RESEARCH NOrE 86-22

LEADERSHIP IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT:

A CONCEPEUAL APPROACH AND ITS APPLICAELONS

Michael D. Mum ford

Advanced Research Resources Organiza tion

Will iam W. Hay thorn, Chief

LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL AREA Contracting Officer's
Representative

Under the supervision of

Newell K. Ea ton, Ac ting Direc tor
MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL RESEARCH LABORATORY

DTIC

ELE
CTE
U. S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

Approved for Dubltc release. dastf'buuo-t unhmeted.

This report. as submitted by the contractor, has been cleared {cc retease to Defense Techn.cal Information
Center (D TIC) to comply with regulatory requirements. It has been given no primary distribution other than
to D TIC and will be available or.ly through D TIC or other reference services such as the National Techn,cal
Informauon Service (NTIS). The vicws. cpir,ions. and/or findings contained in this report are those of the
author(s) •nd should not be construed •s en offtcia; Lkpattrne"t of the Army position. policy, or decaston.
unless so destgnated by other official documentation.

DISCLAIMER NOTICE

THIS DOCUMENT IS BEST

QUALITY AVALABLE, THE COPY
FURNISHED TO DTIC CONTANED
A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PAGES
WHICH DO NOT
REPRODUCE LEGIBLY,
Ent.
r.Ø
 REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ mSTRUCTIONS
BEFORE COMPLETING FOR-M
REPORT ESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CAT ALOG
ARI Research Note 86—22
4. TITLE (md Subtttl.) s. TYPE OF REPORT PERIOD COVERED
Leadership in the ()rganizational Context :
A Conceptual Approach and its Applications
Final Dec 82 - Jan 83
s . PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

I. AUTHOR(.) CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(O)

Michael D. Mumford MDA903-83-C-0062

s . PERFORMING ORGANIZATION N AXE AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASK
AREA a WORK UNIT NUMBERS
Advanced Research Resources Organization
4330 East—West Highway, Suite 900
Bethesda, MD 2081 4 2Q263743A794
CONTROL LING OFFICE NAME AND 12. REPORT DATE
ADDRESS C. S Army Research Inst i tute
5001 Eisenhower Avenue } ebruarv 1986
13. NUMBER OF PAGES 43
Alexandria, VA 22333
from
14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME ADDRESS(ff Cu'itrotlln' Office) SECURITY CLASS. (of

Unclassified
DECLASSIFICATION/
DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of Report)

DISTRIBUTION (ot the .b.t.r.ct In 20, from Report)

Approved or publ ic re l ease ; d is t r ibut ion unl inli ted .

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

'flie Arai Research I nst i t ute Technical Point of Con tac t is :

van Rijn. H is telephone number is (202) 274-8293 or 284-829
3.
KEY WORDS (Conrfnu• on r. ver.. "d. If —'d id•ntlty by block number) Leadership Ident i f i cat ion and
l)evelopment
l)ec is ion Mak i ny
S vs tems Fheorv
Coytni t ive Processes

20 AßT*ACT 'f Iden.*tfy by block mmb.r) [h i s paper rev

iews tile l i ra ture on leadersh i p , founded theoret i ca concept ion
of l eadersh i p that woU Id prov ide a a pp roach to leadershi p i dent i t- i
ca t ion a nd d eve I opment .
a s vs t ems approach ight be used to ga in sorne unde r stand i
I eadership as i t occurs in an orpan i zat iona I eon text a
nd that lead e rsh ip at tainment o oa l s that
can on Iv be ha rac ter i s t i c s and
 DD 1473 ED' nox OF NOV SS OBSOLETE
ASSLULIL_
SECURITY CLASSI FIC ATION OF PACE

UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF PAGE(m—, Entered)
 ABSTRACT (Cont'd. )

that are most facilitative of goal attainment are discussed as

well as implications for leadership identification and
development.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
 TABLE DF CONTENTS

Page

I NTRODUCTION . 1 Previ ous Approaches to Leadershi p Research.

Leadership Identi fi ca ti on and Devel opment . 4

A GENERAL IZED APPROACH TO LEADERSH IP . . 6
The Organi zational Context. 6
Studyi ng Leadershi p i n an Organi zati onal Setti ng . 9
Leadershi p Behavior . . . 32
Some General Attri butes . 33
Some Speci fic Attri butes .
Empi ri cal Support
APPLICATIONS.
I rnpl emen ta ti on .
Leadershi p i denti fi cati on
Leadershi p Devel opment.
CONCLUSION .
REFERENCES .

.......11
. . 11
. . 18
. . 20 . . 24 . . . 24 . . 26 . . 27
INTRODUCTION

Previous Approaches to Leadership Research

Because the life of modern man is influenced in countless ways by the operation of a
number of organizations, their effectiveness is of vital concern to society as a whole.
While the overall effectiveness of any organization is contingent on a wide variety of
factors, the ongoing activity of its members must be integrated and directed to the
attainment of organizational goals. Social scientists have studied leadership, or those
actions taken by individuals to integrate and direct organizational activity, in the hope of
enhancing organizational effectiveness by formulating procedures to identify and develop
more effective leaders. In the following discussion previous efforts will be reviewed, and
an approach to leadership theory, identification, and development will be suggested.
The leadership literature reflects one of the largest and most complex research areas
in the social sciences. Bass (1981) notes that eleven distinguished definitions of leadership
may be found in the literature, ranging from leadership as an expression of personality
characteristics to leadership as a form of role behavior. A number of diverse theoretical
approaches are found as well. Among the general theoretical perspectives identified by
Bass (1981) are the psychoanalytic model employed by Erikson (1961), and the person-by-
situation model employed by Fiedler (1972). Because rather fundamental differences
such as these are often coupled with weak prediction, inconsistent confirmatory and dis-
confirmatory evidence, confusion concerning the processes and content of leadership ,
and underlying paradigmatic differences , the leadership literature does not constitute a
coherent body of knowledge , It is possible , however , to obtain some understand ng of
this literature and its implications for leadership identification and develop by considering
four major historic categories of leadership research.
the earliest attempts to explain leadership behavior held that it was a behavioral
outcome of some reasonably stable cornpo tra i ts ( Bernard , 1923 ; Burks , 1938 ; Webb ,
Consequently , these i ni ti al i nvesti gati ons empl oyed tradi ti onal
psychometric measures or qual i tative observati ons i n an attempt
to i denti fy those tra i ts sys tema ti I y related to leadershi p
behavior. I n an i nsi ghtful summary of the resul ts obtai ned i n
these i nvesti gati ons , Stogd i l l ( 194B ) noted that effecti ve
leaders tend to mani fest higher performance on trai ts reflecti ng i
ntel l ectual capaci ty , achievement concerns , responsi bi l i ty ,
social parti ci pati on , and social sta tus . Whi le these resul ts are
readi ly i nterpretabl e when l eadership i s examined wi thi n a mi
nimum competency framework, the trai t approach to l eadership
began to fal ter i n the l ate 1940s and early 1950s .
After reviewi ng the magni tude of the rel ati onshi ps observed i n trai t i
nves ti gati ons , Stogdi l l ( 1948 ) and Bi rd ( 1941 ) concl uded ttldt thi s
approach general ly yi el ds weak and i nconsi stent resul ts . Thi s observation
eventual ly lead to disenchantment wi th the i ndi vidua l di fference or great
man" approach to leadershi p. Whi le thi s di senchantment may have been
wel l founded , a few caveats should be noted . Fi r St, i n most psychometri c
fi el d studies, these i ni ti al trai t i nvesti gat ions were subject to subs tantia l
and varying degrees of range res trict i on and attenuati on e ffects that woul d
act to reduce the magni tude of the observed coeffi cients , and would lead to
spurious s i tuati onal vari at i on i n that magni tude (Sch:ai dt & Hunter ,
1971 ) . Second , there i s some questi on whether these tra i t measures provi
ded an adequate descri ption of i ndi vi dual i ty , parti cul arl y i n the noncogni
ti ve domai n . Fi nal l y, s tudies conducted by Bass and Norton ( 1951 ) ; Bass
and Wurs ter ( 1953 ) ; and Car ter , Hay thorn , and Howel l ( 1950 ) i ndi ted at
l eas t some cross- si tua tj ona] stabi i ty i n emergent l eadershi p. These f i ndi
ngs suggest that certai n aspects of i ndi vi dual i ty are rel evan t to
understand j ng l eadershi p as a behavi oral phenomenon .
Never the l ess , these l i ture reviews l ed a number of researchers to conc l
ude that I eddershi p was primari l y a functi on of a s i tuati on . Subsequen t exper
iinen tdl i nves ti ga ti ons emphas i zed the r•elevance of s i tuati onal i n f ) uences
to the express i on of leadershi p behav i or .
n i of cer ta i n phys i cd l vari abl es was demons ted i ndi cati ng that
i ndi v i dual s ho l di ng central pos i ti ons i n commun i cati ons
l i ke l y to be viewed Dy others as leaders (Guetzkow,
1954 ; Leavi t t, 1951 ; Shaw, 1963 ) , and that effective leadership in
stressful si tuati ons requi res a greater degree of task s tructuri ng that

2
focuses on immediate resul ts (Jani s & Mann , 1977 ; Torrance, 1957 ) .
Studies exami ning aspects of social si tua ti ons that might be rel evant
to l eadershi p i ndi cated that vari abl es such as an i ndi vi dual ' s posi ti
on i n an organi zati onal hi erarchy , group cohesi veness, and member
characteri sti cs a l so i n fl uence the nature of effectj ve and feasi bl e
leadership behav i or ( Farrow, Val enzi , & Bass, 1980; Pel z , 1952;
Schutz , 1955 ) .
Whi le stud ies such as these demonstrate that a wide vari ety of s i
tuati onal vari abl es jnay affect l eadershi p behavi or , the resul ts of
these i nves ti ga ti ons shoul d be approached wi th some cauti on . As i
n the tra i t studi es , the magni tude of effects obtained i n these i nvesti
gati ons has not been grea t, and i ncons i stent fi ndi ngs are often
observed . Even when s i gn i f i cant rel a ti onshi ps have been obtai ned
, they have often been deri ved from art i fi c i a l experimental mani pul
ations beari ng only a l irai ted s imi l ar i ty to l eadershi p i n real -worl d
s i tua ti ons .
Another approach to the study of l eadershi p was cl osel y ti ed to
leadersh ip i n rea l i s ti c s i tua tions . This research trend may be
traced to Lewi n and L i pp i tt ( 1933 ) , and Bales ( 1949 ) . Attempts
were made to i denti fy general styl es or dimensi ons of l eadershi p
behavi or occurri ng i n a vari e ty of i n terpersonal setti ngs tha t mi ght
be re l evant to l eadershi p e f fecti veness . Over the past thi r ty years ,
a variety of these di nens i ons have been i den ti fi ed U3ass , 1981 ) .
Among the l,nost frequently d i scussed d j;oens i ons , one f i nds cons i
dera ti on ( re l a ti ons ori en tat i on) i n i t i a t i ng structure ( task or
i enta ti on ) , al ong wi th the democrati c c i pa ti ve ) and
autocrati c ( di rec ti ve ) 1 eader shi p sty l es ( Bass ,
F le i , Hemph i l l , 1949 ; sweny , F j euch tner , & Samores ,

