Leadership and Management

According to Peter G. Northhouse, Leadership is a process that is similar to management in

many ways. Leadership involves influence, as does management. Leadership entails working
with people, which management entails as well. Leadership is concerned with effective goal
accomplishment, and so is management. In general, many of the functions of management are
activities that are consistent with the definition of leadership we set forth at the beginning of this
chapter. But leadership is also different from management. Whereas the study of leadership
can be traced back to Aristotle, management emerged around the turn of the 20th century
with the advent of our industrialized society. Management was created as a way to reduce
chaos in organizations, to make them run more effectively and efficiently. The primary
functions of management, as first identified by Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing, staffing,
and controlling. These functions are still representative of the field of management today.

In a book that compared the functions of management with the functions of leadership, Kotter
(1990) argued that they are quite dissimilar (Figure 1.2). The overriding function of
management is to provide order and consistency to organizations, whereas the primary
function of leadership is to produce change and movement. Management is about seeking
order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and constructive change. As illustrated
in Figure 1.2, the major activities of management are played out differently than the
activities of leadership. Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7– 8) contended
that both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper. For example,
if an organization has strong management without leadership, the outcome can be stifling and
bureaucratic. Conversely, if an organization has strong leadership without management, the
outcome can be meaningless or misdirected change for change’s sake. To be effective,
organizations need to nourish both competent management and skilled leadership.
Figure 1.2 Functions of Management and Leadership, Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How
Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.

Many scholars, in addition to Kotter (1990), argue that leadership and management are distinct
constructs. For example, Bennis and Nanus (2007) maintained that there is a significant
difference between the two. To manage means to accomplish activities and master routines,
whereas to lead means to influence others and create visions for change. Bennis and Nanus made
the distinction very clear in their frequently quoted sentence, “Managers are people who do
things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (p. 221).

Rost (1991) has also been a proponent of distinguishing between leadership and management. He
contended that leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a
unidirectional authority relationship. Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of
developing mutual purposes, management is directed toward coordinating activities in order to
get a job done. Leaders and followers work together to create real change, whereas managers and
subordinates join forces to sell goods and services (Rost, 1991, pp. 149–152).
In a recent study, Simonet and Tett (2012) explored how leadership and management are best
conceptualized by having 43 experts identify the overlap and differences between leadership and
management in regard to 63 different competencies. They found a large number of competencies
(22) descriptive of both leadership and management (e.g., productivity, customer focus,
professionalism, and goal setting), but they also found several 54 unique descriptors for each.
Specifically, they found leadership was distinguished by motivating intrinsically, creative
thinking, strategic planning, tolerance of ambiguity, and being able to read people, and
qmanagement was distinguished by rule orientation, short term planning, motivating
extrinsically, orderliness, safety concerns, and timeliness.

Approaching the issue from a narrower viewpoint, Zaleznik (1977) went so far as to argue that
leaders and managers themselves are distinct, and that they are basically different types of
people. He contended that managers are reactive and prefer to work with people to solve
problems but do so with low emotional involvement. They act to limit choices. Zaleznik
suggested that leaders, on the other hand, are emotionally active and involved. They seek to
shape ideas instead of responding to them and act to expand the available options to solve long-
standing problems. Leaders change the way people think about what is possible. Although there
are clear differences between management and leadership, the two constructs overlap. When
managers are involved in influencing a group to meet its goals, they are involved in leadership.
When leaders are involved in planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, they are involved in
management. Both processes involve influencing a group of individuals toward goal attainment.
For purposes of our discussion in this book, we focus on the leadership process. In our examples
and case studies, we treat the roles of managers and leaders similarly and do not emphasize the
differences between them.

Leadership theories:

Great Man Theory:

The great man theory of leadership states that some people are born with the necessary attributes
that set them apart from others and these all traits are responsible for their assuming positions of
power and authority. A leader is a hero who accomplishes goals against all odds for his
followers. The theory implies that those in power deserve to be there because of their
special endowment. Furthermore, the theory contends that these traits remain stable over time
and across different groups. Thus, it suggests that all great leaders share these characteristic
regardless of when and where they lived or the precise role in the history they fulfilled.

