This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.
Management" versus Leadership
'Leadership' a road, a way, the path of a ship at sea - a sense of direction. 'Management' (Latin manus) - a hand, handling a sword, a ship, a horse. 19thC corporatism and industrialisation - managerial agents
What do managers and leaders do? (Zaleznik 1977) Managers focus attention & energy on how things get done their role in events that occur or in a decision-making process. Leaders more concerned with ideas relating to others in more intuitive, empathetic ways what events and decisions mean to people
Managers plan, organise, direct, control resources to achieve objectives. follow formal policies, rules &procedural regulations of their employing organisation (administration > management?) handle and physically direct resources:
money, materials, machinery, equipment, space, facilities, information and technology use of time people
Telling people what to do and how to do it more than vision and giving a sense of direction?
Managers have 'subordinates' and communicate enable others to understand information, instructions or ideas seek order and control Leaders have followers. They envision, influence, inspire. tolerate, promote creativity and imagination Bring order from chaos influence people towards objectives and desire to achieve gain voluntary commitment over compliance win hearts and minds
Administer and copy Maintain Focus on systems & structure Rely on control Short-range view - bottom line Ask how and when Accept the status quo Classic good soldier Do things right
Innovation and originality Develop Focus on people Inspire trust Long-range view - the horizon Ask what and why Challenge the status quo Own person Do the right things
'the liberation of talent rather than restraint by rule’ Leaders aim at 'winning hearts and minds'. Mere managers aim at optimising the use of 'resources'. (Peters & Austin, 1985).
Leadership & organisational effectiveness
Common-sense + research link between manager- leadership behaviour & subordinate performance. belief that business success has much to do with 'leadership'. management development programmes emphasise manager and leadership style. Can leadership and problem-solving skills really be developed from
simulated experienced in a field (outward bound approach)? assessment centre activity (workshop-like selection & development)? coaching and mentoring going on a leadership course? Reading a book, watching the TV? Playing rugby or football?
Practitioners, academia and recipes
a mix of traditional and behavioural science approaches few analytical studies of leadership offer much to the practical manager (Adair) academic doubts textbooks tend to An industry selling
Report 'theories' Some query the validity of particular approaches Imply prescriptions
prescriptive 'leadership development' and interpersonal skills packages: motivating, listening, participative problem solving, assertiveness and transforming skills
Leadership behaviour & effect on performance.
associated Change involving 'people'beismeaningfullywith leadership described as 'leadership'? What competencies cangeneralise - 'we know it when we see it'. & Managersthepoliticians success of particular personalities. Correlate skills and Mayo and Hawthorne experiments (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939) 'permissive' leadership behaviour leads to greater output
Kurt Lewin (1939) Autocratic, Laissez faire, Democratic leader styles & the behaviour/performance of youth groups language & 'model' linking styles --> subordinate performance
Unitary (vs. pluralistic) frame of reference
One set of values, beliefs, commitments Shared understanding & commitment to objectives One source of leadership Team members - All pulling in the same direction Potential for harmony is assumed if leader communicates well Disagreements the result of misunderstanding Dissidents – "rabble" hypothesis
Alan Fox – Research Paper to Donovan Commission 1968
Change the people in post
Selection and job change can profoundly effect organisational effectiveness. Peters and Waterman (1982)
' Hewlett-Packard Way' & 'MbWA’ (Management by walk about)
Pascale & Athos (1982) compare 'styles' and effect
compared the styles and management practices of founder of Matsushita (National Panasonic) American CEOs 'good' and 'bad' leadership styles Konosuke Matsushita & E. Carlson - United Airlines ('good') Harold Geneen at ITT (short-term effective, long-term bad). Margaret Thatcher vs. Tony Blair?
