650 likes | 1.07k Views
A Semi-historical Romp Through Prevailing Perspectives on Leadership . EDU 6040 Leadership in Learning Organizations. Everyone Has a Theory. THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF THE HMUAN MNID I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg …
E N D
A Semi-historical RompThrough Prevailing Perspectives on Leadership EDU 6040 Leadership in Learning Organizations
Everyone Has a Theory THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF THE HMUAN MNID I cdnuoltblveieetaht I cluodaulacltyuesdnatnrdwaht I was rdanieg… Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at CmabrigdeUinervtisy, it deosn'tmttaer in wahtoredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olnyiprmoatnttihng is that the frist and lsatltteer be in the rghitpclae. The rset can be a taotlmses and you can sitllraed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the human mind deos not raederveylteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? Your picture of leadership…
Early Notions of Leadership • Legends, Myths, Heroes: • Stories of individual heroes (and very rarely heroines) were central to Babylonia, Iceland, and Israel. Often, the greater the socioeconomic injustice or turmoil in a society, the more “super human” the leaders became. • Greek concepts : • Nationalism/Governing: “He serves me most, who serves his country best,” Iliad (Book X) • Special: “the leader, mingling with the vulgar host, is in the common mass of matter lost.” Odyssey (Book III) • Justice and judgment • Wisdom and counsel • Shrewdness and cunning • Valor
“Great Man” Perspective1900’s-1920’s • Key questions: Is leadership an innate ability? Are leaders born to lead? • Leadership studies highly biased towards political, military, aristocratic, or cultural elites. Leadership was considered an art, for which some fortunate people had an inbuilt genius. • Mechanistic and managerial perspectives • Fredrick Taylor - Introduced the scientific analysis of tasks and job-design time-study methods for managers to use in “managing” workers. • Henry Fayol - Introduced principles of management focused on command/control & coordination. • Max Weber - Defined a bureaucratic system based on rational system, not hereditary rule.
Trait Perspective1940s-1950’s • Key Question: What traits are common to all leaders? • During WWII, an essential question on the US mind was, “What traits do a nation’s (military) leaders need to win the war?” Researchers began to view leadership as a set of facilitative “traits”: Leadership is “…the process of arranging a situation so that various members of a group, including the leader, can achieve common goals with maximum economy and a minimum of time and work” (Bellows, 1949). • The U.S. government, through defense-research spending, began subsidizing study of leadership effectiveness, which increased interest throughout higher education.
Stogdill (1948) Mann (1959) Stogdill (1974) Lord, DeVader, & Alliger (1986) Kirkpatrick & Locke (1991) Masculinity Adjustment Dominance Extroversion Conservatism Persistence Insight Initiative Self-Confidence Responsibility Cooperativeness Tolerance Influence Sociability Alertness Insight Responsibility Initiative Persistence Self-Confidence Sociability Motivation Integrity Confidence Cognitive Ability Task Knowledge Masculinity Dominance Many Leadership Traits
Leadership Traits Distilled • Intelligence- Intellectual ability including verbal, perceptual, and reasoning capabilities • Self-Confidence - Ability to be certain about one’s competencies and skills • Determination - The desire to get the job done (i.e., initiative, persistence, dominance, drive) • Integrity - The quality of honesty and trustworthiness • Sociability - Leader’s inclination to seek out pleasant social relationships
Strengths(Trait Theories) • Intuitively appealing • Perception that leaders are different in that they possess special traits • People “need” to view leaders as gifted • Credibility due to a century of research support • Highlights leadership component in the leadership process • Deeper level understanding of how leader/personality related to leadership process • Provides benchmarksfor what to look for in a leader
Criticisms(Trait Theories) • Fails to delimita definitive list of leadership traits • Doesn’t take into account situational effects • List of most important leadership traits is highlysubjective • Research fails to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes • Not useful for training & development
Behavioral Perspective (Focus on Skill & Style 1950’s-1970’s • Key Question: What do Leaders Do? • Behavior-focused perspectives on leadership examine the things leaders do or the patterns in those things • Leadership defined as acts by persons which influence other persons in a shared direction. (Seaman (1960) • The essential difference between a leader and an executive is the degree of personal initiative and personal risk that such initiative involves” (Jennings, 1960, page 16). • “Leadership is a position within society which is defined by the ability of the incumbent to guide and structure the collective behavior patterns of some or all of its members …It is at all times relational, interpersonal, and is based upon influence…” (Eidinger, 1967, page 15).