Much of the work on this theory was done in the 19th century and is often linked to the
work of the historian Thomas Carlyle (1948) who commented on the great men or heroes of
the history saying that “the history of the world is but the biography of great men”. According to
him, a leader is the one gifted with unique qualities that capture the imagination of the masses.

Earlier leadership was considered as a quality associated mostly with the males, and therefore the
theory was named as the great man theory. But later with the emergence of many great women
leaders as well, the theory was recognized as the great person theory.

The Trait Theory

The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both successful
and unsuccessful - and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting lists of traits are
then compared to those of potential leaders to assess their likelihood of success or failure.

Scholars taking the trait approach attempted to identify physiological (appearance, height, and
weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background), personality, self-
confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence, decisiveness, judgment, and
knowledge), task-related (achievement drive, initiative, and persistence), and social
characteristics (sociability and cooperativeness) with leader emergence and leader effectiveness.

Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are
different from those of the less effective leaders. Through many researches have been
conducted in the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of core traits of successful leaders
have been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to identify whether a person will be a
successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people with
leadership potential.

Among the core traits identified are:

  Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energy and initiative
 Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach shared goals
 Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open
 Self-confidence: Belief in one’s self, ideas, and ability
 Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical abilities, and
conceptually skilled
 Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technical matters
 Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severe psychological disorders.
 Others: charisma, creativity and flexibility

Strengths/Advantages of Trait Theory

 It is naturally pleasing theory.

 It is valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory.
 It serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be
assessed.
  It gives a detailed knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the leadership
process.

Limitations of the Trait Theory

 There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a

‘good’ or ‘successful’ leader
 The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of
successful leaders in various leadership positions have been identified. These descriptions
are simply generalities.
 There is also a disagreement over which traits are the most important for an effective
leader
 The model attempts to relate physical traits such as, height and weight, to effective
leadership. Most of these factors relate to situational factors. For example, a minimum
weight and height might be necessary to perform the tasks efficiently in a military
leadership position. In business organizations, these are not the requirements to be an
effective leader.
 The theory is very complex

Implications of Trait Theory

The trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people at
all levels in all types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the theory to
evaluate their position in the organization and to assess how their position can be made stronger
in the organization. They can get an in-depth understanding of their identity and the way they
will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the manager aware of their strengths and
weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they can develop their leadership
qualities.

Big 5 personality traits

Most studies and overviews of leadership traits have been qualitative. Five-Factor Personality
Model on Leadership provides a quantitative assessment of leadership traits. It is conceptually
framed around the five-factor model of personality. It describes how five major personality traits
are related to leadership In psychology, the Five Factor Model of personality have been
scientifically discovered and accepted by researchers. This model describes five broad
dimensions of personality that define human personality at the highest level of organization.
These Big five factors are  Openness  Conscientiousness  Extraversion  Agreeableness 
Neuroticism Each factor consists of a cluster of more specific traits that correlate together. For
example, extraversion includes such related qualities as sociability, excitement seeking,
impulsiveness, and positive emotions.

 Openness means the tendency to be informed, creative, insightful, curious and having a variety
of experience.

 Conscientiousness means the tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for
achievement. It means planned rather than spontaneous behavior.

 Extraversion means to have energy, positive emotions, and the tendency to be sociable.

 Agreeableness means the tendency to be compassionate, trusting and cooperative rather than
suspicious and antagonistic towards others.

 Neuroticism means a tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger,

anxiety, depression, or vulnerability. They found a strong relationship between the Big Five traits
and leadership. Extraversion was in their study the factor which was most strongly associated
with leadership and therefore the most important trait for effective leaders. The second factor
was conscientiousness and openness followed. Neuroticism was actually the third factor closely
related to leadership, but it was negatively related to leadership. Agreeableness was only weakly
associated with leadership.

Behavioral Theory

Behavioral Theory of leadership is a big leap from Trait Theory, in that it assumes

leadership capability can be learned, rather than being inherent. This theory is based on the
principle that behaviors can be conditioned in a manner that one can have a specific response
to specific stimuli. Rather than seeking inborn traits this theory looks at what leaders actually
do by studying their behaviors in response to different situations, assessing leadership
success by studying their actions, and then correlating significant behaviors with success. 