( 19 / J ) ha; noted tha t , despi te cer ta i n sub tl e di s ti ncti ons ,

-l inens i ons represent l i ttl e more than var i ati ons on the
cons i and s truc tu re . F l e i shlnan has presen ted ev
i dence sugges t i ng that i nd i v i dua l s d i sp l ay s tdD le d i ton
these two genera l dirnensi ons , and s tud i es no l) the r S , i nth ca
te that i nd i v i dua l ' s s ta tus on
the considerati on and i n i ti ati ng structure dimensions can yi el d moderate l y
powerful predi cti on of eventual l eadershi p performance. However, a variety of
studies have al so shown that the impact of these dimensions on leadership effecti
veness i s moderated by a number of si tuati onal i nfl uences ( Bl ood & Hul i n ,
1961 ; Flei shman , 1953 ) .
The most recent trend i n l eadership research might be described as the
conti ngency theories of leadershi p effecti veness . Typi cal ly , conti ngency
theories postul ate that the i nfl uence on leadership effecti veness of some
form of the considerati on and i ni ti ati ng structure dimensions varies wi th a
set of rel a ti vel y speci fi c si tuati onal vari ab l es . The theories of Fied l er
( 1972 ) , House and Mi tchel l ( 1974 ) , Vroom ( 1976 ) , and Yuk] ( 1971 ) are
of thi s type . Thei r di fferences, due i n part to somewhat di fferent practi cal
concerns , are i n thei r speci fi c implementation of the considerati on and i n
i ti a ti ng structure dimensi ons, al ong wi th thei r defi ni t i on of the s i tuati
onal variables held to moderate th outcomes associated wi th a gi ven styl e
of l eadershi p behavi or. Bass ( 1981 ) has poi nted out that support for vari
ous conti ngency theories i s equi voca l i n the sense tha t weak and theoreti
cal ly i nconsi stent resul ts are often obtai ned . Of course each of these
theories exami nes only a 1 " m i ted set of s i tuati onal variables and
leadershi p behavi ors i n a very complex fi el d , but even so current conti
ngency theories are not l i kel y to provide an adequate founda ti on for a
general theory of l eadershi p or the identi fi ca ti on and l ong term devel
opment of i ndi vidual leaders .
Leadershi p I denti fi ca ti on and Devel opment
The research descri bed above has two central impl i cat i ons :
that leadershi p behavior can be i den ti f i ed by observati on and summari
zed i n mean] ngful dimensi ons ; and second , that i ndi vi dual and si tua ti
ona l charac ter i s t i cs i n terdct i n a hi ghly complex fashi on to determi ne
the l eadersh i p effecti veness ot a g i ven i ndi v i dual . The suggesti on that
the na ture of eftec ti ve leadershi p cannot be separated from the si tuati on i
t occurs i n crea tes d tundamen ta l problem wi th respect to l eddershi p i
den-
ti f i cd ti on and devel opnent. work i n a var iety of s i tua tl
An i nd i v idual empl oyee i s l i ke l y ons
to d career i n an orgam za t i on . I S i nce the na ture of et fec ti ve
eddersh i p tend v i or i s l i ke l y to vary as a func ti on of s i tua t i ona
di fferences , i t wi l l be di ffi cul t to devi se general rul es for the sel
ection and development of organiza tional leaders in a reasonably
economical fashi on . Thus , current concepti ons of leadershi p make i t
di ffi cul t to approach l eadershi p i denti f i ca ti on and development i n
a general , systerna ti c fashi on . The resu l ti ng sta te of affa i rs i s anal

4
ogous to that ar i si ng fronn the assumption that test val i di ties are s i
tuati on- speci fi c , i n that i t tends to proh i b i t the constructi on of the
general rul es that woul d consti tute a science of l eadersh i p i denti fi ca
ti on and devel opment ( Schmi dt & Hunter , 19 /1 ) . Thi s l i ne of
argurnent al so suggests that many general programs currentl y etnpl
oyed i n leadershi p i denti f i ca ti on and devel opment rnay not address
the demands actual ly pl aced on i ndi vi dua l s i n gi ven leadership s i
tua ti ons , parti cul arl y si nce few of these programs attetnpt to exami
ne both general and speci fi c aspects of leadersh i p effecti veness i n the
organi za ti onal setti ng .
Al though organi za t ions do di ffer i n a number ot- ways , to the
extent that they represent speci f i c mani festa t i ons of a rnore general
phenolaenon , there i s l i kel y to be some simi l ari ty i n the demands pl
aced on l eaders across si tuati ons or c l asses of s i tuati ons . I f these
consi stenci es can be i denti fied , ard l i nked to thei r impl i cati ons for
an i ndi v i dua l l s performance as d l eader , i t shoul d be possi bl e to
forrnulate a general and economi cal approach to leadershi p identi fi
cati on and devel oprnent. Of course , the val ue ot thi s d t telnpt i s l i
kely to be enhanced i f these generdl i ti es can be l i nked to speci fi c
mani fes ta ti ons i n a g i ven s i tila t i on . The ensui ng d i scuss i on wi l
l d t telnpt to spec i fy these cons 1 s tenc i es and thei r i Inpl i ca t i ons
for leadershi p identi f i ca ti on and deve I opment.
A GENERALIZED APPROACH TO LEADERSHIP

Any attempt to formulate a general approach to leadership

identification and development requires a general description of the
organizational setting in which leadership occurs. A number of attempts
have been made to obtain some understanding of organizations as a
general social phenomenon beginning wi th the work of Durkheim
(1947 ) and Weber ( 1964 ) . I ni tial attempts. to describe social
organizations commonly focused on the stabi l i ty of social structures,
and these early conceptions of society and social i nsti tutions had a
substantial impact on the study and manipulation of organizational
behavior, The seminal work of Taylor (1960) and Gilbreth ( 1972)
assumed a stable pattern of role relationships and requi rements, and
 employed this assumptional groundwork to fomulate general
prescriptions for organizational effecti veness. The fundamental flaw in
these early conceptions of society and social institutions lay in the
assumption that social i nsti tutions or processes are inherently stable
in character (Perrow, 1970).
More recent studies examining the nature of organizational
structure and effectiveness have not found any single structure capable
of universal ly enhancing organizational effectiveness. They have found
that the structure of effective social organizations is contingent on the
nature of the production process and the organizational environment
( Burns & Stal ker, 1961; Woodward, 1965 ) . Change in the content of
these variables resul ts in a series of integrated, systematic changes in
an organization' s structure processes (Tri st & Bamforth, 1951;
Thompson & McEwen, 1958) . This led Perrow (1970) to conclude that
social organizations are best conceived of as open, adaptive systems
engaged in a series of goal-oriented transactions with their operative
environment. Similar concl usions have been reached by Katz and Kahn
(1977 ) and by Ulri ch and Wieland ( 1980) after a review of the
relevant l iterature.
At present there seems to be general agreement that organi
zations and society are best conceived of as open systems. This
conception suggests that certain broäd conclusions about
orgamizations in general , and leadership in parti cul ar, might be
generated through systems
theory. As origi nal ly proposed by Von Bertalanffy (1968) , systems theory
was intended as a general i ntegrati ng model for the physical , bio and
social sciences . Systems theory di spl ays substantial simi l ari ty to gestal t
psychol ogy (Kohler, 1938) and field theory (Lewin,
I t postul ates that any system i s composed of an organized set of
elements of subsystems, and that the dynamic interaction of the system and i
ts elements wi th the external environment determines the current state of
the system. Causation i s viewed as a complex phenomenon which cannot be
understood through isolated causal variables, and which i s reci procal in the
sense that changes in the feed back upon themsel ves . change in any system i
s held to be complex, organized , and to occur i n an i ntegrated fashi on over
tinm The behavior of the system as a whole i s viewed as a purposeful , goal-
oriented activity, actions of various subsystems embodying a discrete

6
set of subordi nate goal s integrated by the superordinate goal s of the system
as a whole.
When social organizations are viewed from the perspective of
systems theory, i t becomes possible to formulate certain concl usions
concerni ng thei r nature and operati on that appear to provide an
adequate description of the real i ties of organizational behavior (De
Green,
Katz and Kahn (1977 ) have noted that social organizations form
as a resul t of i ndi vidual s engaging in col l ective activi ties in order to
attain certai n goal s that could not be attained by an individual acting al
one . However, the activi ties of a group cannot be said to reflect
organizati onal activi ty unti l feedback from the envi ronment has
occurred , and the di vi si on of labor and i ntegration of subsystems i s
manifest i n the system' s operation . Bureaucracies, as defined by
Jaques represent a. speci fi c form for social organization in which
an i ndi vidual ' s role i s formal ly specified i n a set of role
expectations . i ndividual in a bureaucracy, or any other socia-l
system, may fi l l mul ti p le rol es , and may be a component of a
number of systems or subsystems. Thi s makes i t di ffi cul t to cl early
del i neate a system and i ts subsystems, unless each system or
subsystem i s defined as a cohesive, repeti tive pattern of
transformation activi ties.

7
 I n order to meet their goal s, organizations wi l l extract selected
human and physical resources from the envfronment, These raw materials
wi l l be manipulated in a transformation process derived from the divis ion
of labor, i ts associated role structure, and the technical process in use. The
transformed product wi l l be empl oyed by other systems or subsystems
leading to goal attai nment and maintenance of the socdotechni ca ,
transformation processes . During these processes, the organization wi l l
moni tor i ts own outputs and subsystem actions, and the envi ronrnen t.
This feedback wi l l be used as a basis for change in the nature of the
system, and thus adaptive growth and integration of subsystems. A di vi si
on of labor among i ndividuals and subsystems wi l l occur as one resul t of
thi s moni tori ng and feedback, The nature and content of the divi si on of
labor is l ikely to vary as a function of the transfortnation process, coupled
wi th i ts physical and social environmen t, and the role of any individual or
subsystem is l ikely to be specifi ed by certai n subgoals i nherent i n the
nature of the transformation process .
As social systems, organizations are composed of and completely dependent
on a set of unique and highly autonomous subsystems, i . e . , vi riual human
bei ngs. Individual s choose to engage in organizational activi ty for a variety of
reasons, aside from those di rectly tied to task performance and the
transformation process . Of these reasons, the attai nment of social goal s, such
as bel onging and affi l iation , are of speci al importance. The exi stence of these
personal goal s, the sheer di versi ty of i ndi vidual s , and the di fferent posi tion
of i ndividual s in the t p ansformation process , produces a high degree of
complexi ty in the organizati on' s goals. Because l imi tations on the resources
avai lable are l i kely to precl ude complete sati s faction of al l participant and
subsystem goal s, social organizations wi l l experience a high degree of internaQ
and external confl i ct as wel l as imperative demands for effect ivo adaptati on .
The complexity and confl i ct in organizations makes i t di fficul t to i n
tegra te subsystem functi oning, maintain the effecti veness of the
transforrnation process , defi ne goal priori ties, and direct adaptive
change . I n order to reduce ambigui ty and confl i ct, organizations wi l l

often speci fy the bounds of l egi timate and expected acti vi ti es i n rol e requi rements,
ensure i nterchangeabl e rol es across i ndi vi dual s , and formul ate a hi erarchi cal
arrangement of the rel evant domai ns of responsi b l i t y. Thus , l eadershi p becomes a
cruci al detenni nant of organi zat i onal effecti veness . I nd i vi dual s whose rol es requ i
re that they control and coordi nate the acti vi ti es of two or more systems or
subsystems , down to the l evel of the i ndi vi dual as a subsystem, are i n a sense servi
ng i n a boundary rol e between systems or subsystems .
Study i nq Leaders hi p i n an Orqani zational Setti nq
I f organi zati onal behavi or can be descri bed and understood i n
a broad sense through systems theory, what are the impl i cat i ons for
the defi ni ti on and study of l eadershi p behavi or i n the organi zati
onal setting?
Katz and Kahn (1 977 ) have noted that i n any organi zati onal system, l
eadershi p i s one aspect of a boundary rol e functi on . I n thi s sense, l eadershi p i
s mani fest i n those acti ons taken by an i ndi vi dual i n an organizational
boundary rol e that a ffect the transfomation process occurri ng wi thi n at l east
one other subsystem of the organi zati on . I n a bureaucrati c organi zation , l
eadershi p may i nvol ve i nteracti on wi th 1 ) h i gher order subsystems , 2)
subsystems at a s imi l ar l evel , 3) ower order subsystems, and 4 ) other systems or
the broader envi ronment. Because thi s concepti on of l eadershi p impl ies changi
ng the nature of the transfomation process , l eadershi p actions are not l i kel y to
be tri vi al acti vi ti es . However, no statement i s made here concerni ng the effecti
veness of these l eadershi p acti v i ti es , since there may be many more ineffecti ve
than effecti ve l eaders , i f the course of human hi story i s an adequate i ndex
(Meyer, 1980) .
E ffecti ve l eadershi p may be defi ned as those overt or covert act i ons taken by an i ndi vi
dual as the occupant of a boundary rol e i nteracti ng wi th certa i n other systems or
subsystems , that i nfl uence the transformation process and the goal attai nment of these
systems or subsystems i n such a way as to enhance organi zati onal effecti veness and ada
ptation . Hence effecti ve l eadershi p i s hel d to enhance the effecti veness or adaptati on of
the system as a whol e. I ndi vi dual acti ons may enhance the attai nment of subsystem goal s ,
but may do so at the expense