How do different 'styles' affect an organisation?
wide ranging question open to question difficult to research - what are the variables? difficult to
gap between perception of practitioners and behavioural scientists
separate fact from fiction attribute cause and effect in different contexts and organisational settings over time ambiguity of measures of organisational performance
Typology of leadership theory
Nuances in original works
Yet three variables to: leadership situations
leader followers context/situation in
which L/F find themselves
Focus Behaviour The Person centred
Sometimes misleading to group as 'schools'.
trait theory variable of leader
contingency theory situation & L-F relationship group dynamics + VDL the followers
specific to situation
style theory variable of leader
Breadth of application
Leadership traits approach
everyday wisdom on common traits. can anyone agree? indicate potential do some 'qualities'the ineffective' & differentiate the 'effective from & variety of 'leaders' Wide range of trait descriptorsto agree on one list (heroes and villains) - difficult
Cartwright and Zander (1968)
Effective leaders are often Nature over nurture Nature over nurture
more intelligent, dependable, responsible, active and participative socially with higher socioecon. status act more often in different ways, or the same way to different degrees in some activities? give out & ask for more information make more frequent interpretations of events psychometric tests for psychometric tests for assessment and selection. assessment and selection.
Leadership is learned, although I Leadership is learned, although I cannot explain entirely how ... The cannot explain entirely how ... The ability to lead and inspire others is .. ability to lead and inspire others is .. more instinctual than premeditated and more instinctual than premeditated and … acquired somehow through the … acquired somehow through the experiences of one's everyday life …. experiences of one's everyday life …. the nature & quality of that leadership the nature & quality of that leadership comes out of … innate character & comes out of … innate character & personality… personality…
Harold Geneen ITT Harold Geneen ITT
managers List the Think of threerate as beingyou have known.managersqualities of those you more effective
Do a separate list for three less effective ones. What factors, or qualities, recur on each list? from Select four leadersWhichnational or organisational life and list their qualities. ones keep recurring? What factors match those for your effective managers?
Limitations of 'traits' approach
when leaders behave towards followers in different ways, how much is cause, how much is effect? non-leaders often possess the same traits as leaders. Impossible to compile a list of universal traits.
Bird 1940 identified 79 different traits from 'the literature'.
Only 5% common to => 4 studies
Conclusion? Consider the situation that leadership occurs in.
The group dynamics (group process) approach
leadership as a function of organisation not the individual. small task groups not whole organisation three common functional behaviours: failure in one affects the other two (performance & satisfaction). Leader contributions? But one 'leader' may not necessarily perform all roles from 'trouble-shooters' to 'counsellors' - Belbin roles 'Cometh the hour, cometh the man'.
accomplish the task social & emotional needs of group social & emotional needs of individual members.
Structuring - integrating Calming, supporting Controlling
Adair: Action-centred leadership functional emphasis based on task situation and socio-emotional needs Task functions
Aware of group
processes, people in group, nuances of behaviour, interpersonal skills
Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) Model (Danserau 1975)
Leader may use different style for member (idiosyncrasies) Social exchange - leader-member relationships (dyads) Group = a set of vertical linkages Two sub-groups of relationships In-group members For the leader - reliable, effort, initiative, open, trust and confidence, autonomy Out-group members Calculative, do contract only, distant, tension dyad Leadership - a negotiated VDL role
Anthony Jay (1975) - Propositions
working as social unit (a 'ten Cohesive groups or teams individuals inaisolation. Based on group') achieve more than
Leadership is not a personal quality. innate drive Some have but thistendency andonly for high-status dominance is one factor
Anecdotal, experiential evidence analogy with primitive tribes & animal behaviour Morris (1967, 1969), Ardrey (1961, 1967, 1970). Share common patterns with baboons, chickens, lions?
become leader only in relation to specific group & task group leader emerges because the group thinks that he/she can best help the group
Critique of Group Dynamics approach
and group If leadership behaviour is situationallychanges? related what happens when the situation or group Does the organisation function sub-optimally? But we comprehend how leaders may relate to followers & situations ignores wider organisational demands on leader and group.
The leadership style approach
Hawthorne experiments origin
Kurt Lewin et al 1939 - adult leaders in boys' hobby club
Autocratic, laissez faire, democratic leaders and follower behaviour Democratic style reflects dominant social values Impetus for further study - Michigan and Ohio State
Leader 'style' affects morale and output. Relay Assembly room - increased output caused by 'permissive' management of researchers Bank Wiring room - links management style and employee attitudes and behaviour
Ohio State studies (two factor-theory)
Flieshman 1953 Stogdill (1948, 1956)
two (independent) L-dimensions
"measure" perceptions & style preferences in various settings ---> inventories & development prescriptions effectiveness reflects High task supervisors - productive but high turnover, lower morale High consideration supervisors - high morale, low productivity Over-generalised conclusions
ideal leader = high on initiation + consideration. participative styles preferred
initiating structure (task centred) consideration (interpersonal relationships) task completion member satisfaction
Ohio State findings - balancing initiation & consideration
crews & superiors rate aircraft commanders by:
Crews & senior officers differed in perception of commander styles & effectiveness
Superiors judge leader competence
in terms of
technical competence effectiveness in working with other crew members performance under stress conformity to standard operating procedures overall effectiveness as crew members
Subordinates give less significance to initiating.
formal & traditional standards high initiating & low or indifferent consideration.