The practical application of the theory is that leader’s behavior affects their performance and

different leadership behaviors could be appropriate at different times. The best leaders are those
who have the adaptability to flex their behavioral style and choose the right style suitable for
each situation

Behavioral theory promotes the value of leadership styles with an emphasis on concern for
people and collaboration. It promotes participative decision making and team development by
supporting individual needs and aligning individual and group objectives. 

It helps managers evaluate and understand how their behavioral style as a manager affects
their relationship with the team and promotes commitment and contribution towards
organizational goals. 

The first and foremost study on leadership was carried out by a psychologist, Kurt Lewin,
and his associates in 1939 and identified different styles of leadership,
viz. autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership. Subsequently, many research studies
could be categorized under the heading of the behavioral approach leading to the identification of
various leadership styles and their correlation with measures of effectiveness. The following
three studies are strongly representative of the ideas in this approach:

 Ohio State Studies

 The Michigan Studies
 The Studies by Blake and Mouton

Ohio State Leadership Studies Explained with Examples Ohio State Leadership Studies is
Behavioral Leadership Theory. Series of studies on leadership was done by the Ohio State
University in 1945 to identify observable behaviour of leaders instead of focusing on their
individual traits. They found two critical characteristics of leadership either of which could be
high or low or independent of one another. The research was based on questionnaires to leaders
and subordinates of the organizations. These are known as the Leader Behavior Description
Questionnaire (LDBQ) and the Supervisor Behavior Description Questionnaire (SBDQ).
Ultimately, these studies narrowed the description of leader behavior into two dimensions:

Initiating Structure Behavior: The behavior of leaders which define the leader-subordinate role
so that everyone knows what is expected, establish formal lines of communication, and
determine how tasks will be performed. Task is focused first.

Consideration Behavior: The behavior of leaders who are concerned for subordinates and
attempt to establish a worm, friendly, and supportive climate. The Ohio State Leadership Studies
also showed that initiating structure and consideration are two distinct dimensions and not
mutually exclusive. A low score on one does not require a high score on the other. Hence,
leadership behavior can be plotted on two separate axes rather than on a single continuum, as
shown in the following diagram;

The four quadrants in the above figure show various considerations of initiating structure and
consideration. In each quadrant, there is a relative mixture of initiating structure and
consideration and a manager can adopt any one style. Although an early study, this is still often
referenced. It is notable that the two factors correlate with the people task division that-appears
in other studies and as preferences. The findings of Ohio State Leadership Studies suggest that
effective leaders possess a strong ability to work with others and build a cohesive team which is
balanced with the capability to create structure within which activities can be accomplished.
By looking closely at each of these groups of studies, we can draw a clearer picture of the key
concepts and implications of the style/behavioral approach to leadership.

Of these three the two Key Studies in behavioral theory at the University of Michigan and Ohio
State University became famous in the next generation of leadership research. These studies
identified two key behavioral categories

 Orientation toward task: Task behaviors facilitate goal accomplishment and help the team
to achieve its objectives.
 Orientation toward people: Relationship behaviors help team members feel comfortable
with themselves, with each other, and with the situation in which they find themselves.

The Managerial Grid theory by Blake and Mouton (1978) has a popular application of both
task and person orientation. According to this theory leaders are most effective when they
achieve a high and balanced concern for people and for tasks.

The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions: 

1. Concern for People: This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team
members, their interests, and areas of personal development when deciding how best to
accomplish a task. In this style, leaders look upon their followers as people - their needs,
interests, problems, development and so on. They are not simply units of production or means to
an end.  

2. Concern for Production: This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes organizational

efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a task. Here leaders
emphasize the achievement of concrete objectives. They look for high levels of productivity, and
ways to organize people and activities in order to meet those objectives.  

The Methodology: 

The grid shown below depicts two dimensions of leader behavior, concern for people on y-axis
and concern for production on x-axis, with each dimension ranging from low (1) to high (9), thus
creating 81 different positions in which the leader’s style may fall. This framework plots the
degree of task-centeredness versus person-centeredness. Each leader can be rated somewhere
along each of the axes from 1 to 9 depending on his orientation and the axis is used to plot
leadership ‘concerns for production’ versus ‘concerns for people’. Although there can be 81
possible combinations you should try to understand the 5 types that identifies distinct leadership
styles (Marked in the figure). These will give you a basic understanding of the theory, on which
you can base your other combinations. 