of the system as a whole; from an organizati onal perspecti ve such ac- t ions cannot be
considered effecti ve leadership. Effecti ve leadershi p may requi re sacri fi ci ng attai
nment of subsystem goal s in order to enhance the adaptation of the system as a whole
( e . g . , the platoon leader who sacri f ices a uni t i n combat in order to save a
regiment) . Of course, si tuational i nfl uences are by no means i rrel evant to an
understandi ng of the nature of effecti ve leadershi p, si nce a wide variety of si tuati
onal i nfl uences may affect the content and form of the i ndi vidual behavior most l i
kely to enhance organizational adaptation.
The above defi ni ti on of effecti ve leadership di splays some simi
lari ty to previous defi ni ti ons , yet i t di ffers from them i n a number of
ways. Clearly, this defi ni tion of effecti ve leadersh ip i s not intended as
a general conception of the leadershi p phenomenon , but i s intended
to reflect leadership as i t occurs i n the organizati onal setti ng . Thi s
defi ni t ion focuses on the process or na ture of leadershi p rather than
on the speci fic content of leadershi p behavior. Leadership i s viewed as
the outcome of an acti on rather than as a speci fi c form of behavi or , i
n the sense that effective l eadershi p i s reflected i n the consequences
of certai n overt or covert acti ons . Thi s di sti nction between overt and
covert actions i s intended to convey that in some si tuations effective l
eadershi p may be shown i n a deci si on not to attempt to i nfl uence a
certai n subsystem. However, effecti ve leadership i s l imi ted to the
direct outcomes of an indi vidual ' s acti ons as the occupant of a
boundary role . Thi s conception of effecti ve l eadershi p al so views the
phenomenon as a property of the i ndi vidual . Thi s impl ies that
leadershi p i s a forrn of di screti onary behavior i n which there i s a signi
fi cant element of choi ce about whether and what ki nd of acti on wi l l
be taken . Actions that are completely speci fied by normati ve role requi
rements are a property of the organizati on rather than of the indi vi
dual .
A variety of behaviors or acti ons my resul t i n effective leader
Yet, the domai n of relevant behav I or i s fai rl y wel l -speci fied i n
terms of i ts outcomes and the associ ated processes, si nce leadershi p i
s entai led i n those di scret i onary acti vi ties that i nfl uence others and
enhance the effecti veness ot the transformation process and organi zat
i onal adaptation . Thi s conceptual i zati on of leadershi p i s perhaps
most

10

simi l ar to Hemphi l l ' s ( 1949 ) defi n i ti on , but i t appears to be somewhat

broader and capable of i ncorpora ti ng many ex i sti ng defi n i t i ons , when they
are thought of as operati ng i n a gi ven organi zati onal setti ng . Whi le thi s
model suggests that the nature of effec ti ve leadersh i p i s conti ngent on both
the i ndi v i dual and the si tuati on , i t does penni t the deri va ti on of certai n
general concl usi ons pertai ni ng to l eadershi p i dent i f 1 ca ti on and
development that are l i nked to the speci fi c demands on an i nd i v i dual as the
occupant of a boundary rol e i n an organi zati onal setti ng .

Leadership Behavior
Some General Attri butes. I n any organi zati onal setti ng where behav i or i
s not compl etely speci fi ced by role requi rements, a vari ety of al ternati ve acti
ons are l i ke l y to be avai l abl e to an i ndi v i dual that may affect the
transformati on process occurri ng i n a vari ety of subsystems i n a vari ety of
ways . Whenever leadershi p i s exhi bi ted , the i ndi v i dua l i s maki ng deci si ons
about the k i nd of acti ons to take to i nfl uence the transformati on processes
occurri ng i n other systems or subsys tens . I n i nstances of effecti ve l eadershi p,
the chosen acti ons wi l l enhance goal attai nment and the eventual effecti veness
and adaptati on of the organ i zati on as a whole . Across a l l s i tua ti ons , effecti
ve l eadersh i p wi l l entai l a forl;l of problem- sol vi ng ac ti v i ty requi ri ng deci si
ons be made about a series of di scre ti onary ac ti ons i n re ld ti on to the val ued
outcoines of goal attai ntaent and organ i za ti onal ef fecti veness ( Scandura , 19 /
7 ) . Thi s consi stency i n the process of leadershi p 1 ndi cates thdt I t rni Jht be
possi bl e to formul ate a general system for leadershi p i den ti f i cd ti on and
development on the bas i s of generi c proul efn- sol v i ng a tternpts Ster nbe rg ,
i)dZ ) .
These problem-sol vi ng act i v i t i es shoul d not be v iewed as trad i ti
ona] knowledges , sk i l l s and ab i l i ti es . Ra ther , they d re Ljore s jrni I dr
to the me cd-process he I d to underl i e prob l egn so l v i , reasoni ng and
genera l i nte l l i gence (S ternberg , Re ts n I Uk u I d ser , I he sequence oi
probl elil-sol vi ng ac t i v i ti es presen ted here was de r i ve f l t rolli a rev i ew
and eval ua ti on ot the rel evant l i tera ture . However , the recent erne
rqence ot

Il

thi s l i terature and the syntheti c approach taken i n the present effort, suggests that thi
s l i st should not be viewed as al l i nci usi ve . Trai n i ng beari ng on these problem-sol
vi ng activi ties has been shown to lead to enhanced performance on problem-sol vi ng
tasks (Campi one & Brown, 197 7 , 19 /9 ; Pol son & Jeffries, 1982 ) . Whi le these generi
c acti vi ties are l i kel y to be i nvol ved i n al l problem-sol vi ng attempts, the pattern of
usage may vary across roles and posi ti ons . For instance , defi ni ti on of the problem
may be especi al l y important to leadershi p effecti veness i n
upper- level boundary roles where compl exi ty i s great and role incumbents are responsi
ble for adapti ng the organi zation to the broader envi ronmen t, whi le the generati on of al
ternati ve sol utions to problems may be more important i n staff posi ti ons .
A schematic overview of the generi c problem-sol vi ng processes identi fi ed i n the
review, al ong wi th thei r hypothetical sequence i n an i ncident of problem sol vi ng ,
may be found i n Figure 1 . In al l , twel ve such processes were identi fied i n the l i
terature, seven of which represent control processes , and fi ve of whi ch represent
producti on processes . This sequence of prob)em-soJ vjng processes l ays the foundati
on for identi fi cati on of generi c sk i l l s .
Rietman (1964 ) notes that Il a problem" i s a di screpancy between the current
state of affai rs and some desi red state which, i n the context of leadershi p i n
bureaucrati c organi zati ons would be speci fied by the goal s i nherent i n the i ndi
vidual ' s role . Hence , before an i ndividual can engage i n sol vi ng a problem, i t must fi
rst be establ i shed that a goal i s not bei ng met. Thi s cal l s for the fi rst probl em-sol vi ng
process, whi ch entai l s moni topi ng the stimul us s i tuati on to identi fy certai n cues si
gnal i ng a goal state (Kdhneman, 19 /2 ) . Th i s process wi l l requ i re both attenti on to
and a knowledge of the cues rel evant to the current std tus of the goal , as wen as the ab j
J i ty to abstract thi s j ntor;nati on frotll a complex environrnent. Experience i s l i ke l y to
enhdnce the operd ti on ot thi s process (Hunt & Lansman , 1982 ; Lane , 1982; S imon &
Simon ,
The next process i nvol ves an eva I udti on of the importdnce ot the di screpancy. Essenti a
l l y , thi s i s a k i nd ef con tro l taechani sm d l lowi ng the indi v idual to reject tr i v i a l or
unimportant problems, and thus

12
5
Generi c s k i l l s .
 13

i ncreasi ng effi ci ency i n i ndi vi dual problem-sol ving ac ti v i ty (Hogarth , 1980 ) .

Cues si gnal i ng a goal state wi l l be compared to a cogni ti ve templ ate of the ideal
state and i ts associ ated cues . The importance of these si gnal i ng cues wi l l be
assessed on the basi s of the strength of the si gnal , thei r re l i ab i l i ty as an i ndi
cator of the goal state , thei r frequence of occurrence, and thei r overal l resemblance
to the template ( Sternberg , 1982 ) . The itnportance of these si gna l i ng cues , and the
degree of di screpancy from the template cues, wi l l enter i nto an es ti mate of the
magni tude of the di screpancy . Thi s estimate of the degree of di screpancy i s l i kel y
to be coral) i ned wi th an eval uati on of the importance of attai ni ng the goal state to
deterrnine whether or not the problem should be sol ved . Cl earl y , an i nappropri ate
pri ori ti za ti on of goal s wi l l substantial ly i nfl uence the effecti veness of thi s
process , and once agai n di rect trai ni ng and past experi ence are l i kel y to pl ay an
important rol e i n thi s eval ua ti on process ( Hogarth , 1980 ) .
After i t has been determi ned that there i s a problern worth sol vi ng , some deci si on
must be made tak i ng i nto account the other demands pl aced on the i nd i vidual , genera
jnotjvdti on, i nterest i n the problem, and the overa l l importance of the probl em about the
resources ( such as time and effort) that shoul d be devoted to problem sol uti on (Hogarth,
1980; Mccal l , Kapl an , & Ger l ach , 1980; Sternberg , 19 77 ) . Thi s eval uati on process can
have a drajnati c effect on the nature of l ater probl em-sol vi ng procedures and the qua l i ty
of the resul ti ng sol uti on . i nstance , Cyert and t•larch ( 1963 ) have noted that deci si on
makers operati ng under mul ti p l e demands and tilile pressure wi l l often l imi t the i r tilne i
nves tment i n sol uti on generati on by sa ti s f i c i ng , or sel ecti ng the f i rs t sol uti on that
might work , rd ther than generati ng and eval uati ng a number of a l terna ti ve sol u ti ons.
I ndi v i dual s wi l l next de f l ne the spec I t i c nature of the problem a t
hand; that i s , jus t what i t i s that needs to be sol ved . Th i s I s d cr i t i cal sk i l l
that i nvol ves i den t i fy i ng the vari ab l es and i n terre l a t i onsh i ps that are
rel evant to the probl em or d i screpancy even presence of incomplete on di
s tor t i no r kina n ,
G l aser , Whi le the adequacy ot probler,l de t i n i t i on W) I l on a var i ety of fac tors i