The U-M and OSU Studies • Throughout the 1950s-1960s, Ohio State and University of Michigan researchers tried to create a universal theory of leadership by examining how leaders combined task and relationship behaviors. Stogdill and his colleagues began examining leader behavior, rather than traits alone. Importantly, the emphasis was on describing what leaders do (how they behave). • Typically the research involved having subordinates in industrial, military, and educational organizations complete questionnaires (Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ)– consisting of some 150 items) about their leaders. • Ultimately, results were contradictory and unclear. Some research suggested every situation required a combination of high-task and high-relationship orientation, but other studies provided conflicting information.
The Ohio State (OSU) Studies • Researchers found that questionnaire responses indicated two types of leader behaviors: initiating structure and consideration. • Initiating structurebehaviors were task behaviors (e.g., scheduling work activities, defining role responsibilities, giving structure to the work context). • Consideration involved behaviors such as building trust, respect, and camaraderie between leaders and followers and among followers.
The Michigan (U-M) Studies • Research on the impact of leaders’ behaviors on small group contexts described two types of leadership behaviors: employee orientation and production orientation. • Employee orientation behaviors, (like “consideration behaviors” identified in OSU studies), describe the behavior of leaders who show a strong human relations orientation with subordinates. Production orientation behaviors stress technical and production aspects of a job.
Behavioral: A Question of StyleLeadership Grid Theory (Blake &Mouton, 1964) • Blake and Moutin’s work drew heavily upon the early style research; sought to identify the proper integration of task- and relationship behaviors. • Their “management grid” described two dimensions along which managers and leaders may vary, 1-9. These measures interacted to create a grid describing five pure style types.
The Leadership Grid® High 9 1, 9 9, 9 Country Club Management Team Management 8 7 6 5, 5 Concern for People 5 Middle-of-the-Road 4 3 Impoverished Management Authority-Compliance Mgmt. 2 1, 1 9, 1 1 Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Concern for Results High Low
Authority-Compliance (9,1) Definition: Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work such that human interference is minimal Role Focus: More emphasis on task and job requirements and less emphasis on people • Communicating with subordinates outside task instructions not emphasized • Results driven; People regarded as tools to that end
Country Club (1,9) • Definition: Thoughtful attention to the needs of people leads to a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo • Role Focus: Low concern for task accomplishment coupled with high concern for interpersonal relationships • De-emphasizes production; leaders stress the attitudes and feelings of people • Positive climate fostered by being agreeable, eager to help, comforting, noncontroversial
Impoverished (1,1) Definition: Minimal effort exerted to get work done is appropriate to sustain organizational membership Role Focus: Leader unconcerned with both task and interpersonal relationships • Going through the motions, but uninvolved and withdrawn • Have little contact with followers and are described as indifferent, noncommittal, resigned, and apathetic
Middle-of-the-Road (5,5) Definition: Adequate organizational performance possible through balancing the necessity of getting work done while maintaining satisfactory morale . Role Focus: Leaders who are compromisers; have intermediate concern for task and people • To achieve equilibrium, leader avoids conflict while emphasizing moderate levels of production and interpersonal relationships • Described as expedient; prefers the middle ground, soft-pedals disagreement
Team (9,9) Definition: Work accomplished through committed people; interdependence via a “common stake” in the organization’s purpose, which leads to relationships of trust and respect Role Focus: Strong emphasis on both tasks and interpersonal relationships • Promotes high degree of participation and teamwork • Leader stimulates participation, acts determined, makes priorities clear, follows through, etc.
Strengths (Style theories) • Broadened the field of leadership studies to include what leaders do, rather than merely who they are. • Easily applied. • A wide range of studies give some credibility to the findings of style-researchers, particularly regarding the effects on follower/subordinate satisfaction. • The essential elements of the style approach—task and relationship—influenced subsequent generations of leadership research (e.g., Situational Theory).
Criticisms (Style theories) • Hasn’t adequately shown how leaders’ styles are associated with performance outcomes. • There is no universal leadership style. • Implies that the most effective leadership behavior is the Team Management style (9,9), when in fact there is little evidence overall in support.
Behavioral: A Question of Skill(1955, reemergence 1990’s) • Actually more about what a leader is capable of doingthan what a leaderdoes… • Three categories of skills (Katz 1955): • Technical skill • Human Skill • Conceptual Skill
Basic Administrative SkillsKatz (1955) Conceptual Skills (ideas) Human Skills (people) Technical Skills (things) Manager Director VP Exec VP CEO
Skills Model Mumford, Zaccaro, et al (2000) Individual Attributes Crystallized Cognitive Abilities Motivation Personality Competencies Problem-Solving Skills Social Judgment Skills Knowledge Leadership Outcomes Effective Problem Solving Performance Career Expectations Environmental Influences
Strengths (skills perspective) • Made leadership available to anyone; can be developed and improved • Complicated enough to capture dynamics of many leadership situations, social skills, problem-solving, environment, etc. • Lends itself to teaching other leaders
Criticisms (skills perspective) • Skills extend beyond the bounds of leadership so theories are less precise • Weak in predictive value. Skills may correlate with leaders’ success, but HOW do they influence performance?
