation may have a much greater impact on how the organization functions than does any individual, including the leader (Meindl & Ehrlich, 1987) Despite the differences, the various definitions of leadership share three common elements: First, leadership is a group phenomenon; there can be no leaders without followers. As such, leadership always involves interpersonal influence or persuasion. Second, leadership is goal directed and plays an active role in groups and organizations. Leaders use influence to guide others through a certain course of action or toward the achievement of certain goals. Third, the presence of leaders assumes some form of hierarchy within a group. In some cases, the hierarchy is formal and well defined, with the leader at the top; in other cases, it is informal and flexible.
Combining these three elements, we can define a leader as any person who influences individuals and groups within an organization, helps them in establishing goals, and guides them toward achievement of those goals, thereby allowing them to be effective. Leadership Is Both Rational and Emotional
A democracy cannot follow a leader Unless he is dramatized. A man to be a hero must not content himself with heroic virtues and anonymous action. He must talk and explain as he acts—drama. -William Allen White, American writer and editor, Emporia Gazette
Leadership involves both the rational and emotional sides of human experience. Leadership includes actions and influences based on reason and logic as well as those based on inspiration and passion. Because people differ in their thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams, needs and fears, goals and ambitions, and strengths and weaknesses, leadership situations can be very complex. Because people are both rational and emotional, leaders can use rational techniques and/or emotional appeals in order to influence followers, but they must also weigh the rational and emotional consequences of their actions. A full appreciation of leadership involves looking at both these sides of human nature. Good leadership is more than just calculation and planning, or following a “checklist,” even though rational analysis can enhance good leadership. Good leadership also involves touching others’ feelings; emotions play an important role in leadership too. Ex. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., inspired many people to action; he touched people’s hearts as well as their heads. Aroused feelings, however, can be used either positively or negatively, constructively or destructively. Some leaders have been able to inspire others to deeds of great purpose and courage. Ex images of Adolf Hitler’s mass rallies or present-day angry mobs attest, group frenzy can readily become group mindlessness. Leadership and Management In trying to answer “What is leadership?” it is natural to look at the relationship between leadership and management. To many, the word
management suggests words like efficiency, planning, paperwork, procedures, regulations, control, and consistency. Leadership is often more associated with words like risk taking, dynamic, creativity, change, and vision. Some say leadership is fundamentally a value-choosing, and thus a value-laden, activity, whereas management is not. Leaders are thought to do the right things, whereas managers are thought to do things right (Bennis, 1985; Zaleznik, 1983). Here are some other distinctions between managers and leaders.
Remember the difference between a boss and a leader: a boss says, “Go!”—a leader says, “Let’s go!” -E. M. Kelly
• • • • • • •
Managers Managers Managers Managers Managers Managers Managers
administer; leaders innovate. maintain; leaders develop. control; leaders inspire. have a short-term view; leaders, a long-term view. ask how and when; leaders ask what and why. imitate; leaders originate. accept the status quo; leaders challenge it.
Good leadership has a profound impact on organizations, government, society, and everyday activities because leadership allows organizations to achieve their goals. Excellent managers are usually expected to have a reasonably high level of leadership skills, and effective leadership is a necessary ingredient in successful companies (Bennis and Nanus, 1985). Approaches to Understanding Leadership The data revealed two general leadership factors or dimensions labeled consideration and initiation of structure in interaction. The considerate leader is more concerned with subordinates’ welfare and selfesteem, while the initiation-of-structure leader emphasizes organization, planning, and task completion (Hemphill and Coons, 1957). A third dimension of leadership, called change-centered, has been proposed and tested. The change-centered style of leadership relates to transformational leadership. Change-centered leadership focuses on making changes in objectives, processes, and procedures and adapting to change in the environment. This approach requires the ability to scan and interpret external events, as well as the ability to get support and implement change.