nc l ud i ng exper i ence , the content and c l a r i ty ot

the cues beari ng on the nature of the di screpancy and the indi vi dual ' s
capabi l i ty for establ i shi ng rel ati onshi ps i n a poorly-defi ned fi el d ,
etc . , i t i s al so l i kel y to be markedly infl uenced by resource al l ocati on
si nce variable speci fi cati on wi l l tend to e poor when l i ttl e time and effort
are avai l abl e .
Problem sol vabi l i ty wi l l be eval uated on the basi s of the rel evant variables and the
nature and magni tude of the di screpancy. Thi s eval uation wi l l be heavi ly dependent on past
experience wi th problems i nvol ving simi lar variables and di screpancies, and wi l l consider the
ava i lable resources and the overal l importance of the problem. The resul ts of the eval uati on
w i I I be employed i n a judgment as to whether or not a problem sol ution shoul d be attempted
(Hogarth , 1980; McCal l , Kapl an , & Ger 1 ach , 1980 ) . I f resources are l imi ted, simi l ar
problems have proved di ffi cu l t to sol ve , and/or the problem i s unimportant, the i ndi vidual
can be expected to return to moni tori ng; otherwi se, an attempt to sol ve the problem wi l l be
made .
The fi rs t step i n problem sol uti on entai l s selection of ( l ) the sk j n s, know)edges
and abi l i ti es requi red, (2) the manner i n whi ch the rel evant i nformati on shoul d be
represented , and (3 ) the sequenci ng of opera ti ons . Whi le thi s process mi ght be
separated i nto a set of di screte subprocesses , Sternberg ( 1982 ) has noted that the
relevant processes are so highly j n terdependent i n practi ce that they wi l l be di ff i
cul t, i f not impossi bl e , to separate . The parti cu l ar sel ecti ons made w j n depend
on the nature of problern defi ni ti on , the i ndi v i dual I s rel ati ve effecti veness i n empl
oyi ng the sk i l l s , knowl edges , and abi l i ti es and knowledge of and fa c i l i ty i n
working wi th vari ous strateg i es (Greeno , 19/1 ; 19/3 ; Chi , Gl aser & Rees , 1982 ) .
The selecti on made j n th i s process wi l l then guide the i ndi vi dua l through the
next process , tha t i s , encodi ng i nfomnati on beari ng on the nature of the problell) and
the rel evant van jab Jes througn d i rect acqu i s iti on and retenti on as wel l as transfer
from long- term lilemory. Si eg l er ( 19/3 ) has demons tra ted the importance of tin s
encodi ng process, by showi ng tha t more effec t i ve problem sol vers spend more time
encodi ng . Thi s opera tion wi l l be subs tanti a l l y i n f l uenced by the outcomes ot
the foregoi ng processes . For exacap1 2 i t i s l i kel y that the tipae spent i n
15

encodi ng wi l l be I if)) i ted by resource al l ocati on . Moreover , vari ety of si

tuati onal factors may al so i nfl uence the effecti veness of encodi ng , i ncl udi ng
i ndi v idual knowledge of the rel evant i nfortnati on sources , the physi cal and
cogni ti ve avai l abi l i ty of thi s i nformation , i ts causal impl i ca ti ons ,
relevance to the overal l si tuati on , recency, redundancy , spec i fi ci ty and
percei ved hel pfu l ness ( E i nhorn & Hogarth, 1981 ; Tversky, 191 1 ) .
Next, the combi nati on and compari son process wi l l be carri ed out. Al though
knowledge about the characteri sti cs and content of thi s process i s l imi ted , i t appears
to be a cri ti ca l aspect of complex probl em-sol vi ng (K lah & Wal lace, 1977; Sternberg,
1982) . Genera l l y , the combi na t ion and compari son process can be concei ved of as
an associ ati ve categori zat i on process along the l i nes suggested by Bruner ( 1966 ) . For
our purposes , i t can be expected that thi s process wi l l resul t i n a set of categori es
contai ni ng the rel evant i nformati on i n weighted form provi di ng a representation of
the current si tuati on , the projected si tuati on , and line thods for movi ng between the
two.
These categories wj ] J then provide the background for the generat i on of al
ternati ve sol uti ons . Th i s process i s simi l ar to Gui l ford I s ( 1977 ) di vergent thi nki
ng construct, al though i t i s somewhat more si mi l ar to creati vi ty i n the sense defi
ned by Owens ( 1969 ) . The categori es wi l l be mani pulated and i nterrel ated to
produce al ternati ve procedures for raoving from di fferent represen ta ti ons of the
current s ta te to a ] terna t i ve outcorne sta tes . l•lhi l e there i s l i ttl e support for the
importdnce of thi s process i n the probl em-sol vi ng l i terature , evi dence has been
obtai ned i n other areas ( Barron & Harri ngton , 1981 ) , and the adequacy of the sel ec
ted sol u ti on i s cl earl y dependent on generati on of v i ab l e A I terna ti ves . Ef fec ti
ve use ot th i s process i s al so dependent on the previ ous processes. For exagnple , the
generati on of a l terna ti ves i s of ten c i rcuvnscr i bed i n pract i ce when resources are l
im i ted i Background experi ences and personal charac len i s t i cs a l so appear to i nt l
uence the process ( Barron & Marr I Hoga n , 1980 ) .
The process ot choos i ng at:njng the genera ted a l terna t i ves has been label ed I
'evdl uati on of dl terna t i ve sol ons . I t can a l so be expected

that the nature of these al ternati ves wi l l be i nfl uenced by the forego- i ng processes as
wel l as a variety of background experiences and personal characteri sti cs ( Barron & Harri
ngton , 1981 ; Hogarth, 1980 ) . Here, each al ternative wi l l be assigned a subjecti ve
probabi l i ty of resul ti ng i n the desired outcome. General I y , the i ndividual can be
expected to choose the al ternative that wi l l produce an outcome of the highest value
and probabi l i ty of occurrence (Kahnegnan & Tversky, 19/3 ) . Thi s expectat ion may be
modi fied by consi derations such as a conservative bi as , desi re to resol ve confl i ct,
preference ambi gui ty , avoidance of responsibi l i ty , sel f-confidence and power (Ei
nhorn & Hogarth, 1981 ; Hammond & Summers, 1980) . The indj vjdua) may decide that
no sol uti on shoul d be chosen due to the lack of a clear di fferenti ati on of uti l i ti es ,
lack of any parti cu l arl y valued outcome , hi gh uncertai nty, or refusal to accept
responsi bi l i ty. I n thi s case, the i ndi vi dual wi l l return to moni tori ng or to eval uati on
of di screpancy importance, and cycle through the processes agai n . I f an acceptable sol uti
on i s found , the i ndi vidual wi l l rnove on to implement that sol uti on .
Because much of the rel evant research i s l imi ted to labora tory problem-
solving, where implementing a sol ution i s simply a matter of choosi ng a
response or vocal i z i ng a preference, there i s not a great deal of l i terature
focusing on the implementation process. I t i s l i kel y that implementation of a
sol uti on wi l l be complex process, invol vi ng mobi l i zati on of resources and sk i l l
s , know ledges, and abi l i ti es i n an integrated fashi on . Thi s sk i l l represents the
overt behavioral component of leadershi p, and i t i s l i kel y to be i nfl uenced by a
variety of fac especi al l y soci o-psychol ogi cal vari ables such as persuasi
veness , power and credi bi l i ty ( Bass , 1981 ) .
Fol lowi ng impl ementa t i on of the sel ec ted sol uti on , the eventual ou
tc01ne, d s wel l as the speci fi cs of sol ution impletaentd ti on, are l i kel y to be
moni toned. Thi s i nformati on wi l l be fed back i nto the system for use i n l ater
problem- sol v i ng attempts ( Sternberg , 1982 ) . Thi s pr,ccess dppears to be of
subs tantial importance i n the development of problem-
sol vi ng sk i l l s . Trai ni ng i n moni tori ng has been shown to enhance i ntel
lectual performance ( Belmont & Butterfield, 1971 ) , whi ch i s not surpri si ng
si nce moni tori ng sol uti on implementation and outcomes provides a basi s
for experiential learni ng . Of course experience and implementati on do not
necessari ly lead to useful learni ng experiences outside the laboratory
( Bremer, 1978 ) . The l imi ted val ue of di rect experience may be attri buted
to uncontrol lab l e features of a si tuation , the complex nature of a si tuati
on and of probl em-sol vi ng acti vi ties , ambigui ty i n feedback, i nabi l i ty to
test al ternati ve hypotheses and sel f-ful fi l l i ng prophecies (Castel lan ,
1977; Ei nhorn & Hogarth, 1978) . Whi le moni tori ng i s l i kely to be
important i n the devel opment of problem-sol ving sk i l l s , i t cannot be
expected that i t wi l l be uniquely effecti ve.
Some speci fi c attributes. The di scussi on of generi c processes
suggested that each wi l l be i nvoü ved i n al l problem-sol vi ng acti vi ties to
varyi ng degrees , and so consti tute the groundwork for descri ption of
effective leadership i n an organi zational setti ng . There i s an impl i ci t
assumption that di fferences between i ndi vi dual s i n the extent and effecti
veness of employment of the generic process i n probl em-sol vi ng acti vities
coul d account for some vari abi l i ty i n leadershi p effecti veness across i ndi
vidual s and si tuati ons, and thus serve as a general basi s for leadershi p
identi fi cati on and development. Thi s does not mean that problem-sol vi ng
acti vi ties per se are identi cal across i ndividual s and si tuati ons. Generi c
processes cannot operate i n the absence of speci fi c content; the nature of
thi s content coul d di ffer across i ndi vidual s and si tuati ons .
These processes obvi ously requi re a unique set of sk i l l s and
characteri sti cs i f they are to y i el d effective problem sol uti ons i n a Pdrtj
cul ar si tuati on . I n some cases only a threshold amount of a certa i n
content vari able needs to be present for effecti ve process operati on , whi le
i n other cases consi derabl e faci l i ty may requi red . The effecti ve operati
on of each process and the eventual problem sol uti on , i s l i kel y to requi re
a number of di screte sk i l l s , know ledges , ab i l i ti es and personal
characteri s ti cs empl oyed to provide an organi zed frmnework
for process operation . The number of potential content variabl es i nfl
uenc i ng problem sol uti on i n boundary rol e acti vi ti es i s extensive,
rangi ng f rota variables such as attention span and mechanical
comprehension to other variables such as i nterpersonal sensi ti vi ty
and knowledge of organi zati onal structure . The nature of the content

18
variables empl oyed by a gi ven i ndividual i s l i kel y to vary as a joi nt
function of the sk i l l s , know ledges , ab i l i ti es , personal characteri s
ti cs and experiences ava i lable to that i ndi vidual .
I t i s l i kel y that an i ndi vi dual may not empl oy al l relevant
content variabl es i n a parti cul ar probl em-sol vi ng attempt. Only
those variab l es that are avai lable to the i nd i v i dual and can be
effecti vely employed i n the problem si tuati on at hand are l i kel y to
be used. Thi s impl ies that poor perforrnance on a probl em-sol vi ng
task , and thus i neffecti ve leadershi p, might be due to poor selecti on
of relevant content variabl es as wel l as i nabi l i ty to erapl oy the
content variabl es or problem-sol vi ng processes effecti vel y . Even i n a
hypotheti cal ly i denti cal s i tuati on , di fterent i ndi vi dual s may empl
oy functi onal ly di fferent patterns of sk i l l s , know ledges, abi l i ti es ,
and personal characteri sti cs i n equal ly effecti ve problan- sol vi ng
attempts . When these pattern di fferences di spl ay some cross- si tuati
onal stabi l i ty , they are l i kely to produce di fferent types of leadershi
p sty l e (POI son & Jeffries , 1982 ) . Thi s suggests the possi bi l i ty of
pattern or qual i tati ve di fferences among i nd i v i dua l s i n thei r use
of content vari abl es , as wel l as simpl y di fferences i n the effecti
veness wi th which the variables are employed. Unfor tuna tel y, these
qual i ta ti ve di fferences are di ff i cul t to exami ne and control for ,
and any attempt to use them to describe an i nd i v idual leader i n
generdl must be cons i dered hi ghly approximate aggregate da ta .
The charac teri s ti cs of the generi c problern- sol vi ng processes sugges
t tha t the parti cu l ar combi na ti ons of sk i l l s , knowl edges , ab i l i ti es
and personal characteri s ti cs ernpl oyed by an i ndi vidual wi l l vary wi th the
na ture of the problem s i at hand . For exa:npl e , i n the ease
of l eadershi p tasks i nvol vi ng substan ti a l soci al con tdct i t could be
expected tild t social sk i l l s woul d be ot subs tdnti dl import, wh i l e i n
case of leadershi p the tasks ot a d i s ti nc tl y conceptual nature , i
as those i nvol ved n a chi ef executi ve ' s def 1 ni t i on ot organ i zati
onal
goal s , i t coul d be expected that i nterpersonal sk i l l s woul d e l ess
important than cogni ti ve sk i l l s and abi l i ti es . When i nd i v idua l