Situational Perspective(First emerged in 1970’s) • Key Question: How does the situation influence leadership effectiveness? • Situational Leadership asserts that different situations demand different kinds of leadership. To be an effective leader, leaders must fit their style to the demands of different situations.
Situational Leadership (SI)Hersey and Blanchard (late 1960’s) • Built on the work of the OSU and U-M teams. • This model considers two components: • Leadership stylemay be defined as the behavior pattern of an individual who attempts to influence others. It includes both directive (task) behaviors and supportive (relationship) behaviors. • Development levelof subordinates refers to the degree to which employees/followers have the competence and commitment necessary to accomplish a given task. Employees are at a high level of development if they are interested in their work, and know how to do their work. Employees with low levels of development are those with high commitment, but low competence.
The behavior pattern of an individual who attempts to influence others; includes: • Directive behaviors - Help group members in goal achievement via one-way communication through: • Giving directions • Establishing goals & how to achieve them • Methods of evaluation & time lines • Defining roles • Supportive behaviors - Assist group members via two-way communication in feeling comfortable with themselves, co-workers, and situation
Effective leaders are those who exercise appropriate degree of task orientation and relationship orientation relative to the maturity of followers. Specifically, as the level of follower maturity increases, effective leader behavior involves less structuring and less social support. • Based on combinations of these two dimensions, leadership styles can be divided into four distinct categories: • High directive-low supportive (S1) = “directing” • High directive-high supportive (S2) = “coaching” • High supportive-low directive (S3) = “supporting” • Low supportive-low directive (S4) = “delegating” • Employees are conceptualized as moving backwards and forwards along the continuum of development depending upon the task at hand. • The job of leaders, therefore, is to diagnose where employees are in their development, then adapt the leader’s style to match the needs of the follower.
S 3 S 2 Coaching Supporting High Supportive Low Directive High Directive High Supportive Supportive Behavior S 1 Directing S 4 High Directive Low Supportive Delegating Low High DirectiveBehavior Low Supportive Low Directive D4 D3 D2 D1 Low High Moderate Developed Developing High Developmental Level of Followers
Strengths (Situational Leadership) • Marketplace approval. Situational leadership is perceived as providing a credible model for training employees to become effective leaders. • Practicality. Situational leadership is a straightforward approach that is easily understood and applied in a variety of settings. • Prescriptive value. Situational leadership clearly outlines what you should and should not do in various settings. • Leader flexibility. Situational leadership stresses that effective leaders are those who can change their style based on task requirements and subordinate needs. • Differential treatment. Situational leadership is based on the premise that leaders need to treat each subordinate according to his/her unique needs.
Criticisms (Situational Leadership) • Lack of an empirical foundation raises theoretical considerations regarding the validityof the approach • Further research is required to determine how commitment and competenceare conceptualized for each developmental level • Conceptualizationof commitment itself is very unclear • Replication studies fail to support basic prescriptions of situational leadership model • Does notaccount for how particular demographics influence the leader-subordinate prescriptions of the model • Fails toadequately address the issue of one-to-one versus group leadership in an organizational setting • Questionnaires are biased in favor of situational leadership
Contingency TheoryFiedler (1964) • Key question: What style of leadership is most likely to be successful in a specific situation? • All about a Leader-Match-- Effective leadership is contingentupon matching the right leadership style to the situation
Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Measure • Low LPC’s are task motivated. • Gain self esteem primarily from productivity • Attend to interpersonal relationships but secondarily • Primary needs: accomplishing goals • Secondary needs: getting along with people • Mid LPC’s are socio-independent • Self-directed • Not overly concerned with task or with how people think of them • More removed from situation and act more independently than low or high LPC • High LPC’s are motivated by Relationships • Major satisfaction in interpersonal relationships • Sees good qualities even in LPC • Attends to tasks after relationships are in good shape
Contingency Model (Fiedler, 1967) Leader-Member Relations Task Structure Position Power Preferred Leadership Style
Transactional Perspective1970’s • Origins lie in early 20th-century “management-sciences”. In its original form, the perspective viewed management in economic terms – as exchanges of rewards for good performance, punishments for poor performance. • Heavily influenced by Frederick Taylor’s Five Principles of Scientific Management: • Shift all responsibility for the organization of work from the worker to the manager. • Use scientific methods to determine the most efficient way of doing work; design the workers’ tasks accordingly, specifying the precise way in which it is to be done. • Select the best person to perform the job thus designed; • Train the worker to do work efficiently; • Monitor worker performance, intervening when exceptionally productive or deficient.