Why Do We Need Leaders? "The job of a good leader is to articulate a vision that others are inspired to follow" Leadership is a universal phenomenon across cultures. What it is about people that makes leadership necessary and possible? What problems does leadership address? What needs does it fulfill? Although these can be philosophical and even spiritual questions about the human condition, there are more practical and maybe simpler reasons why we need leaders. These reasons closely fall in line with the functions and roles that leaders play and are related to the need or desire to be in collectives. Overall, we need leaders. To keep groups orderly and focused. Human beings have formed groups and societies for close to 50,000 years. Whether the formation of groups itself is an instinct or whether it is simply on the need to be with others to accomplish goals, the existence of groups requires some form of organization and hierarchy. Whereas individual group members may have common goals, they also have individual needs and aspirations. Leaders are needed to pull the individuals together, organize, and coordinate their efforts. To accomplish tasks. Groups allow us to accomplish tasks that individuals alone could not undertake or complete. Leaders are needed to facilitate that accomplishment, to provide goals and directions and coordinate activities. They are the instrument of goal achievement. To make sense of the world. Groups and their leaders provide individuals with a perceptual check. Leaders help us make sense of the world, establish social reality, and assign meaning to events and situations that may be ambiguous. To be romantic ideals. Finally, as some researchers have suggested (e.g., Meindl and Ehrlick, 1987), leadership is needed to fulfill our desire for mythical or romantic figures who represent us and symbolize our own and our culture's ideals and accomplishments. With all its benefits, the need for leadership presents a sizeable challenge. The presence of leaders necessarily and unavoidably creates
hierarchy and inequality in groups. Even though some consider any unequal relationship inherently wrong and suggest that leadership should only be used to describe egalitarian, participative, and willing relationships between leaders and followers (Hicks cited in Wren, 2006), such a view would limit who would be considered a leader. We often follow people we agree with most, but not necessarily all of the time. We are willing to tolerate some degree of inequality in exchange for the security of groups and the ability to reach our individual and collective goals. Culture greatly impacts how much people tolerate inequality. Managing the inequality inherent in leader-follower relationships and the use of proper power by leaders are essential components of leadership. Leadership Styles Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it. —Dwight D. Eisenhower Leadership styles may be of relevance to a variety of situations where thereis a requirement to manage others. Effective performance will depend on many factors including the organizational culture in which the individual is operating. Directive Leader: Directive Leaders are characterised by having fm views about how and when things should be done. As such they leave little leeway for subordinates to display independence, believing that they should adhere to the methods and schedules as originally laid down. Having a high goal orientation and being particularly concerned with results the Directive Leader will tend to closely monitor the behaviour and performance of others. This may lead them to be perceived as a little cool and detached. Delegative Leader: As the name suggests, the style of Delegative Leaders is characterised by delegating work to subordinates. Since their style is not strongly democratic, the process of delegation may not involve consultation. As a result, subordinates will generally be assigned work rather than have active input into how projects should be conducted. Participative Leader: Participative leaders are primarily concerned with getting the best out of a team as a whole. Hence, they encourage contributions from all members of a team and believe that by pooling ideas and coming to a consensus view the best solutions to problems will naturally arise.
Consultative Leader: The Consultative Leadership Style combines elements of both democratic and directive leadership orientations. They value group discussion and tend to encourage contributions from the separate members of the team. However, although group discussions will be largely democratic in nature, Consultative Leaders typically make the final decision as to which of the varying proposals should be accepted. Negotiative: Leader: Negotiative Leaders motivate subordinates, through incentives, etc., so that they work towards common objectives. Hence, through a process of negotiation attempts are made to arrive at some mutually equitable arrangement with other members of the team so as to motivate them to work in a particular way. Negotiate Leaders tend to rely on their skills of persuasion to achieve their stated goals.
Issues of Leadership
Private lives and public duties: Leaders have private lives from which they draw emotional balance and human sustenance, though they often find their official lives systematically more rewarding. Leadership can destroy both the privacy and the quality of personal life. The importance of position undermines authenticity in personal relations. Self becomes inseparable from standing, thereby making love and hate equally suspect. Leadership also attracts curiosity and gossip, compromising privacy. Followers claim a right to knowledge about a leader’s personal life on the grounds of its relevance to assessing character and establishing rapport. Finally, private lives complicate the responsibilities of leadership. Personal motives and relations affect the actions of leaders. Personal jealousies and loyalties bend a leader’s judgment. Interpersonal trust contributes to, yet corrupts, organizational actions. What are the possibilities for combining a rich personal life with life as an organizational leader? How are personal feelings to be reconciled with organizational responsibilities? Cleverness, innocence, and virtue: What is the place of cleverness and innocence, intelligence and ignorance in descriptions of, or prescriptions for, leadership? Cleverness, On the one hand, leaders are often portrayed as astute manipulators of resources and people, praised for their use of superior
knowledge and adroitness. They are frequently described as intelligently devious and secretive. innocence, leaders are often pictured not as sophisticated in the usual sense, but as possessing an elemental innocence that overcomes the fatuous convolutions of clever people and goes instinctively to the essentials. virtue: In this spirit, leaders are often praised for their naïveté and openness, and for their ability to use honesty as a basis for inspiring and extending trust.