19
va ri ance i n sk i l l s , know l edges , abi l i ti es , anu personal
characteri sti cs i s coupled wi th s i tua ti onal vari ance , such as the
sa l i ence of si gnal i ng cues, whi ch affect the operati on of the
generi c processes , there can be l i ttl e doubt that the s i tuation wi l
l have a subs tantial impact on the nature of eftecti ve l eadershi p i n
a di rect behavi oral sense .
There are many ways i n whi ch effecti ve l eadersh i p behavior
and probl em- sol vi ng acti v i ti es may di ffer i n terms of the sk i l l
s , knowl edges , abi i ti es and personal characteri s ti cs requi red for
effecti ve probl etn sol uti on i n boundary rol e di screti onary ac ti v i
ti es . Yet thi s does not necessari l y i ndi cate that i t woul d be
impossible to l i nk problem sol v i ng and effecti ve leadershi p to a
general set of sk i l l s , knowl edges , abi l i ti es and personal
characteri s ti cs requi red for these ac ti v i ti es . To the extent that a
gi ven cl ass of simi l ar boundary rol es consi stent l y presents simi l
ar problems to role occupants , i t i s l i kel y that thi s s imi l ari ty wi l
l i nduce at least l imi ted consi stency i n the content ot effec ti ve
leadership and problem- sol vi ng acti v i ti es . There may be gl oba l s
i tua ti onal constrai nts across rol e categori es , such as Liu I ti p l e
demands for time i nvestment, whi ch would suggest some general
elements of effecti ve leadershi p and probletn sol vi ng , such as high
energ y or tnoti vati onal l evel s . Thus, i n th i s l imi ted sense, i t
should be poss i bl e to l i nk effec ti ve l eadershi p to a general
content of sk i l l s , knowl edges , ab i l i ti es , and personal characteri
s ti cs for a g i ven role class of rol es , a 1 though i t can be
expected tha t the feas i b i l i ty ot i den ti ty i ng content vari abl es
of th i s sort of any par ti cu l ar s i gni t i cance wi l l dimi ni sh as
boundary rol es become more di verse .
Empi r i ca l Support. A possi bl e frdmework has been sugges
ted concern i ng the nd ture ot i lid i v i dud I l eadersh i p and the
conceptua l p i nn i ngs ot ef tec ti ve l eadersh i p . Before turn i
ng to i ts prac ti ca l
I t woul d seem appropri ate to revi ew the d va i I
db l e l i teratare support i ng the va l i d i ty of thi s frdlnework .

20
 I t has long been recogn i zed tha t reason i ny ab i I i ty and the i
nd i v i dua l ' s capac i ty to sol ve novel probl erns are cl osel y re l a
ted to
proc
esses might appropriately be—viewed as subprocesses involved in
general intell i gence (Sternberg, 1982 ) , it was noted that
intel lectual capaci ty typical ly di splays a moderately posi tive
relationship to leadership performance; however, the magnitude of
this relationship might be underestimated due to the operation of
range restriction effects in the rel evant psychometric field studies. In
a meta-analysis correcting for range restriction effects, Cornwel l
(1983 ) found that the relationship between intel l igence and
leadership performance l ies in the mid-50s. Simi larly, in an
unrestricted analysi s of movement into sociological leadership posi
tions, (1938) correlated occupational status with the average intel l
igence of occupational members and obtained an ini tial correl ati on
of .50 which i ncreased to .75 over a ten-year interval . Bray, Campbel
l , and Grant (1974 ) have shown that general intel l igence is one of
the best predi ctors of performance in managerial leadership positions
, whi le Terman (1959 ) has shown that the highly intel l igent are far
more l i kely than most to obtain and perform successful ly in a wide
variety of leadership posi tions in terms of variables ranging from mil
itary honors to academic l eadership. Fi nal ly, Horner (1983 ) has
found that i ntel l igence was an excel lent predictor of tank crew
leadership in combat si tuati ons .
These studies suggest that the relati onship between intel l
igence and i ts component processes is far stronger than might be
expected after a cursory review of the l i terature that fai l s to
consider the impact of range restriction effects . it would seem that
there is some tangibl e support for use of the generic problem-
solving processes in attempts to understand leadership
effectiveness-r However, i t cannot be assumed that these processes
wi l l operate independently of the specific si tuatiorr at hand. One

21
 would expect to find i nteractions between intell i gence or i ts
component processes and thé specific content variables refl ecti ng
ski l l s, knowl edges, abi l i ties, and personal characteristics requi
red for problem sol vi ng in the leadership si tuation . In recent studi
es employing the least preferred co-worker approach, Fiedler ( 1983
) has found repl i cable interaction effects of thi s sort, whi le Hol
lander and Jul ian (1970) have found that the impact of intel l igence
on leadership effectiveness is moderated by the average intel l
igence of fol l owers.
The framework described above would lead one to expect some
change in specific content variables relevant to leadership
performance as.. a probletn si tuation changes. Strong support for
this position has been obtained in a study by Carter, Hay thorn and
Howell (1950) which manipul a ted the nature of a problem si tuation
(e.g. , a n'Echanica1 task, a clerical task, and an intel lectual task) and
found that similar individual s tend to emerge as group leaders on
tasks wi th similar demands, while di fferent individuals tend to
emerge as leaders on tasks with dissimilar problem-solving demands.
The tendency of individuals holding central posi tions i n comunication
networks to emerge as leaders has al so been attributed to their
greater abil i ty to solve problems facing the group (Guetzkow, 1954;
Shaw, 1963) . It might be expected that individual s wi th practice in
solving chal lenging leadership problems would be more l ikely to
emerge as effective leaders at a later date; Bray, Campbel l , and
Grant (1974 ) heve obtained evidence supporting this proposi tion i n
a sample cf managerial personnel .

22
 At least three addi tional pieces of evidence bearing on the va1
idi ty of the foregoing proposi tions may be found in the literature.
Earl i er it was pointed out that changes in the nature of problem-
solving si tuations should lead to some change i n the requirements
for effective leadership. Kanter (1977 ) and Pel z (1952) have found
that the nature of probl em-solving demands changes as individual s
move up the organizat ional hierarchy, and that i t is associated with
changes in the ski l l s , knowledges, abi l i ties, and personal
characteri stics required for effective leadership in these di fferent
categories of boundary roles. One might expect that the relationship
of these changes to leadership effectiveness would be associated with
increased demands on intel l igence and i ts component problem-
solvi ng processes, which genera-l ize across specifi c boundary roles
at a given level . Oaques (1977 ) has provided some evidence i ndi
cating that this expectation does, in fact, hold true. Final ly, to the
extent that a variety of boundary roles are associa ted wi th simi lar
problem-solvi ng demands, certain consistencies should emerge in
the nature of the rel evant content variables and problem-solving
behavior. Katz and Kahn (1977 ) have pointed out that in any
organizational setting , boundary role occupants wi l l nearly always
be presented wi th at least some problems of a distinctly social
nature related to individual needs for bel onging and affi l iati on , and
some problems stemming from the need to complete objecti ve tasks.
Therefore, i t i s not especial ly surpri si ng that consideration ( rel ati
on orientati on ) and ini tiating structure ( task orienta tion)
consistently emerge as genera] dimensions of leadershi p behavior
capable of predi cti ng di fferenti al effecti veness. However, i t i s al so
true that the framework sketched out above suggests that the
relevance of these dimensions to leadership effectiveness would be i
nfl uenced by more speci fi c si tuati onal factors and that thei r predi
cti ve power would thus be l imi ted . The 1 i terature mentioned earl
ier al so provides support for thi s proposi ti on .
The l i tera ture seems to contai n a variety of empi rical fi ndi
ngs provi di ng subs tanti al support for the theoreti cal framework. I

23
t appears that thi s approach to leadershi p and lead.rship effecti
veness provides a raechanism for i ntegrati ng a variety of highly
divergent observations , and that i t might provide a more adequate
theory of leadershi p as a general behavioral phenomenon than has
hi therto been avai l able . Consequently, i t now seems appropriate
to examine how thi s approach might be implemented in the
organiza ti ona) setting , and i ts potential appl i cations i n the area
of leadershi p i denti fi cati on and development.
APPLICATIONS

Impl ementation

In formal bureaucratic organi zations , where rol es are to some

extent speci fied independently of indi vi dual actions , and
subsystem or rol e interchanges occur i n a ci rcumscribed fashion
defined by the organi zation , i t shoul d be possi bl e to identi fy
boundary rol es and occupants on the basi s of formal organizational
structure. Whil e thi s approach wi l l not capture informal rol es
formul ated by an indi vidual , i t wi l l permit speci fication of those
rol es hel d to be of legitimate and stabl e import to the organization.
Once the boundary rol es i n the formal organizational structure
have been identi fied , it wi l l be necessary to identi fy the probl em-
sol ving acti vi ti es engaged i n by rol e occupants. These probl em-sol
ving acti vities would be refl ected i n discretionary behavior carried
out with respect to certai n goal s . The di scretionary acti vi ti es
performed by rol e incumbents affecting the transformation
processes characteri zing other subsystems could be identi fied; thi s
information woul d be employed to defi ne the nature of effecti ve l
eadershi p and probl em-sol ving behavior i n each boundary rol e .
Standard job analysi s procedures may be used to speci fy the nature
of these acti vi ti es . The richness of the resul ting descri pti ve
information might be enhanced by usi ng inventory rati ngs to
determine the frequency and importance of each acti vity as well as i
ts rel evance to the various goal s associ ated with the boundary rol e
at hand.

24
 Of course , a wide vari ety of boundary rol es and di
scretionary acti vi ties are l i kel y to be identi fied i n any given
organi zation. Hence , it wi l l be necessary to summarize thi s
information to obtai n a more general and useful descri ption of l
eadershi p probl em-sol ving requ i rements . Thi s
summarization i s best accompl i shed through a two-step
sequence. I ni ti al l y , those boundary rol es that shoul d be
combined i n simil ar categories woul d be identi fied . Thi s may
be accompl i shed ei ther through an empi rical cl ustering using
the rating data descri bing each boundary rol e , or through a
rational categori zation of boundary rol es based on job descri
ptions and organizational structure. Some combi nati on of these
two approaches might be employed i n the sense that boundary
rol es might be empi ri cal ly cl ustered wi thi n a gi ven level of
the organizati ona) hierarchy. Once the relevant categories have
been defi ned , i t wi l l then be necessary to surnrnarize the
leadershi p di screti onary acti vi ti es occurri ng wi thi n the
boundary roles i ncorporated i n each ca tegory . Thi s cl usteri
ng of di screti onary acti vi ties coul d be accompl i shed i n a
variety of ways, and i t i s l i kely that the parti cul ar procedures
employed in the defi ni tion of these sumraary dimensions wi l l
vary wi th the i r anti ci pated appl i cati ons ( Flei shman & Quai
ntance, 1984 ) . In most cases, mani fest sirni l ari ty i n the
content of the di screti onary acti vi ties wi l l serve as the basi s
for development of summary dimens ions .
Once sumrnary dimensions have been formul ated, i t wi l l be
necessary to determine the relevance of the vari ous generic
processes and content variabl es to effecti ve perforrnance on these
surnrnary dimensi ons . The roost economical and di rect approach
would entai l defi ni ng a domain of rel evant sk i l l s , knowledyes,
abi l i ti es, and personal characteri sti cs on the basi s of a l i terature
review and di rect observati on . Subsequen t 1 y , these content
variables and the generi c processes would be rated for frequency of
use and cri t i cal i ty i n accompl i shi ng the di screti onary acti vi ties
incorporated under each summary dimension wi thi n a gi ven

25
boundary role category. Whi le these ra ti ngs might be obta i ned
from e ither subject matter experts or job analysts , i t seems l i kel y
that the complexi ty of the generi c sk i l l s dild some of the relevant
content variables wi l l requi re the use of job analysts in sone
populati ons, whi le subject matter experts mi ght be used i n other
popul ati ons.
Two addi t i onal poi nts shoul d be noted . Fi rst, when long
range career devel oprnent efforts are bei ng consi dered , an organi
zati on Illi ght fi nd i t val uable to forum l ate sumlfldry di'nensions
extend i ng across various job or boundary role Cd tegories and to
obta in generic process and con tent vdn i al)le rati ngs for each of
these dimensi ons . Thi s can be accompl i shed s illiply by aggregdti
ng data across the rel evant boundary r01 2 categor ies and then
generati ng sumlllary dimens ions and ra ti ngs i n accordance w i th
tile procedures sketched out above. Second , studi es
conducted i n the mi l i tary and i n industry have shown that thi
s descriptave approach can be highly useful i n generating an
understandi ng of leadershi p effectiveness i n the organi zati
onal setti ng and can provide the requi si te groundwork for a
systematic approach to leadership identif i cation and
development (Clement & Ayres , 1977; Deluca & Powers, 1911;
Hernphi 1 1 , 1959; Tornow & Pi nto, 1976 ) .