High satisfaction under 'considerate' commanders (seen as more competent).
Linking Pin (Likert)
Effective leaders fulfil group needs & functions in a situation low absentees Frustration,can’tproductivity,these. & turnover if formal-L perform all
Formal tasks. instrumental competencies & motives technical know-how, innovation, sense of achievement, concern for quality & customer care Affiliation interaction, support & expressive needs Weak formal-L. Informal alternative emerges If L-behaviour best fits group situation, what if this changes? Can formal leader adapt? will group, dept, nation (led by alternative) perform optimally?
o o o o o o
Critique of Ohio State Studies
group evaluation by Did not use peernon-evaluative measures of commanders or
performance. output measures can often be favourably affected in the short term by authoritarian leadership. Usual problems of social research
Hawthorne effect Abstracted empiricism likelihood that a change in performance is related to
more than one variable
Michigan Leadership Studies
programmes for changing style & org. culture 'proprietary' approaches to assessment & training Diagnosis and treatment - Mouton Blake(1968) Managerial Grid Extended with contingency focus
Tannenbaum 1958 Reddin (1970) Hersey &Blanchard (1977)
Concern for people
9.9. the ideal one-best style 5.5.
9.1. High Concern for production
use of authority by leader decision making & action freedom for followers
Tells Sells Suggests Consults Joins Delegates Abdicates
Continuum based on situational factors: value system, wants, confidence, willingness.
Review your experiences of working under
different leadership styles. Advantages & disadvantages of a shift to a more 'participative' style? What departments in your organisation appear to operate with different 'leadership cultures'? Account for the differences.
Critique of style theories
Universality of the style approach? Ambiguous evidence for usefulness of ' style' theories Style changes often assoc. with changes in org. structure + other mgt competencies . Fiedler (1967) questions whether participative, considerate styles are better than trad. authoritarian
or directive. Ineffective L-training - weak transfer of behaviour change from directive to participative. Organisational & work pressures - own & other people's expectations.
Contingency approach - Fiedler (1967)
Defines L-effectiveness as behaviour Defines L-effectiveness as behaviour that ---> high task performance by that ---> high task performance by group. Depends on group. Depends on
Respected leaders have to personal power. No need
use position power (authority) High structure? noncompliance? Easy intervention. Unstructured, hard measure? Cannot easily enforce. Less power extent of formal authority over rewards and sanctions Power is not just dependent leaderfollower relationships.
preferred style of leader preferred style of leader group situation as much as leader group situation as much as leader contextual variables contextual variables
1. Quality of L-member relations 1. Quality of L-member relations 2. Work structure (high to low) 2. Work structure (high to low) 3. Leader position power 3. Leader position power
Fielder development prescription Measure preferred style Measure preferred style
least preferred co-worker LPC least preferred co-worker LPC instrument
instrument 88scales e.g. cooperativescales e.g. uncooperative,cooperativeuncooperative,friendly-unfriendly, friendly-unfriendly, supportive-hostile supportive-hostile High LPC --relationships oriented High LPC relationships oriented
Low LPC --task oriented Low LPC task oriented
--External circumstances affect L External circumstances affect L ability to influence ability to influence --Change leader (personality?) to Change leader (personality?) to fit situation or restructure to fit situation or restructure to reflect strengths? reflect strengths?