Power, domination, and subordination Many modern ideologies treat inequalities in power as illegitimate. Yet, we pursue power and are fascinated by it. We equate personal power with personal self-worth, and powerlessness with loss of esteem and identity. We write history and describe progress in terms of changing patterns of domination and subordination. As a result, we see power as both central to leadership and a complication for it. We recognize a tension between hierarchy and participation, between power and equality, and between control and autonomy. Power is often said to corrupt the holder of it, to transform normally honorable people into monsters. It is also said to condemn, to undermine the ordinary pleasures of honesty in interpersonal relations. At the same time, power is often described as elusive, more a story-telling myth than a reality. Insofar as leaders have power, how do they use it? What are its limits? What are its costs? How does a person with little power function in a power-based institution? What are the moral dilemmas of power? Gender and Sexuality: Gender and sexuality are well-recognized factors in modern biology, sociology, and ideology. They affect a wide range of behaviors, and interpretations of behaviors, in organizations. In virtually all societies, leadership is linked to questions of sexual identity and gender equality. Historically, most leaders have been men; and the rhetoric of leadership has been closely related to the rhetoric of manliness. Changes in gender stereotypes with respect to leadership interact with the ways women and men are interpreted to have (or not have) distinctive styles, characters, beliefs, or behaviors, as well as with our understandings of their relations, not only outside hierarchical organizations, but also within them. Moreover, leadership appears to be intertwined with sexuality. Being a leader and being seen as having power are components of sexual appeal and sexual identity. Sexual relations and accusations of sexual misconduct are endemic around leadership. How do the manifest elements of
sexuality and gender in leadership affect the ways we understand, become, and act as leaders? Pleasures of the process: Leadership and leaders are generally justified and understood in instrumental terms. We see leadership as contributing to the ways in which organizations are coordinated and controlled to improve outcomes. Leaders evaluate themselves, are evaluated, and are (to some extent) compensated in terms of their contributions to those outcomes. At the same time, it is frequently noted that there are pleasures associated with the processes of leadership: the glories of position, the joys of commitment, the excitements of influence, the exhilaration of conflict and danger. These pleasures are, to a substantial extent, independent of their outcomes. As a consequence, understanding leadership often involves recognizing the ways in which the pleasures of the process fit into the calculus of leadership and how they ought to do so. What are the major pleasures of being a leader? How do they affect recruitment into leader roles and behavior within them? How do they affect the way we think about leadership? Importance of Leadership
I obey a manager because I have to. I follow a leader because I want to. (Steve Carey, former advisor to Bill Clinton, 1999)
Leadership is an important function of management which helps to maximize efficiency and to achieve organizational goals. The following points justify the importance of leadership in a concern. Initiates action- Leader is a person who starts the work by communicating the policies and plans to the subordinates from where the work actually starts. Motivation- A leader proves to be playing an incentive role in the concern’s working. He motivates the employees with economic and noneconomic rewards and thereby gets the work from the subordinates . Providing guidance- A leader has to not only supervise but also play a guiding role for the subordinates. Guidance here means instructing the subordinates the way they have to perform their work effectively and efficiently.