Leadership Identi fi cati on

One potential appl i cation would l ie in the identi ficati on
of indi vidual s who are most l i kely to perform effectively i n
leadership positions . An attempt could be made to identi fy indi
vidual s i n the appl i cant pool who have successful ly solved a
variety of problems i n a number of di fferent settings, ei ther
before or after organizational entry. Thi s approach i s based on
the assumption that i ndividual s who have di splayed effective
use of problem-solving processes i n the past are more l i kely to
do so i n the future . Al ternati vely, appl i cants might be
selected on the basis of general intel lectual abi l i ty, si nce such
measures are cl osely related to effective use of the generic

26
processes . Fi nal ly, an attempt might be Inade to identi fy
problem-solving acti vi ties that general ize across boundary
roles and the ski l l s , know l edges, ab i l ities , and personal
characteri s ti cs related to effecti ve engagement i n these acti vi
ti es . Subsequently, measures of these ski l l s , know ledges ,
abi 1 i ties , and personal characteri sti cs could be empl oyed i n
selecti ng leaders.
I t i s di ffi cul t to recommend any one of these three approaches for
excl usive use i n leadership i dentl fi cati on . Whi le the fi rst two
strategies are l i kel y to be effecti ve and capable of ready impl ementati
on i n most organi zati ons, their feasi bi l i ty and effecti veness may be l
imi ted by extrellje range restrictions in the appl i cant pool , the l imi ted
ava i l abi l i ty of hi ghly i ntel l i gent and highly successful talent, and
equal ernpl oyment opportuni ty i ssues . The thi rd approach offers the
advantage of mani fest content val i di ty , but no di rect assurance that the
i ndi vidual wi l l be a general ly effecti ve problem sol ver or wi l l have avai
lable the know ledges, abi l i ti es , and personal characteri sti cs requi
red for et fecti ve leadershi p on speci fi c job assigntaents. Consequently,
the appl i cation of mul ti ple strategi es is to be encouraged i n most si
tuations, al though the most appropriate combination and implementation
of these al ternatives wi l l depend on the nature of the organization , i ts
appl i cant pool , and the legal constrai nts under which it operates.
Whi le the central concern i s identi fi cati on of indi vidual
s l i kel y to be effecti ve leaders i n a si ngle boundary role or
category, the methods are somewhat more straightforward . I
n thi s case, the content variabl es related to successful
performance on the suumary dimensions would be identi fied
and used as a basi s for selecti ng potential leaders through
experience, assessment centers or performance on standard
psychometric measures of these vari abl es . I n certai n cases ,
i t might be possible to identi fy individual s who have been
effective leaders in other boundary roles wi th simi l ar
dimensions of di screti onary behavior and relevant ski l l s ,
knowl edges, abi l i ties, and personal characteri sti cs .

27
Regardless of the particular methods empl oyed, i t seems l i
kely that when job-speci fi c strate-gies are used i n
conjunction wi th the general strategies described above, an
organization wi l l be able to forrnulate a viable system for l
eadership identi fi cati on .

Leadership Development
Leadership identi fi cati on strategies are often used to si ngle
out i ndividual s for special devel opment. It i s not always necessary
to l igni t developmental experiences to a select few, and in the fol
ng paragraphs, the impl i cat i ons of thi s approach for the devel
opment of more effecti ve leaders wi l l be examined . The focus of
thi s d i scussion wi l l be on leadership development per se, rather
than on trai ni ng . I t i s unl i kely that leadershi p effecti veness can
be much improved by d si ngle trai ni ng i ntervention carried out
short period of tilde. The l i tera ture suggests that devel opment of
effecti ve problem-sol vi ng behavi or and leadershi p wi l l requi re a
l ong- term effort due to the c onpl ex and enduri ng nature of many
of the rel evant i nd i v idua l character i sti cs . Addi ti onal l y ,
because of thei r di vers i ty i t dny s i ngle trai ni ng procedure wi
l l resul t i n subs tanti a l improvetnent of a l l the relevant processes
, knowledges, abi I i ti es , sonal characteri sti cs . I nstead , a var ie
ty ot trd i n i ng procedures shoul bc employed, rangi ng from on-
the-job tra i ni ng to lec cures

28
exerci ses . Fi nal ly, development of these processes , sk i l l s ,
know ledges , abi l i ti es , and personal characteri sti cs need not
always be tied to a speci fi c boundary rol e . Increasi ng an
individual ' s awareness of the biases that can ari se i n i
nformation encoding mi ght readi ly enhance leadershi p effecti
veness , despi te the fact that thi s i s not di rectly rel ated to parti
cular problems emergi ng i n certai n boundary rol es.
Once the summary dimensi ons of di screti onary acti v i ti es occurri ng
i n a boundary role or role category have been establ i shed, and l i nked to
the generi c processes and content vari ables requi red for sol vi ng prob1
erns through frequency and cri ti ca l i ty rati ngs, thi s informati on could
serve as a foundati on for a systemati c effort to develop more effecti ve
leaders. Such an approach to leadershi p development might be based on :
( 1 ) a set of special ly desi gned probl em-sol vi ng exerci ses, (2 ) formal
classroom i nstructi on , and (3 ) an organi zed sequence of on- the-job trai
ni ng requi rements .
One technique that mi ght be used to develop probl em-sol vi ng sk i l l
s would employ real i s ti c probl em-sol vi ng exerci ses or problem sets (Whi
ünore, 19/3 ; Whi tmore & Fry , 1974 ) . These problem sets coul d be
generated simply by havi ng a panel of i ncumbents or subJect matter exper
ts in the boundary role at hand review the content of each relevant
summary dimensi on and formul ate a rea l i s ti c scenari o of probl em-sol vi
ng acti v i ties based on these dimensi ons . Rati ngs of the frequency and cr i
ti ca l i ty of the generi c processes , and the tradi ti onal s k i l l s , knowl
edges , ab i l i ti es , and personal characteri sti cs associated wi th effecti ve
sol uti on of these probl em sets could be genera ted . These problem sets
and the rel evan t ra ti ngs woul d then forrn the fi rs t set of data requ i red
for the constructi on ot a career devel opment program.
The second dd ta coul d be obtai ned by reviewi ng the con tent of
summd ry d i i ons i denti fied for each boundary tegory a t
vari ous ) eve) s of the organi za ti onal hi e r'd PC h y , a l ong
w i th associ ated t terns of gene r i c process requ i
reunents der i ved the rati ng ddtd .
boundary rol es be i denti f i ed that would serve appropr i a te
sources of on- the- job t or boundary pole
 tegury because ot overl ap in dimensions
processes , know ledges ,
and personal characteri sti cs i n frequency and cri ti cal i ty of use i n effecti ve
probl em-sol vi ng efforts . Addi t i onal 1 y, an attempt might be rnade to
determine di fferences i n the nature of problera-sol ving acti vi ti es and thei r
relevant process and content variable demands as one moves to d i fferent
role categories and/or di fferent l evel s i n organizati onal hierarchi es.
The fi nal set of data would De obtai ned frosn a review of current trai ni ng
procedures. Here the nature and con tent of cl assroom i nstruction woul d be
determined al ong wi th i ts relevance to development of the sk i l l s , know l edges,
abi l i ti es , and personal characteri sti cs empl oyed i n eval uati ng performance on
the summary dimensions contai ned i n the vari ous role categories. Addi ti ona trai
ners would be asked to speci fy when, where, how, and to whom trai ni ng was
provided to faci l i tate performance on each of the swnmary dimensi ons and i ts
associated content variabl es .
The inforraati on obtai ned from thi s fi nal set of data coul d then be
cornpared to the sk i l l s , know l edges, abi l i ti es , and personal characteri sti cs
held to a ffect performance jn the re)evant boundary rol es . Thi s would serve to
speci fy what trai ni ng would be requi red to prepare an i ndi vidual for a boundary
rol e category, and any di screpancies would serve to suggest where changes shoul d
be made i n the current trai ni ng program. The importance of provi di ng
experiences to prepare an i ndi vi dua l for movement between boundary roles may
al so be determi ned through thi s ddtd . Trai ni ng programs mi ght be adjusted i n
order to stress content vari abl es that a l arge number of trai nees mi ght l ack
because of
1 ill) •i ted overlap wi th the leadershi p demands made by thei r
previous job . th i s i nformati on would d l low trai ners to
concentrate on those areas where an i ndi v i dud 1 i s l i ke l y to be def i
c i ent i n leadershi p requ i re:nents.
i n generdJ steps Jht be taken i n d I l trdi ni ng programs tha t wou l
d be ot va l ue g i ven the na ture and con tent of the generi c problem•JD l v i
ncj processes . i t has been shown that an
J problem- sol v i ng perfortnance can be enhanced by provi di ng
general probl sol v i ng stra teg ies (Greeno , A review of the leadershi p
pe r fortna n ce d i;aens ions , d s we l l dS relevdnt process and content
variable requi rements, rnight be used to specify strategies for incl usion
i n formal classroom i nstructi on . Classroom i nstructi on might al so
attempt to enhance leadershi p effecti veness i n general by providi ng
the background for optimal use of the vari ous generi c processes. The i
nstruction might speci fy: ( l ) the categories which are l i kely to be of
use i n problem sol vi ng , (2 ) the pri ori ty of goal s i n boundary rol es , (
3 ) the vari ables that si gnal goal di screpancies , and (4 ) the types of bi
ases which ari se i n information encoding and selection of sol uti on.
Impl ementation of these approaches shoul d lead to more effecti ve cl
assroom i nstructi on and to enhanced leadershi p performance on a
variety of jobs .
I t cannot be expected that al l processes , ski l l s , know ledges , abi I i ti es ,
and personal characteri s ti cs can be enhanced through formal classroorn i
nstruction . A series of procedures might be empl oyed to supplement tradi ti onal
curricula wi th exerci ses deri ved from the problern sets identi fied by havi ng
subject matter experts formul ate real i sti c problem-sol vi ng i nci dents and l i nki
ng these i nci dents to thei r sk i l l requi remen ts . One strategy for the use of these
problem sets woul d be to present them as case studies for group di scussi on
(Champion & James, 1975 ; Brown & Kel l y, 1968 ) . Thi s approach parti cul arly
when coupled wi th formal lectures and feedback targeted on sk i n improvement,
has proven highly effecti ve i n Inanagement development (Argyri s , 1965; Maier ,
1953; Riegel , 1952; Del uca & Powers, 1971 ) .
Case studies are most l i kely to be useful for rel ati vely objecti ve
problem sets and may not represent an especial ly viable strategy for developi
ng social ly oriented problem-sol vi ng sk i l l s . Instead , rol e-playi ng exerci
ses might be desi gned based on the problem sets ( Bradford & Li ppi tt, 1953 )
. Role pl ayi ng i s especial ly l i kely to be effecti ve i f i t i s combi ned w i th a
systemdti c coachi ng effort that defi nes al terna ti ve approaches and
provides a trai nee wi th feedback concerni ng hi s/her acti v j ti es (Lawshe,
Bol da , & Brune , 1959; 0 ms tead , Cleary, Lackey, & Sal ten , A fi nal strategy
would i nvol ve bui l di ng computer simul ati ons around a prob lem set. Thi s
has been shown to be at l east as effec ti ve as case studi es jn addressi ng rel
atively objecti ve problelils
(Raia , 1966 ) , and i t offers certai n advantages si nce i t provides pract ice
in deci sion making as wel l as rapid and accurate feedback that might
otherwise be di ffi cul t to obtai n, and i t al lows practi ce i n sol vi ng
problems i n costly si tuati ons .
Whi le al l of these problem set approaches are l i kely to be of some value i n
developing effecti ve l eaders, a fi nal procedure whi ch might al so be employed is
on- the-job traini ng . Here the matrices of the processes, sk i l l s, know ledges, abi
l i ti es and personal characteri sti cs requi red i n di fferent boundary roles could be
used to design a sequence of boundary role assignments servi ng to prepare the i
ndividual for some higher-level boundary role , on the basi s of the degree of
overlap in the elements requi red for effecti ve problem sol ving (Korotkin , Hadl ey,
Davi s, & Marsh, 1916 ) . Since performance on many of these vari ables i s i nfl
uenced by appropriate experience, i t can be expected that when thi s sequence of
job experiences i s extended over a period of years , i t wi l l be a hi ghly effecti ve
developmental tool .
The classroom, problem set, and on-the-job trai ni ng procedures for
developi ng the problem-solvi ng capaci ty of leaders should be viewed as
mutual ly supportive rather than mutual ly excl usive techniques . I t can be
expected that the use of such mul ti ple, overlapping trai ni ng procedures ,
parti cularly when extended over an individual ' s career, wi l l yield a highly
effective career development system (Showe) , Tayl or, & Hood, 1960 ) .
Moreover, when these procedures are careful ly designed and i
ntegrated, i t can be expected that they wi l l provide a val id and systematic
approach to the sequential and progressi ve devei opment of leadership and
management personnel .
CONCLUSION