Re-structure the work - How? position power - depending on L. assessment, give subordinates nearequal 'rank' (experts) or assign several ranks below Loosen or tighten communication and decision-making leader-member relations - leader can be similar or dissimilar to members (social, educational or ethnic background, values or attitudes) A history of harmony or conflict? Assign a leader whose style fits group Fiedler and Garcia 1987 pp 49-55 See Chapter 13 Rollinson
Fiedler: leader-members, task structures, position power
Leadermember Relations 1 Good 2 Good 3 Good 4 Good 5 Poor 6 Poor 7 Poor 8 Poor
Position power Strong Weak Weak Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak
More effective leadership style Task centred Task centred Task centred Relationship-oriented Relationship-oriented Relationship-oriented Relationship-oriented Task centred
Structured Structured Unstructured Unstructured Structured Structured Unstructured Unstructured
Good Good Good Moderate Moderate Moderate Weak Weak
Implications and critique of Fielder
If Fielder is right
don’t try to change people arrange task & power to fit situation
select leaders & identify preferred styles. Diagnose situation and change it for - best fit leader-match concept
But can a manager really choose a style, change 'personality' and a virtuoso with different styles? Leadership training targets this. Are they training pigs to fly? LPC scores may indicate attitudes or personality but not actual behaviour Task performance is sole criterion for evaluating effectiveness (neglects follower satisfaction) L-processes are more sophisticated than this theory. Mixed evidence on validity other variables ignored However a deeper study which breaks the 'one-best-style' view and addresses contextual variables
significance of Fiedler's 'social engineering' Evaluate thethe development of thinking on leadership and approach to
manager development practice. Evaluate how the Fiedler 'contingency and social engineering approach' to leadership could work in any organisation known to you.
Reddin's 3-D model (a style-contingency approach)
Relationships Low High
Bureaucrat Benevolent autocrat
Is Blake - Mouton (1968) 9.9 style ideal? style is more/less effective in situation 36
Situational leadership model (Hersey & Blanchard 1977, 1982)
A contingency approach with follower maturity as critical
situational variable for Leffectiveness. two major dimensions
task style relationship style telling, selling, participating, delegating. degree of achievement motivation willingness to take on responsibility education or experience
Theoretically weak no proper rationale for the hypothesised relationships Maturity - an over-simplified
factor - lacks empirical support (Yukl, 1981; Graeff, 1983; Blank et al, 1990).
Path-goal theory (contingency approach) Main idea Effective-L smooths subordinates' path goals using appropriate style, contingent on situational variables differs from Fiedler various styles - directive, supportive, participative and achievement-oriented - can be used by the same leader in different situations to
influence subordinates' perceptions of the situational factors motivate by focusing on payoffs coaching and direction clarifying goals and expectancies House & Mitchell 1974 reducing frustrations/barriers. Based on expectancy the research is not conclusive theory of motivation
Problems with contingency theories
what causes what in real life? style theories, is difficult to understand why there As withbe a favourableitclimate towards the leader in some should
groups. It could be argued that 'permissive' leadership is the result, rather than the cause, of group effectiveness.
Social learning theory and leadership
for continuous interaction between the environment a modelvariables + subordinates and the leader's behaviour, (macro
perceptions and cognitions. leader & subordinates/followers have negotiable, interactive relationship They learn how they can modify or influence each other's behaviour by giving or holding back desired rewards
Davis and Luthans, 1980 Sims and Lorenzi, The New Leadership Paradigm, Sage, 1992
Why the persistent search ?
exercising effective-L is becoming more and more difficult
Many skills and techniques of today's senior executives are being superseded. Competition & changing markets, products, technologies and expectations dictate adaptability and innovation in
strategic decision making, marketing, organisation - and leadership
economic shifts Pacific Rim and China etc. political change South Africa, Soviet Union, Italy, Japan and Europe less natural goodwill and traditional deference towards leaders
Are successful leaders redefining their role?
projecting a particular ethos and culture powerful vision of where their companies or their societies are heading. Prime Minister E.g.year 2020 Dr Mahathir Mohamed's vision of Malaysia in the former PrimeofMinister Lee Kuan Yew's vision of Singapore as The Switzerland the East by 1999. What does this imply for leadership behaviour? are successful Managers and senior executives who but also activelyleaders will not only respond to change positively create
change. Leaders with a particular drive, a desire to bring order out of chaos, or, if something is too cosy, to create chaos in order to bring change.