1,9 9,9

5,5

1,1 9,1

Blake and Mouton defined the following five leadership styles: 

1. Country Club Leadership: 

The (1, 9) leader is primarily concerned for people and only incidentally concerned with
production. The leader's major responsibility is to establish harmonious relationships among
subordinates and to provide a secure and pleasant work atmosphere. He is called as Country Club
Management leader. In this management style we have high people satisfaction and low
production levels. This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of
members of the team operating under the assumption that as long as subordinates are happy and
feel good, they will work hard. These managers exhibit a high concern for people and building a
friendly environment. They have a lower concern with the task and with getting things done. The
outcome of such a management style is a very relaxed and open environment but the delivery or
production suffers due to lack of direction and control. 

2. Produce or Perish Leadership: 

The (9, 1) leader is primarily concerned about the task or production. Managers in this category
believe that employees are simply a means to an end and employee needs are secondary to the
need for efficient and productive workplaces. He is concerned with his responsibility to see that
the work is completed. He is also called a Task-Management leader or the style is also referred to
as “Authority - Compliance Management Style”. These managers have a high concern for
task and emphasize productivity and efficiency at all times. These managers are also known as
authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, This approach results in high production but low people
satisfaction levels. This type of leader is very autocratic, has strict work rules, and always insists
on policies, and procedures, and use punishment as the most effective means to motivate
employees. 

3. Impoverished Leadership: 

The (1,1) leader is concerned with neither production nor people. He tries to stay out of the way
and not become involved in the conflict between the necessity for production and the attainment
of good working relationship. He is called as Impoverish Management leader. This management
style generally results in low Production and low people satisfaction levels. These managers take
a lazy approach to leadership and hence the manager is mostly ineffective, as he has neither a
high regard for getting job done, nor for creating a satisfying work environment. They have little
regard for people or task and are very poor managers and hence the result is a place of failures,
disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony. 

4. Middle-of-the-Road Leadership: 

The (5,5) leader reflects a middle ground position and is called as Middle of the Road
Management leader. He seeks to compromise between high production and employee
satisfaction. The result is generally medium production and medium people satisfaction. This
style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns or we can assume that these leaders
have minimal focus on people and task. It may at first appear to be an ideal compromise but what
it results is in preserving the status quo. Leaders who use this style settle for average
performance, generally do what must be done, but do not set high standards or raise the bar for
performance.   

5. Team Leadership: 

The (9,9) leader is extremely concerned about the task and also the people. He is concerned to
see that the work accomplishment is from committed people; interdependence through a
common stake in the organization; purpose leads to relationship of trust and respect. He is called
a Team Management leader. This style leads to higher production levels as well as higher people
satisfaction levels. This is the pinnacle of managerial style as these leaders accomplish
production needs and stress the needs of the people equally highly. These leaders are the most
effective managers. They are highly focused both on people and task and they maintain high
performance standards. The leader feels that empowerment, commitment, trust, and respect are
the key elements in creating a team atmosphere which will automatically result in high employee
satisfaction and production. This style brings employees commitment and bridges the gap
between organizational needs and employee perceived needs. This builds a team environment
based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high
production. 

Practical Applications of Blake Mouton Managerial Grid: 

The Managerial or Leadership Grid is used to help managers analyze their own leadership styles
through a technique known as grid training. This is done by administering a questionnaire that
helps managers identify how they stand with respect to their concern for production and people.
The training is aimed at basically helping leaders reach to the ideal state of 9, 9. It is important to
understand how you currently operate, so that you can then identify ways of becoming
competent in both realms. 

You can use the following approach to practically use this tool in your day to day life: 

Step One: Identify your leadership style

Step Two: Identify the leadership style of your subordinates and stakeholder

Step Three: Identify areas of improvement and develop your leadership skills

Step Four: Analyze your current leadership method and critically analyze its effectiveness.

Step Five: Learn to flex your style to shift from one management style to other based on
situation or the person involved

Step Six: Test the effectiveness of the style flexing and find the most effective approach for
distinct situations and stakeholders. 

Limitations of Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid The model ignores the importance of
internal and external limits, matter and scenario. Also, there are some more aspects of leadership
that can be covered but not done.