A number of statements have been made about the nature of l

eadershi p i n organi zati onal setti ngs and impl i cati ons suggested for
leadershi p i denti f i cati on and development. I t appears that an
organizational ly-based approach to leadership and the di fferential
effectiveness of leaders as boundary role occupants can serve to i
ntegrate a wide range of conceptual and empi ri cal fi ndi ngs , through
use of the problem-sol vi ng acti vi ti es i nherent i n al l these rol es .
Tradi ti onal I y, i nvesti gators have approached the i ssues of leadershi
p and l eadershi p effecti veness i n a manner which was not especi al ly

32
concerned wi th the nature of leadershi p as mani fested i n the organizat i
onal setti ng . Consequentl y, the l eadership l i terature lacks cohesi on and i t
has been di ffi cul t to apply behavioral science pri nci pl es in l eadershi p i
denti fi cati on and development. The present paper represents a prel imi
nary attempt to formul ate an approach to leadershi p that i s cogni zant of
both the i ndi vi dual l eader and the organi zational setti ng i n whi ch
leadershi p occurs .
REFERENCES

Argyri s , C . ( 1965 ) . Expl orati ons i n i nterpersonal competence .

Journal of Appl ied Behavi ora l Science, l , 255-269 .
Bal es , R. F . ( 1949 ) . I nteracti on process analysi s. Readi ng ,
MA : Addi son-Wesley .
Ba l l , R. S . ( 1938 ) . The predi ctabi l i ty of occupati onal level from i ntel l i
gence . J ournal of Consul ti ng Psychol ogy, 2 , 184-186 .
Barron , F. 8 Harri ngton , D. ( 1981 ) . Crea ti vi ty, i ntel l i gence and
personal i ty . In M. R. Rosenzweig & L . W. Porter ( Ed . ) , Annual
Review of Psychol ogy, 2 , 184-186 .

Bass, ( 1967 ) . Some effects on a group of whether and when the

head reveal s hi s opi ni on . Organi zati onal Behavi or and
Human Performance, 2 , 375-382 .
Bass , B. ( 1981 ) . S togdi l l l s handbook of l eadershi p. New York
: press .

Bass , & Norton , F . Il. ( 1951 ) . Group si ze and l eaderl ess di scuss i ons .
Journal of Appl ied Psychol ogy, 35 , 397-400 .

Bass , B. M. & Wurster, C. R . ( 1953 ) . Effects of the nature of the problern on

LGD performance . Journal of Appl ied Psychol ogy, 37 , 96-99 .

Belmont, J . M. , & Butterfi eld , E . C . ( 1911 ) . Assessi ng and improvi ng the

executive cogni ti ve functi ons of mental ly retarded peopl e . I n I . Bai
l er & J . Stern l i ch t ( Eds . ) , Psychol ogi cal i ssues and mental

retardati on. New York :Psychol og i cal Dimensi ons .

33
Bernard , J . ( 1928 ) . POI i t i ca l l eadershi p among tuorth Ameri can I nd
ians . Ameri can Journal of Soc i ol ogy, 34 , 296-315 .

Bi rd , C. ( 1941 ) . Socia l psychol ogy. New York : Basi c Books ,

Bl ood , M. R . , & Al i enati on , envi ronrnental character i s ti cs , and
worker responses . Journal of Appl ied P sychol ogy, 51 , 284-290 .
Bradford , L . P . , & L i ppi tt, R . ( 1952 ) . Rol e-pl ayi ng i n mandgement
trdi ni ng . I n t•l. J . Dooher & V . l•larqui s ( Eds . ) , The devel opment
of executi ve ta lent. New York : Amer i can t rlanage:nent Assoc i a t i
on .

Campbel l , & Grant, D . L . Formati ve years i n busi ness : A l

ong- term AT&T study of managerial l i ves. York : Wi l ey.

34
Brerntaer , B. ( 1 9 / 6 ) . Response corns i s tency i n probab i l i s ti c i
nference tasks . Organ i za ti ona l behavi or and Human
Performance, 22 , 103-10b .
Brown , F . L . , & Ke l l y , H . ( i 968 ) . C ri ti cal combat performance ,
knowl edges , and sk i l l s requi red of the i nfantry ri f l e pl atoon l
eader. Al exandri a , VA: Elumatl Resources Research Organ i zati on
.
Bruner , J . S . ( i 9b6 ) . The act of di scovery . Harvard Educati onal Review, 31
, 2 1 -32 .

Burks , F . W. ( 193b ) . Some factors rel ated to soci al success i n co] l ege .
Journal ot Soc i d l Psychol ogy, 9 , 125-140.
Burns , T . , & Std l ker , G . M . ( 1 96 1 ) . The management of i nnova ti
on. London , England : T av i s tock Publ i cati on .

Campi one , J . C. , & Brown , A. L . ( 1 9 79 ) . Toward d theory of in te l l i

gence: Contri bu ti ons from research wi th retarded persons . I n R . J
. Sternberg & D . K . Dettemnan ( Ed s . ) , Human i nte l l i gence :
per-

specti ves on i ts theory and measurement. Norwood , NJ : Abl e x .

Campione, J . C. , & Brown , A. L . ( 1 9 / 1 ) . r•lernory and rae

ta-tneraory deve l opment i n educabl e retarded chi l dren . I
n R. V . Ka i l , J r . & Haye ( E d s . ) , Perspecti ves on the
devel opment of snemory and cognit i on. H i l l sda l e , NJ :
Lawrence Erl baum and Associa tes .
Carter , L . F . , Hay thorn , W . , & Howel l , M . u950 ) . A fur ther i nves t] gat
i on of the cr i teri a of l eadershi p . Journal of Abnormal Soc i a l
Psychol ogy, 45 , 350-35b .

Cas tel I a n , ( 1 9 / 1 ) . Dec i si on Inaki ng wi th mul ti pl e probab i l i s

t i c cues . I n N. J . Cas te l l an , D. B . P i s i oni G . R. Potts ( Ed
s.),
Cogni ti ve theory.H i l l sda l e , NJ : Lawrence Erl baum & Assoc i a
tes .
C hdinpi on , J . & James , J . ( 1 9 / 5 ) . Cri t i cal i nci dents i n
tnanageme n t. H urnewood , Ri char'd D . I rwi n , I nc .
Chi G l aser , R . , Rees , E . ( 1 982 ) . Experti se i n probl e:n so l v InR.J.
Sternberg ( Ed s . ) , Advances i n the psychol ogy of human i n te l l i gence.
Lawrence Erl baurn & Assoc i -
d tes .

C l euaen t, S . l) . Ayres , D . B. ( May 19 / / ) . i za t i ona I I edder sh p tasks

for Artily l eadersh i p tra i ng . Leadershi p t or the 19/0 ' s ,

t•lonograph #9 . U.S. A me ta-ana lys is of sel e cted tra i t re1

Cornwe l l i tera ture . Paper presen ted d t the i.\ee
sea rch i n the l eadershi p tP sycho l og i ca l A tl an to ,
i nos of the Southeastern
A(iln i n i s tra t i on Centen .
4

Cyert, R , n. U 903 ) . A behavi ora l theory of the f i rm. Englewood C l i t

t s , P ren ti ce-Hal 1 .
Green , K . d. Soc i o techni cal systems: Factors i n ana l y s i s , desi gn
and managelilent. Englewood Cl i ff s , NJ : Prenti ce-Ha1 1 .

Del uca , A. J . , & Powers , ( 1 9 / 1 ) . Ba t ta l i on Commander comba t

arms raaneuvcr ba tta l i on : I denti fi ca ti
on of know l edges and sk i l l s and i nvesti ga ti on of thought
process 1 ng. Al exandri a , VA: hiuman Resources Research Urgan
i za ti on .

Durkhei;n , E . ( 1 9 / 4 ) . The d i v i s i on of l abor i n society. Trdns l a

ted by G . S i (inpson . New Y : F pee P ress .
& Hogarth , (19/3). Confidence i n judgtnent :
s i s tance of the i l l us i on of va l i di ty . P sychol ogi cal Revi
ew, 85 , 312-314.

t- i nhorn , q . J , & Nogar th , R . ( 19d1 ) . Behav i oral deci si on theory .

R. Rosenzwei g & L . W. Porter ( Eds . ) , Behavi oral deci si on theory.
to , CA : Annual Rev i ews , I nc .
L r i k son , c .( 1 96 1 ) .Young roan Luther. New York : Nor ton .
Farrow , t) . L . , Va l enzi , & Bass , B. M. ( 1980 ) . A cotnpari son of
leadersh i p and s i tuati ona l chdracteri sti cs wi thi n prot i t and
nonprot i t organ i zati ons . P roceedi ngs of the Academy of
t,lanagement.

F i ed l er , ( 1 9 / 2 ) . P redi c ti ng the et fects of l eadershi p tra i ni ng

and exper I ence t rotl the conti ngency model . Journal of Appl i ed
P sychol ogy, 56 , 1 14-1 19 .

F i ed l er , F . E . ( 1983 ) .Persona l conrnuni ca ti on .

E . A. ( 1953 ) . Leadersh i p cl irna te , human rel a ti ons and super
v i sor y behav i or Personne l P sychol ogy, 6 , 205-222 .

F l e i & Qua i n tance , ( 1984 ) . Taxonomies

of hunldtl nee : The descri p ti on ot hu'lldn tasks.
(lew York : Academi c

"tot i on s tudy. Cas ton , PA:

u ree no u . ( 1 9 / 1 ) .P rocess u i unders Candi ng . Cd s te l I an ,

R . Potts ( Ed s . ) , Cogni ti ve theory: vol ume l l
. Lawrence d r )buur,) Assoc i a tes.
(J rsa n i zd ti deve l op:aent and res tri c ti ons i n
cornrynuni ca ti on S. P i t tsburgil , Carneg ie I ns ti tu te ot Techno) 09 y
.
Gui l ford , J . p . ( 1971 ) .The way beyond I . Q .New York :Creati ve Edu-

cati on Foundati on .

Hanunond , K . R. , & Sutntaers , D . A. ( 1980 ) . Cogni ti ve control . P

sychol ogi cal Review, 19 , 58-6/ .