In the early 1970s, theorists Jacobs (1970) & Hollander (1978) developed an updated transactional theory of leadership. Their model: • Brought followers into focus by highlighting power relations, and the negotiations necessary among people of unequal power and different agendas. • Held that followers are significantly involved in negotiating any exchange or transaction that results in a decision or a course of action. • Acknowledged the fact that followers have minds of their own, and that their opinions and ideas also influence the leader: that leadership is, in fact, a social system characterized by feedback between leaders and followers.
Some political scientists also became interested in the exchange model of leadership because it seemed to: • 1) appeal to the discipline’s interest in analysis of influence relationships, • 2) reflect the pluralistic underpinnings of American democracy, and • 3) imply a more powerful role for followers. In exchanging promises for votes, for example, the transactional leader works within the framework of the self-interests of his or her constituency, thus, followers are alleged to wield as much power as leaders. • The leader’s effectiveness, therefore, is defined as the extent to which he or she “delivers” on the promises made to followers in exchange for their support; where delivery is achieved, reciprocal support is presumed to grow, further enhancing the leader’s power, stature, and capability of delivering on future promises made to followers. • Advocates of exchange emphasized its normative nature, its efficiency considerations, and its beneficial implications for followership.
Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) • Key Question: What kinds of relationships contribute to success? • LMX theory conceptualizes leadership as a process centered in the interactions between leaders and followers. • LMX theory first described by Dansereau, Graen, & Haga (1975), Graen & Cashman (1975), and Graen (1976) • Theory has undergone a number of revisions since its inception and continues to be of interest to researchers • LMX theory challenges the assumption that leaders treat followers in a collective way.
Phases in Leadership MakingGraen & Uhl-Bien (1995) Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Stranger Acquaintance Partner Roles Scripted Tested Negotiated Influences One Way Mixed Reciprocal Exchanges Low Quality Medium Quality High Quality Interests Self Self / Other Group TIME
Phase 1 Stranger • Interactions rule bound • Rely on contractual relationships • Relate to each other within prescribed • organizational roles • Experience lower quality exchanges • Subordinate motives directed • toward self-interest
Phase 2 Acquaintance • Offer by leader/subordinate for improved career-oriented social exchanges • Testing period of taking on new roles and leader providing new challenges • Shift from formalized interactions to new ways of relating • Quality of exchanges improve along with greater trust and respect • Less focus on self-interest, more on goals of the group
Mature Partnership • Marked by high-quality LMX exchanges • Experience high degree of mutual trust, respect, and obligation toward one another • Tested relationship that is dependable • High degree of reciprocity between leader and subordinate • May depend on each other for favors and special assistance • Highly developed patterns of relating that produce positive outcomes Phase 3
Strengths(LMX) • LMX theory validates our experience of how people within organizations relate to each other and the leader • LMX theory is the only leadership approach that makes the dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the leadership process • LMX theory directs our attention to the importance of communication • Solidresearch foundation on how the practice of LMX theory is related to positive organizational outcomes
Criticisms(LMX) • Inadvertently supports the development of privileged groups in the workplace; appears unfair and discriminatory • The basic theoretical ideas of LMX are not fully developed • Because of various scales and levels of analysis, measurement of leader-member exchanges is being questioned
Transformational Perspective • James MacGregor Burns, in Leadership (1978), advanced a notion of leadership known as transformational leadership theory. • Burns: “[Transformational leadership] appeals to the moral values of followers…and occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p 20). • Transformational leadership refers to the process whereby an individual engages with others to create a bond which raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower – typically for the purpose of bringing substantial change to the organization.
Burns saw leadership as a structured interaction between leader and followers that permits significant social processes of change. • Transformational changes within society embrace material, psychological, cultural, and institutional dimensions. • When the transforming leader engages others by exploiting their higher-order needs, the resulting collective act produces a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents.
Types of Leadership DefinedBurns (1978) LAISSEZ-FAIRE Non-leadership. Leaders make no real attempt to move or to meet followers’ needs TRANSACTIONAL Focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and their followers TRANSFORMATIONAL Process of engaging with others to create a connection that increases motivation and morality