Creating confidence- Confidence is an important factor which can be achieved through expressing the work efforts to the subordinates, explaining them clearly their role and giving them guidelines to achieve the goals effectively. It is also important to hear the employees with regards to their complaints and problems. Building morale- Morale denotes willing co-operation of the employees towards their work and getting them into confidence and winning their trust. A leader can be a morale booster by achieving full co-operation so that they perform with best of their abilities as they work to achieve goals. Builds work environment- Management is getting things done from people. An efficient work environment helps in sound and stable growth. Therefore, human relations should be kept into mind by a leader. He should have personal contacts with employees and should listen to their problems and solve them. He should treat employees on humanitarian terms. Co-ordination- Co-ordination can be achieved through reconciling personal interests with organizational goals. This synchronization can be achieved through proper and effective coordination which should be primary motive of a leader. Leadership and Motivation Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things. —Peter F. Drucker Motivation is a goal-oriented characteristic that helps a person achieve his objectives. It pushes an individual to work hard at achieving his or her goals. An executive must have the right leadership traits to influence motivation. However, there is no specific blueprint for motivation. As a leader, one should keep an open perspective on human nature. Knowing different needs of subordinates will certainly make the decision-making process easier.
Both an employee as well as manager must possess leadership and motivational traits. An effective leader must have a thorough knowledge of motivational factors for others. He must understand the basic needs of employees, peers and his superiors. Leadership is used as a means of motivating others. Given below are important guidelines that outline the basic view of motivation: Harmonize and match the subordinate needs with the organizational needs. As a leader, the executive must ensure that the business has the same morals and ethics that he seeks in his employees. He should make sure that his subordinates are encouraged and trained in a manner that meets the needs of the business. Appreciation and rewards are key motivators that influence a person to achieve a desired goal. Rewarding good/ exceptional behavior with a small token of appreciation, certificate or letter can be a great motivator. If a certificate is awarded to a person, it should mention the particular act or the quality for which the individual is being rewarded. Being a role model is also a key motivator that influences people in reaching their goals. A leader should set a good example to ensure his people to grow and achieve their goals effectively. Encouraging individuals to get involved in planning and important issues resolution procedure not only motivates them, but also teaches the intricacies of these key decision-making factors. Moreover, it will help everyone to get better understanding of their role in the organization. The communication will be unambiguous and will certainly attract acknowledgement and appreciation from the leader. Developing moral and team spirit certainly has a key impact on the wellbeing of an organization. The metal or emotional state of a person constitutes his or her moral fabric. A leader’s actions and decisions affect the morale of his subordinates. Hence, he should always be aware of his decisions and activities. Team spirit is the soul of the organization. The leader should always make sure his subordinates enjoy performing their duties as a team and make themselves a part of the organization’s plans. A leader should step into the shoes of the subordinates and view things from subordinate’s angle. He should empathize with them during difficult
times. Empathizing with their personal problems makes them strongermentally and emotionally. A meaningful and challenging job accomplished inculcates a sense of achievement among employees. The executive must make their employees feel they are performing an important work that is necessary for the organization’s well-being and success. This motivational aspect drives them to fulfill goals. Remember, “To become an efficient leader, you must be self-motivated”. You must know your identity, your needs and you must have a strong urge to do anything to achieve your goals. Once you are self motivated, only then you can motivate others to achieve their goals and to harmonize their personal goals with the common goals of the organization.
THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP
Basing on how leaders managed the day-to-day functioning of employees, the three general types of theories were emerged. (1). Trait theories, which propose leaders have a particular set of traits that makes them different from non leaders; (2). Behavioral theories, which propose that particular behaviours make for better leaders; (3). Contingency theories, which propose the situation has an effect on leaders.
Trait Theory: Are Leaders Different from Others? The search for personality, social, physical, or intellectual traits found that most of the dozens of traits that emerged in various leadership reviews fall under one of the Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience). This approach resulted in consistent and strong support for traits as predictors of leadership.
extraversion Comprehensive reviews of the leadership literature, when organized around the Big Five, have found that extraversion is the most important trait of effective leaders. But results show that extraversion is more strongly related to leader emergence than to leader effectiveness. This is not totally surprising since sociable and dominant people are more likely to assert themselves in group situations. agreeableness, emotional stability The traits of agreeableness and emotional stability do not appear to offer much help in predicting leadership. conscientiousness, openness Conscientiousness and openness to experience also showed strong and consistent relationships to leadership, but not as strong as extraversion. Recent studies indicate that emotional intelligence (EI) is an additional factor to consider in the emergence of a leader.7 The work on EI suggests that leaders need more than the basic traits of intelligence and job-relevant knowledge.8 It is the possession of the five components of EI—self-awareness, selfmanagement, self motivation, empathy, and social skills—that allows an individual to become a star performer. Without EI, a person can have outstanding training, a highly analytical mind, a long-term vision, and an endless supply of terrific ideas, but still not make a great leader. Under the trait approach the following traits are central: → Intelligence: Intellectual ability, verbal ability, perceptual ability and reasoning. → Self-confidence: The ability to be certain about one’s competencies and skills. → Determination: The desire to get the job done including the characteristics of initiative, persistence, dominance, and drive. → Integrity: The quality of honesty and trustworthiness, to take responsibility for one’s own actions. → Sociability: The inclination to seek out pleasant social relationships by being outgoing, friendly, tactful, courteous, and diplomatic. Behavioural Theories: Do Leaders Behave in Particular Ways?
