CHAPTER 12

OBJECTIVE 1 Define leadership and contrast leadership and management PRESENTED BY- GOMTI BYMEENAKSHI NEELAM PRITI RAMYA

What Is Leadership ?


The ability to influence a group toward the achievement of a vision or set of goals.

Difference Between Leadership And Management

Management is about coping with complexity. Leadership is about coping with change.

OBJECTIVE 2
Trait Theories
Theories that consider personal qualities and characteristics that differentiate leaders from non leaders. Strong Leaders : Mahatma Gandhi, Buddha, Napoleon, Nelson Mandela.

Important behavioral studies

 Ohio state studies  The Managerial grid  University of Michigan studies

1. Ohio State University

Found two key dimensions of leader
Initiating structure

the defining and structuring of roles Organize work, work relationships, and goals Maintain definite standard of performance job relationships that reflect trust and respect Help employees with personal problems

behavior:

Consideration

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-5

2. University of Michigan
Two key dimensions of leader behavior:
Employee orientedEmphasize on interpersonal relations Production oriented Emphasize on technical aspects of job

3. Managerial Grid
 Developed by Blake and Mouton   concern for people concern for production Style is determined by position on the graph

Contingency Theories
 While trait and behavior theories do help us understand leadership, an important component is missing: the environment in which the leader exists  Contingency Theory deals with this additional aspect of leadership effectiveness studies  Three key theories:
Fiedlers Model Hersey and Blanchards Situational Leadership Theory Path-Goal Theory

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-8

Fiedler Model
 Effective group performance depends on the proper match between leadership style and the situation
Assumes that leadership style (based on orientation revealed in LPC questionnaire) is fixed

 Considers Three Situational Factors:

Leader-member relations: degree of confidence, trust and respect members have in the leader. Task structure: degree to which job assignments are procedurized. Position power: leaders ability to hire, fire, and reward

 For effective leadership: must change to a leader who fits the situation or change the situational variables to fit the current Inc. All rights 2009 Prentice-Hall leader reserved. 12-9

Graphic Representation of Fiedler s Model

Used to determine which type of leader to use in a given situation

E X H I B I T 12-2

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-10

Assessment of Fiedler s Model

 Positives:
Considerable evidence supports the model, especially if the original eight situations are grouped into three

 Problems:
The logic behind the LPC scale is not well understood LPC scores are not stable Contingency variables are complex and difficult for practitioners to access.
2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 12-11

Fiedler s Cognitive Resource Theory

 A refinement of Fiedlers original model:
Focuses on stress as the enemy of rationality and creator of unfavorable conditions A leaders intelligence and experience influence his or her reaction to that stress

Stress Level Low High

Intellectual Abilities Effective Ineffective

Leader s Experience Ineffective Effective

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-12

Hersey & Blanchard s Situational theory

 Leadership model developed by Paul hersey and Ken Blanchard

 A model that focuses on follower readiness

Followers can accept or reject the leader Effectiveness depends on the followers response to the leaders actions Readiness is the extent to which people have the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task

 A paternal model:
As the child matures, the adult releases more and more control over the situation As the workers become more ready, the leader becomes more laissez-faire

 An intuitive model that does not get much support from the research findings 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-13

House s Path-Goal Theory

 Builds from the Ohio State studies and the expectancy theory of motivation  The Theory:
Leaders provide followers with information, support, and resources to help them achieve their goals Leaders help clarify the path to the workers goals Leaders can display multiple leadership types

 Four types of leaders:

Directive: focuses on the work to be done Supportive: focuses on the well-being of the worker Participative: consults with employees in decision-

making
Achievement-Oriented: sets challenging goals
2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 12-14

Path-Goal Model
 Two classes of contingency variables:
Environmental are outside of employee control Subordinate factors are internal to employee

 Mixed support in the research findings

E X H I B I T 12-4

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-15

Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory

 A response to the failing of contingency theories to account for followers and heterogeneous leadership approaches to individual workers  LMX Premise:
Because of time pressures, leaders form a special relationship with a small group of followers: the ingroup This in-group is trusted and gets more time and attention from the leader (more exchanges) All other followers are in the out-group and get less of the leaders attention and tend to have formal relationships with the leader (fewer exchanges) Leaders pick group members early in the relationship
2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 12-16

LMX Model
 How groups are assigned is unclear
Follower characteristics determine group membership

 Leaders control by keeping favorites close

 Research has been generally supportive

E X H I B I T 12-3

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-17

Yroom and Yetton s Leader-Participation Model

 How a leader makes decisions is as important as what is decided  Premise:
Leader behaviors must adjust to reflect task structure Normative model: tells leaders how participative to be in their decision-making of a decision tree
Five leadership styles Twelve contingency variables

 Research testing for both original and modified models has not been encouraging
Model is overly complex
E X H I B I T 12-5

2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

12-18