Hernphi l l , J . K . ( 1949 ) . The leader and hi s group . Journal of Educat i

onal Research, 28 , 225-229 , 245-246 .

Heraphi I l , J . K . ( 1959 ) . Job descri pti ons for executi ves : Harvard
Business Review, 31 , 55-6 /

Hoga r th , R. M. ( 1980 ) .Judgment and choi ce.New York :Wi l ey .

Hol l ander , E . P . , & J ul i an , J . W. ( 1970 ) . Studies i n leader l eg i
tisnacy, i nfl uence and i nnovati on . I n C. Berkowi tz ( Ed . ) ,
Advances i n experirnental soci al psychol ogy, Vol urne 5 . New
York : Academi c Press .
Horner A. ( 1983 ) . Ki l l ers , fi l l ers , and fodder . Journa l of the A
rmy War Col l ege, 32 , 2/-34 .

House , R. T. R . ( 19/4 ) . Path-goal theory of l eadershi

p . Journal of Contemporary Busi ness, 3 , 81-91 .

Hunt, E . , & Lansman , ( 1982 ) . I ndi vidual di fferences i n attenti

on . I n R. tel . Sternberg ( Ed . ) , Advances i n the psychol ogy of
human i ntel l i gence. H i l l sda l e , NJ : Lawrence Erl baum &
Associ ates .
Jan i s , l . & Mann , L . ( 191 1 ) . Dec
i s i on mak i ng: A psychol ogi and commi tment. New York :
ca l analysi s ot conf l i c t, choi
ce Press .

Jaques , E . ( 19 / 1 ) . A general theory of bureaucracy. London , Engl and : Hei

neman .

Kahneman , & Tversky , A. ( 1983 ) . On the psychol ogy of pred i c ti

on . P sychol og i cal Rev i ew, GU , 237-251 .
Kahne:nan , D . ( i 9 /2 ) . Subjec ti ve probabi l i ti es : A judynent of
representdti veness . Cogn i ti ve P sychol ogy, 3 , 430-454 .

Kan ten , R . hi. r•len and women of the corporati on . New York :
Bas i c Books.

Leadersh i p : A chal lenge to tradi ti ona l research met

nods and as sumpt j ons . Academy of Blanagement Rev iew, d ,

Ka tz , D . , & Kahn , R. L . ( 19 7 7 ) . The soc i a l psychol ogy of organ i za

ti ons. New York : Wi l ey .

K I ah ) D . , & Wal l ace , J . G . ( 19 / 1 ) . Cogni ti ve devel opment: An i

nformat i on processi ng view. H i l l sda l e , NJ : Lawrence Erlbauro &
Assoc i ates .
Kohl er , u. ( 1938 ) . Cl osed and Open Sys telns . Excerpted i n F . E .
Emery , 1969 , Systems thi nk i ng, Harmondsworth , ('ti dd lesex ,
Engl and : Pengui n Books, 59-69 .

Korotk i n , A. L . , Hadl ey , H .Davi s , p . , & telarsh , C . N.

Duty module methodol ogy for the offi cer career rnanagement system devel
opment. Alexandra a , VA: U . S . Array Research I ns ti tute for the
Behav 1 oral and Soci al Sciences. Researcll 137)
Lane , l) . M. ( 1982 ) . L iini ted capac i ty , atten t i on al I ocatwn and
product i v i ty . I n A. C . Howel l & E . A. F l ei shinan ( Ed s . ) ,
Human perforlllance and producti vi ty : I nformati on processi ng and
deci s i on tnaki ng. H 1 1 sda e , NJ : Lawrence E r l baul,) & Assoc
i a tes .

Lawshe , C . H . , Bol da , R . A. , & Brune , R . L . ( 1959 ) . Studi es i n

mandgeInent trai n i ng eval uati on : The e ffects ot exposures to rol e
pl ay i ng . Journal of Appl i ed P sychol ogy, 43 , 287-292 .

Leav i tt, H . J . ( 1951 ) . Some effec ts of certai n counmuni cdti on pa

tterns on group pertorraance . Journal of Abnorrnal and Soc i al P
sychol ogy, 46 , 33-50 .

Lewi n , K . ( 195 1 ) .F i el d theory i n soc i al sc i ence.New York : Harper .

Lewi n , K . , L i ppi tt, R . U 93d ) . An experimental approach to the study
of au tocracy and detaocracy : A prel i n i nary note . Soc i ometry, l ,
292-300 .

Ma i er , ( 1 953 ) . An experirnen ta l te s t t) t tne et tec t ot tra i n i ng

on
discussiDn leadership. NIli.'dn Relations, b, It)1-1/J.
l

Leadersh i p and organ i za t i ona l s bruc tupe . Ameri

can J ourna l of Soc i o l ogy, 81 ,
Mot t, p. E. ( 1972 ) . The characteri sti cs of effective organizati
ons. New York: Harper & Row.
Olmstead, Cleary, F . K. , Lackey, L . L . , & Sal ter, J . A. ( 1973 ) .
Development of leadership assessment simulations. Alexandria ,
VA: Human Resources Research Organi zation.
Owens, W. A. ( 1969 ) . Cogni tive, noncogni tive and environmental
correlates of mechanical i ngenui ty. Journal Appl ied Psychol ogy, 53,
199-208.

Pari s , S. W. (1913 ) . Comprehension of language connectives and proposi

tional logical relationships . Journal of Experimental Chi ld Psychology,
16 , 278-291 .

Pel z, D. C. ( 1952 ) . I nfl uence: A key to eftective leadershi p i n the fi

rst-l i ne supervi sor . Personnel, 29 , 205-217 .
Perrow, C. (1910 ) . Organizational analysis: A sociological view.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Pol son , p . & Jeffri es , R. ( 1982 ) . Problem solving as search and

understanding . In R. J . Sternberg (Ed . ) , Advances i n the
sycholo y of human i ntel l igence. Hi l l sdal e , NJ : Lawrence
Er baum & Associates.

Powel l , J . S. , & Sternberg , R. J . ( 1983 ) . Acqui si tion of vocabulary

from context. Manuscript submi tted for publ ication.
( 1966 ) . A study of the educational value of management games.
Journal of Busi ness. 39, 339-352 .

Rei , R. ( 1964 ) . Heuri stic deci sion procedures, open constrai nts, and
the structure of i l l -defi ned problems. Shel ley &
G. Bryan (Eds. ) , Human judgments and optimaci ty. New York : Wi l ey .

40
Resni ck, L . B. , & Glaser, R. ( 1977 ) . Problem solvi ng and i ntel l i
gence. In L . B. Resnick ( Ed . ) , The nature of intel l igence. H i
l l sda l e , Lawrence Erl baum & Associates.
Riegel , J . W. ( 1952 ) . Executive development: A survey of the
experience i n fi fty Ameri can corporati ons. Ann Arbor, MI : Uni
versi ty of Michigan Press.

Scandura , J . Isl. Problem sol vi ng.New York:Academic Press .

Schmidt, F. , & Hunter, J . E . ( 1971 ) . Development of a general sol ution to
the problem of val i di ty general i zati on . Journal of Appl ied
Psychology, 62, 529-540.

Schutz, W. C. ( 1955 ) . What makes a group productive? Human Relati ons, 8,

465-499 .

Shaw, fl. E. ( 1963 ) . Some effects of varyi ng amounts of information

exclusively possessed by a group member upon his behavior in the
group. Journal of General Psychology, 68, 71-79 .

Showel , M. , Taylor, E. , & Hood, P . D. (1966 ) . Automation of a porti

on of NCO leadership preparation trai ning. Washington, D.C . :
Human Resources Research Organi zati on .

Siegler, S. ( 19/8 ) . The ori gi ns of scienti fi c reasoni ng .

Siegler (Ed . ) , Chi ldrens thi nki ng: What develops? Hi l l sdal e ,
NJ : Lawrence Erlbautil & Associates.
& Simon, H. A. ( 1976 ) . Individual di fferences i n sol vi ng
physics problems. I n R. Siegler (Ed . ) , Chi ldren' s thi nki ng:
What develops? Hi n sdal e , NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum & Associ ates.
Sternberg, R. J . ( 1982 ) . A componential approach to i ntel lectual development. In
R. J . Sternberg (Ed . ) , Advances i n the psychol ogy of human intel l igence. Hi
l l sdale , NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum & Associa tes.

41
Sternberg , R. J . ( 1981 ) . Toward a uni fied componential theory of human i
ntel 1 i gence : I . Fl uid abi l i ties . In M. Friedman, J . Das, & N. 0 1
Connor (Eds . ) , I ntel l igence and learni ng. New York : Plenum.

Sternberg, R. J . ( 1977 ) . I ntel l igence, i nformation processi ng, and

analogi cal reasoni ng: The componential analysi s of human abi
l ities. Hi l l sdal e , NJ : Lawrence Erl baum & Associates .
S togdi l l , R. M. ( 1948 ) . Personal factors associated wi th leadership: A
survey of the l i terature . Journal of Psychology, 25 , 35-71 .

Sweney, A. B. , Fiechtner , L . A. , & Samores, R. J . ( 1975 ) . An i

ntegrative factor analys i s of leadership measures and theories .
Journal of Psychol ogy, 90 , 75-85 .
Tayl or, F . W. ( 1960 ) . The pri nci pl es of science i n management. I n H. F. Merri l l
( Ed . ) , Cl assi cs i n management. New York : American Management Associati on ,
82-113 .

Terman, L . M. ( 1959 ) . The gi fted group at midl i fe.

Stanford , CA: Stanford Universi ty Press .

Thompson, J . D. , & McEwen , W. J . Organizational goal s and enviromnen t .

American Soci ol ogi cal Review, 23, 23-30.
Tri s t, E . L . , & Bamforth , ( 1951 ) . Some soci al and psychol og i cal
consequences of the longwal l method of goal getti ng . Human Rel ati
ons, 4 , 3-38 .

Tornow, W. W. , & P i nto , P . R. ( 1976 ) . The devel opment of a managerial

job taxonomy : A system for descri bi ng , cl assi fyi ng and eval ua ti ng
executive posi ti ons . Journal of Appl ied Psychol ogy, 61 , 410-418 .
Torrance , E . P . ( 1951 ) . Group deci si on making and di sagreement. Social
Forces, 35 , 314-318 .

Tversky, A. ( 1971 ) . Features of simi lari ty . Psychol ogy Review,

84 , 327-352.

42
Tyler , L . E . ( 1964 ) . The psychology of i ndi vidual di fferences.
Englewood i ffs , NJ : Prenti ce-Ha11 , I nc .
Ul ri ch , R . A. , & Wiel and , G. F. ( 1980 ) . Organizational theory and
desi gn. Homewood, I L : Ri chard D. I rwi n , Inc .
Von Bertalanffy , L . ( 1968 ) . General systems theory: Foundati ons ,
development, appl i cati ons. New York : Brazi l ler .

Vroom, V. H. ( 1976 ) . Leadershi p . I n f•l . D. Dunette ( Ed . ) . Handbook of

ndustrial and organi zati onal psychology, Chi cago , I L :
McNal ly.

Webb, U. ( 1915 ) . Character and i ntel l i gence . Bri ti sh Journal of P sychol

og i ca l Monographs, #zo .

Weber, ( 1964 ) . The theory of soci al and economic organi zati on.
Translated By F. Henderson & T. Parsons. New York : Free Press .
Whi more , P . C . ( 1973 ) . Use of the job model concept to guide job
descri pt i on procedures for Army offi cers. Al exandri a , VA:
Human Resources Research Organi za tion .

Whi more , P . C. , ( 1914 ) . Soft sk i l

l s : Defi ni ti on, behavi onal
model ana lysi s and trai ni ng procedures. Alexandri a . VA:
Human Resources Research Organ i zd ti on .

Woodward , J . ( 1965 ) . I ndus tri al organi zati ons : Theory and practi
ce. London, England : Oxford Un i vers i ty Press .
Yuk i , G. A. ( 19/3 ) . Towa rd a behav ioral theory of leadershi p. za
ti ona l Behavi or and Human Performance, b , 414-440 .

43