A lengthy review of the results of behavioural studies supports the idea that people oriented behaviors by leaders is related to employee satisfaction and motivation, and leader effectiveness; meanwhile, production-oriented behavior by leaders is slightly more strongly related to performance by the leader, the group, and the organization. The research also provides some insights into when leaders should be production oriented and when they should be people oriented: • When subordinates experience a lot of pressure because of deadlines or unclear tasks, leaders who are people oriented will increase employee satisfaction and performance. • When the task is interesting or satisfying, there is less need for leaders to be people oriented. • When it’s clear how to perform the task and what the goals are, leaders who are people oriented will increase employee satisfaction, while those who are task oriented will increase dissatisfaction. • When people don’t know what to do or individuals don’t have the knowledge or skills to do the job, it’s more important for leaders to be production oriented than people oriented. Limited success in the study of traits led researchers to look at the behaviours that specific leaders exhibit. They wondered if there was something unique in the way that effective leaders behave. They also wondered if it was possible to train people to be leaders. The three most best-known behavioural theories of leadership are The Ohio State Studies In the Ohio State studies, these two dimensions are known as initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure refers to the extent to which a leader is likely to define and structure his or her role and the roles of employees in order to attain goals; it includes behaviour that tries to organize work, work relationships, and goals. For instance, leaders using this style may develop specific output goals or deadlines for employees. Consideration is defined as the extent to which a leader is likely to have job relationships characterized by mutual trust, respect for employees’ ideas, and regard for
their feelings. A leader who is high in consideration shows concern for followers’ comfort, well-being, status, and satisfaction. For instance, leaders using this style may create more flexible hours, or flextime, to make it easier for employees to manage family issues during work hours. The Michigan Studies Researchers at the University of Michigan, whose work is referred to as “the Michigan studies,” also developed two dimensions of leadership behaviour that they labeled employee-oriented and production-oriented. Employee-oriented leaders emphasize interpersonal relations. They take a personal interest in the needs of their subordinates and accept individual differences among members. Production-oriented leaders, in contrast, tend to emphasize the technical or task aspects of the job. They are mainly concerned with making sure the group accomplishes its tasks, and the group members are simply a means to that end. The Leadership Grids Blake and Mouton developed a graphic portrayal of a two-dimensional view of leadership style. They proposed a Leadership Grid based on the styles of “concern for people” and “concern for production,” which essentially represent the Ohio State dimensions of consideration and initiating structure, or the Michigan dimensions of employee orientation and production orientation. The grid, has 9 possible positions along each axis, creating 81 different positions in which the leader’s style may fall, but emphasis has been placed on 5: impoverished management (1,1); authority-obedience management (9,1); middle-of-the-road management (5,5); country club management (1,9); and team management (9,9). The grid shows the dominating factors in a leader’s thinking with respect to how to get results from people, without focusing on what the specific results are. Contingency Theories: Does the Situation Matter? Starting in the 1960s, leadership theories began to examine the situational factors that affect a leader’s ability to act. This research pointed out that not all leaders can lead in every situation. Situational, or contingency, theories of leadership try to isolate critical situational factors that affect leadership effectiveness. The theories consider
the degree of structure in the task being performed, the quality of leadermember relations, the leader’s position power, group norms, information availability, employee acceptance of leader’s decisions, employee maturity, and the clarity of the employee’s role. There are four situational theories: 1The Fiedler contingency model, 2Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory, 3 path-goal theory, and 4 substitutes for leadership Fiedler Contingency Model: The Fiedler contingency model proposes that effective group performance depends on the proper match between the leader’s style and the degree to which the situation gives control to the leader. Fiedler created the least preferred co-worker (LPC) questionnaire to determine whether individuals were mainly interested in good personal relations with coworkers, and thus relationship-oriented, theories mainly interested in productivity, and thus task-oriented. Fiedler assumed that an individual’s leadership style is fixed. Therefore, if a situation requires a task-oriented leader and the person in that leadership position is relationship oriented, either the situation has to be modified or the leader must be removed and replaced for optimum effectiveness to be achieved. Fiedler identified three contingency dimensions that together define the situation a leader faces: • Leader-member relations. The degree of confidence, trust, and respect members have in their leader. • Task structure. The degree to which the job assignments are procedurized (that is, structured or unstructured). • Position power. The degree of influence a leader has over power variables such as hiring, firing, discipline, promotions, and salary increases.