Transformational leadership theory
C national Context? late-20change & global pol-econ. Contributors: Downton
fresh thinking? transformational leader creates conditions for
creates conditions for followers to want to achieve results and to fulfil themselves.
group studies bridges smallby ’movers and & leadership shakers’ who transform organisations
(1973), Burns (1978), Bass (1985), Bennis & Nanus (1985), Tichy & Devanna (1986) Bass surveyed 70 execs "In your careers, who transformed you in Burns' terms (raised awareness, move up Maslow hierarchy …. to transcend self-interest). Answer: usually an organisational superior.
From Laissez faire to Transactional
leaders at all, Laissez-faire not really for confusion avoid intervention, weak follow up, passivity, potential Transactional leaders
Management by exception
Passive: set standards/objectives, wait for, react to, reluctant intervention. Status quo Active: standards/objectives, monitor, correct, look for error, enforce rules/procedures. Low initiative and risk-taking constructive transactions, contingent rewards
agree standards/objectives, feedback, rewards for achievement. outcome: performance that meets expectations. simplified in One-Minute Manager (Blanchard & Johnson 1982) Airport business library
Transactional leadership in perspective
may Mixed evidence - itPRP be desirable, even necessary. Contingent rewards underpin laissez-faire and transactional in directive, consultative, participative & delegative styles
directive + Mgt by Exception
'These are the rules and this is how you've broken them'. participative + Mgt by exception 'Let's work out together the rules to identify mistakes'
Weaknesses rewards, emphasis on plans, targets, systems, Carrot/stick
controls management > leadership fails to develop, motivate, bring to full potential (Bass)
The transformational leader (Bass’s four 'I's)
promotes follower desire for achievement & self-development. teams, esprit de corps, autonomy, synergy, belief, value
lndividualised consideration (IC) Intellectual stimulation (IS) Inspirational motivation (IM) ldealised influence (charisma) (II)
Individualised consideration and Intellectual stimulation IC
identifying individuals' needs & abilities, opportunities to learn, delegating, coaching and giving developmental
feedback. Spend time with individuals e.g. mentoring. IS quo, encourage question status and intuition. imagination, creativity, logical thinking unorthodoxy in character, symbolise innovation. Compare UK motorcycles & Swiss watch market to Sony
Inspirational motivation & ldealised influence Inspirational motivation clear vision, problems as opportunities, language & symbols I had a dream …... Ask not what America can do for you. Ask what you can do.. go the extra mile. Iacocca at Chrysler. ldealised influence Confident in communicating a virtuous vision the buck stops here'. Purpose, persistence, trust, accomplishment over failure. Respected for personal ability
.. the priceless Leadershipfrom those who gift you earn work for you. I have to earn the right to that gift, and continuously re-earn (it).
John Harvey-Jones (ICI)
Gandhi, Luther King, Thatcher, Blair Hitler, Jim Jones
Bass's model effective
Learn TL!! Avolio-Bass training package
package passive LF LF MbEx-P MbEx-P
LF LFLF LFLF LF 4x 4 x II CR CR MbEx-A MbEx-A active
Encouraging TL will project confidence, commitment & competence attract quality staff to the mission & challenge develop people more fully to respond better to competition & change
Motorola's six-sigma programme.
Transformational leadership application defect-free parts within six standard deviations concepts, symbols and vision for world-class quality IS, IM, IC in promoting awareness, responsibility and self-monitoring.
Is transformational leadership cross-cultural?
‘exporting participative management or Theory Y from the USA to authoritarian cultures is like 'preaching Jeffersonian
democracy to managers who believe in the divine right of kings'.
Haire, Ghiselli and Porter 1966
Leadership - a universal phenomenon?
context and culture influences Bass presents evidence from studies in Italy, Sweden, Canada, New Zealand, India, Japan and Singapore suggests that the model needs only fine-tuning across cultures
Motivated in spite of leader? Do we really need 'em?
1970s dissatisfaction with leadership theory and research in explaining effect on motivation &performance
'Substitutes' theory of leadership (Kerr & Jermier 1978) Are there substitutes for leadership making L-behaviour unnecessary e.g.
Replace/counteract leader behaviour in determining
member performance and satisfaction.
'Professional', competent people do not need 'leadership' to perform well and to be motivated. Depends on the individuals, the work, the organisation and its structure, feedback, intrinsic job satisfaction, group cohesion, weak authority or remoteness of the leader
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.