Fiedler stated that the better the leader-member relations, the more highly structured the job, and the stronger the position power, the more control the leader has. He suggested that task-oriented leaders perform best in situations of high and low control, while relationship- oriented leaders perform best in moderate control situations.20 In a high-control situation, a leader can “get away” with task orientation, because the relationships are good and followers
are easily influenced.21 In a low-control situation (which is marked by poor relations, ill-defined task, and low influence), task orientation may be the only thing that makes it possible to get something done. In a moderate-control situation, the leader’s relationship orientation may smooth the way to getting things done. Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory : This model—called situational leadership theory (SLT)—has been included in leadership training programs at more than 400 of the Fortune 500 companies; and more than one million managers a year from a wide variety of organizations are taught its basic elements. SLT views the leader-follower relationship as similar to that of a parent and child. Just as a parent needs to give up control as a child becomes more mature and responsible, so too should leaders. Hersey and Blanchard identify four specific leader behaviours—from highly directive to highly laissez-faire. The most effective behaviour depends on a follower’s ability and motivation. SLT says that if a follower is unable and unwilling to do a task, the leader needs to give clear and specific directions (in other words, be highly directive). If a follower is unable and willing, the leader needs to display high task orientation to compensate for the follower’s lack of ability, and high relationship orientation to get the follower to “buy into” the leader’s desires (in other words, “sell” the task). If the follower is able and unwilling, the leader needs to adopt a supportive and participative style. Finally, if the employee is both able and willing, the leader does not need to do much (in other words, a laissez-faire approach will work). Path-Goal Theory : The essence of the theory is that it is the leader’s job to assist followers attain their goals and to provide the necessary direction and/or support to ensure that their individual goals are compatible with the overall goals of the group or organization. The term path-goal derives from the belief that effective leaders both clarify the path to help their followers achieve their work goals and make the journey along the path easier by reducing roadblocks and pitfalls. According to this theory, leaders should follow three guidelines to be effective: • Determine the outcomes subordinates want. These might include good pay, job security, interesting work, and the autonomy to do one’s job. • Reward individuals with their desired outcomes when they perform well.
• Let individuals know what they need to do to receive rewards (that is, the path to the goal), remove any barriers that would prevent high performance, and express confidence that individuals have the ability to perform well. Path-goal theory identifies four leadership behaviors that might be used in different situations to motivate individuals: • The directive leader lets followers know what is expected of them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific guidance as to how to accomplish tasks. This closely parallels the Ohio State dimension of initiating structure. This behaviour is best used when individuals have difficulty doing tasks or the tasks are ambiguous. It would not be very helpful when used with individuals who are already highly motivated, have the skills and abilities to do the task, and understand the requirements of the task. • The supportive leader is friendly and shows concern for the needs of followers. This is essentially synonymous with the Ohio State dimension of consideration. This behaviour is often recommended when individuals are under stress or otherwise show that they need to be supported. • The participative leader consults with followers and uses their suggestions before making a decision. This behaviour is most appropriate when individuals need to buy in to decisions. • The achievement-oriented leader sets challenging goals and expects followers to perform at their highest level. This behaviour works well with individuals who like challenges and are highly motivated. It would be less effective with less capable individuals or those who are highly stressed from overwork. Substitutes for Leadership: The previous three theories argue that leaders are needed, but that leaders should consider the situation in determining the style of leadership to adopt. However, numerous studies collectively demonstrate that, in many situations, leaders’ actions are irrelevant. Certain individual, job, and organizational variables can act as substitutes for leadership or neutralize the leader’s ability to influence his or her followers. If employees have appropriate experience, training, or “professional” orientation or if employees are indifferent to organizational rewards, the effect of leadership can be replaced or neutralized. Experience and training, for instance, can replace the need for a leader’s support or ability to create structure and reduce task ambiguity.
CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN LEADERSHIP
Leaders should have clean hands, warm hearts and cool minds. (Sarros and Butchatsky, Leadership and Values, 1999)
Is there a moral dimension to leadership? Do men and women rely on different leadership styles, and if so, is one style inherently superior to the other? Is There a Moral Dimension to Leadership? The topic of leadership and ethics has received surprisingly little attention. Only very recently have ethicists and leadership researchers begun to consider the ethical implications in leadership. Professor James Clawson of the Darden Graduate School of Business, University of Virginia, suggests that there are four cornerstones to a “moral foundation of leadership” • Truth telling. Leaders who tell the truth as they see it allow for a mutual, fair exchange to occur. • Promise keeping. Leaders need to be careful about the commitments they make, and then careful to keep those commitments. • Fairness. Leaders who are equitable ensure that followers get their fair share for their contributions to the organization. • Respect for the individual. Leaders who tell the truth, keep promises, and are fair show respect for followers. Respect means treating people with dignity. Moral leadership comes from within the individual, and in general means treating people well, and with respect. Gender: Do Men and Women Lead Differently? Studies indicate some differences in the inherent leadership styles of women and men. A recent Conference Board of Canada study found that “women are particularly strong in managing interpersonal relationships and their approach is more consensual.”93 Other studies have shown that women tend to adopt a style of shared leadership. They encourage participation, share power and information, and try to enhance followers’ self-worth. They prefer to lead through inclusion and rely on their charisma, expertise, contacts, and interpersonal skills to influence others. Men, on the other hand, are more likely
to use a directive command-and-control style. They rely on the formal authority of their position for their influence base. The best leaders listen, motivate, and provide support to their people. Many women seem to do those things better than men. The leadership styles women typically use can make them better at negotiating, as they are less likely than men to focus on wins, losses, and competition. Although it’s interesting to see how men’s and women’s leadership styles differ, a more important question is whether they differ in effectiveness. Although some researchers have shown that men and women tend to be equally effective as leaders,94 an increasing number of studies have shown that women executives, when rated by their peers, employees, and bosses, score higher than their male counterparts in a wide variety of measures, including getting extra effort from subordinates and overall effectiveness in leading. Subordinates also report more satisfaction with the leadership given by women. In today’s organizations, flexibility, teamwork and partnering, trust, and information sharing are rapidly replacing rigid structures, competitive individualism, control, and secrecy. In these types of workplaces, effective managers must use more social and interpersonal behaviours. They must listen, motivate, and provide support to their people. They must inspire and influence rather than control. Women seem to do those things better than men. The most exciting breakthrough of the 21st century will occur not because of technology, but because of an expanding concept of what it means to be human. —John Naisbitt
The leader is expected to play many roles and therefore, must be qualified to guide others to organizational achievement. Although no set of absolute traits or skills may be identified, the individuals who possess abilities to lead others must have certain attributes to help them in performing their leadership rolls. In a broad way the skills which are necessary for an industrial leader may be summarized under four heads:-
(a) Human skill (b) Conceptual skill (c) Technical skill and (d) Personal skill. Human Skill A good leader is considerate towards his followers because his success largely depends on the co-operation of his followers. He approaches various problems in terms of people involved more than in terms of technical aspects involved. A leader should have an understanding of human behaviour. He should know people; know their needs, sentiments, emotions, as also their actions and reactions to particular decisions, their motivations etc. Thus, a successful leader possesses the human relations attitude. He always tries to develop social understanding with other people. The human skill involves the following:(a) Empathy: A leader should be able to look at things objectively. He should respect the rights, belief and sentiments of others. He should equip himself to meet the challenges emanating from the actions and reactions of other people. The leader should be empathetic towards his followers so that he can carefully judge their strengths, weakness, and ambitions and give them the attention they deserve. (b) Objectivity: A good leader is fair and objective in dealing with subordinates. He must be free from bias and prejudice while becoming emotionally involved with the followers. His approach to any issue or problem should be objective and not based on any pressure, prejudice or preconceived notions. Objectivity is a vital aspect of analytical decision making. Honesty, fairplay, justice and integrity of character are expected of any good leader. (c) Communication Skill: A leader should have the ability to persuade, to inform, stimulate, direct and convince his subordinates. To achieve this, a leader should have good communication skill. Good communications seem to find all responsibilities easier to perform because they relate to others more easily and can better utilize the available resources
(d) Teaching Skill:
A leader should have the ability to demonstrate how to accomplish a particular task. (e) Social Skill: A leader should understand his followers. He should be helpful, sympathetic and friendly. He should have the ability to win his followers confidence and loyalty Conceptual Skill In the words of Chester Barnard -"the essential aspect of the executive process is the sensing of the organization as a whole and the total situation relevant to it". Conceptual skills include – (a) The understanding of the organization behaviour, (b) Understanding the competitors of the firm, and (c) Knowing the financial status of the firm. A leader should have the ability to look at the enterprise as a whole, to recognize that the various functions of an organization depend upon one another and are interrelated, that changes in one affect all others. The leader should have skill to run the firm in such a way that overall performance of the firm in the long run will be sound.
Technical Skill A leader should have a thorough knowledge of, and competence in, the principles, procedures and operations of a job. Technical skill involves specialized knowledge, analytical skill and a facility in the use of the tools and techniques of a specific discipline. Technical competence is an essential quality of leadership. Personal Skill The most important task of the leader is to get the best from others. This is possible only if he possesses certain qualities. These personal skills include(a) Intelligence: Intellectual capacity is an essential quality of leadership. Leaders generally have somewhat higher level of intelligence than the average of their followers.
(b) Emotional Maturity:
A leader should act with self-coincidence, avoid anger, take decisions on a rational basis and think clearly and maturely. A leader should also have high frustration tolerance. According to Koontz and O'Donnell - "Leaders cannot afford to become panicky, unsure of themselves in the face of conflicting forces, doubtful of their principles when challenged, or amenable to influence". (c) Personal Motivation: This involves the creation of enthusiasm within the leader himself to get a job done. It is only through enthusiasm that one can achieve what one wants. Leaders have relatively intense achievement type motivational drive. He should work hard more for the satisfaction of inner drives than for extrinsic material rewards. (d) Integrity: In the words of F.W Taylor - "integrity is the straight forward honesty of purpose which makes a man truthful, not only to others but to himself; which makes a man high-minded, and gives him high aspirations and high ideals". (e) Flexibility of Mind: A leader must be prepared to accommodate other's viewpoints and modify his decisions, if need be. A leader should have a flexible mind, so that he may change in obedience to the change in circumstances. Thomas Carle has said - "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of a little mind". Difference between Leadership and Management: Leadership is different from management. The main differences between these two terms are:1. A manager is required to plan, organize, direct and control. But a leader is one who gets others to follow him. 2. A manager depends on his authority. But a leader depends on his confidence and goodwill. He inspires enthusiasm. 3. Management is concerned with the formulation of broad policies to guide the operations of an enterprise. But leadership is concerned with the initiation of action for the accomplishment of the goals.
4. An individual is a leader in the true sense if he is accepted as a leader by the group. A manager is appointed and he derives his authority by virtue of his office. 5. Management is associated with the organized structure. But leadership may be associated with unorganized groups. The origins of our ideas and beliefs about leadership From From From From From From From From our mothers and fathers and the way they raise us during childhood our interactions with siblings and peers, and our experiences at school the stories, legends and myths we hear while growing up our work and career experiences, by observing leaders and being led personal experience, and through trial and error active self-reflection about our leadership beliefs and practices studying leadership and leaders formal instruction and education
Successful leaders have some really noteworthy characteristics: they are good team leaders, they are empathetic, they really care about their people, they paint a vision for the future that they can then convey to their people, and they are able to get the right balance between the interests of their customers, their staff and their shareholders. It seems to me that these are characteristics that typify both successful men and women. (Cited by Maley, 1998)
THE ABOVE MATERIAL IS PREPARED FOR THE M.A. FINAL YEAR STUDENTS OF ANDHRA UNIVERSITY (DISTANCE MODE).
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.