leadership

LeadershipLEADERS D.L. Rogers Corp., based in Bedford, Texas, owns and operates 54 franchises of Sonic Corp., a chain of fast-food drive-in restaurants. Jack Hartnett, Rogers's president, leads by combining ingredients from both the Stone Age and the New Age.1 Hartnett prides himself on knowing everything about his employees— both at work and at home. If they have marital problems or credit-card debt, he wants to know. And he thinks nothing of using that information if he thinks he can help. For instance, how many executives do you know who counsel employees on their sex life? When a wife of one of his managers called Hartnett to say her husband was impotent and didn't know what to do, Hartnett had an answer. He met with the couple in a motel room, where he prodded the fellow to confess to an affair and to beg for forgiveness. Is Hartnett's style intrusive? Yes! But neither he nor his employees consider it a problem. "There are no secrets here," he says. No subject is too delicate for his ears. And his defense? He's merely doing what any good friend might do. Also, he believes that the more he knows about his workers, the more he can help them stay focused at work and happy at home. Hartnett plays golf with his managers, sends them personally signed birthday cards, and drops by their homes to take them to dinner. But if you think he's "Mr. Nice Guy," think again. He badmouths academic theories that propose that leaders need to persuade workers to buy in to the leader's vision. Hartnett instructs his employees to "do it the way we tell you to do it." He's perfectly comfortable using the authority in his position to make rules and dish out punishments. One of Hartnett's basic rules is "I will only tell you something once." Break one of his rules twice and he'll fire you. The managers who work for Hartnett are well compensated for meeting his demanding requirements. His unit managers and regional managers earn an average of $65,000 and $150,000, respectively. This compares with industry averages of $30,000 and $52,700. Moreover, Hartnett's managers are eligible for upwards of a 15 percent bonus program as well as an opportunity to own 25 percent of the company. Does Hartnett seem inconsistent? Maybe. He believes in openness, integrity, and honesty, but he expects as much as he gives. It's not an option. So he's "your best friend," and, at the same time, he's rigid and autocratic. He admits to purposely keeping everybody slightly off balance "so they'll work harder." Hartnett's approach to leadership seems to be effective. His per-store revenues are nearly 18 percent higher than the chain's average, and profits are 25 percent above the norm. Moreover, people seem to like working for him. In an industry known for high turnover, Hartnett's managers stay about nine years, compared with an industry average of less than two. Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan 1 Leadership Because the topic of leadership has fascinated people for centuries, definitions abound. This section presents a definition of leadership and highlights the similarities and differences between leading versus managing. Leadership Defined Disagreement about the definition of leadership stems from the fact that it involves a complex interaction among the leader, the followers, and the situation. For example, some researchers define leadership in terms of personality and physical traits, while others believe leadership is represented by a set of prescribed behaviors. In contrast, other researchers believe that the concept of leadership doesn't really exist. There is a common thread, however, among the different definitions of leadership. The common thread is social influence. Leadership is defined as "a social influence process in which the leader seeks the voluntary participation of subordinates in an effort to reach organizational goals."5 Tom Peters and Nancy Austin, authors of the best-seller, A Passion for Excellence, describe leadership in broader terms: Leadership means vision, cheerleading, enthusiasm, love, trust, verve, passion, obsession, consistency, the use of symbols, paying attention as illustrated by the content of one's calendar, out-and-out drama (and the management thereof), creating heroes at all levels, coaching, effectively wandering around, and numerous other things. Leadership must be present at all levels of the organization. It depends on a million little things done with obsession, consistency, and care, but all of those million little things add up to nothing if the trust, vision, and basic belief are not there. As you can see from this definition, leadership clearly entails more than wielding power and exercising authority. Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan 2 Leadership Leading versus Managing It is important to appreciate the difference between leadership and management to fully understand what leadership is all about. Bernard Bass, a leadership expert, concluded that "leaders manage and managers lead, but the two activities are not synonymous." Bass tells us that although leadership and management overlap, each entails a unique set of activities or functions. Broadly speaking, managers typically perform functions associated with planning, investigating, organizing, and control, and leaders deal with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job. Leaders inspire others, provide emotional support, and try to get employees to rally around a common goal. Leaders also play a key role in creating a vision and strategic plan for an organization. Managers, in turn, are charged with implementing the vision and strategic plan. Table B summarizes the key differences found between leaders and managers. Table B: Differences between Leaders and Managers LEADERS Innovate Develop Inspire Long-term view Ask what and why Originate Challenge the status quo Do the right things MANAGERS Administer Maintain Control Short-term view Ask how and when Initiate Accept the status quo Do things right Source: Distinctions were taken from W G Bennis, On Becoming a Leader (Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, 1989). The distinction between leaders and managers is more than a semantic issue for four reasons: 1. It is important from a hiring standpoint. Because leaders and managers perform a subset of unique functions, it is important to recruit and select people who have the required intellectual abilities, experience, and job-relevant knowledge to perform their jobs. 2. Differences may affect group effectiveness. Work group performance can be increased by staffing a productive mix of leaders and managers. 3. Successful organizational change is highly dependent upon effective leadership throughout an organization. Senior executives cannot create change on their own. According to organizational change expert John Kotter, successful organizational transformation is 70% to 90% leadership and 10% to 30% management. 4. Distinctions between leading and managing highlight the point that leadership is not restricted to people in particular positions or roles. Anyone from the bottom to the top of an organization can be a leader. Many an informal leader have contributed to organizational effectiveness. Consider the behavior exhibited by Skip Tobey, an employee at America West Airlines. "I'm not just an aircraft cleaner," the 36-year old Phoenix native said. "That's my title, but that's not the end of my job." Tobey said he looks for ways to help passengers, lending a hand to young families maneuvering strollers through narrow aircraft aisles and assisting elderly travelers. "My satisfaction is tied into quality, helping the passengers," he said. "No matter what it takes, if it means going to the furthest extreme, I'll do it." Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan 3 Together. (2) dominance. Trait Theory At the turn of the 20th century. the prevailing belief was that leaders were born.Leadership Skip's behavior is not only inspirational. each personifies the word "stubborn. (4) level of energy and activity. Mann's review was similarly disappointing for the trait theorists. During the postwar period.'' Andy Grove. masculinity. Bennis characterized managers as people who do things right and leaders as individuals who do the "right" things. Selected people were thought to possess inborn traits that made them successful leaders. Mann found intelligence was the best predictor of leadership. By applying modern statistical techniques to an old database. caused the trait approach to fall into disfavor. their methodology did not single out specific traits. CEO of Intel. and (5) task-relevant knowledge. research revealed that these five traits did not accurately predict which individuals became leaders in organizations. Based on a reanalysis of Mann's data and subsequent studies. Course Instructor: Madan L. Skip Tobey is clearly doing the "right" things to help America West provide excellent customer service. Mann warned that all observed positive relationships between traits and leadership were weak (correlations averaged about 0. Your leadership prototype is a mental representation of the traits and behaviors that you believe are possessed by leaders. But now. Studies conducted by Ralph Stogdill in 1948 and by Richard Mann in 1959. A 1986 meta-analysis by Robert Lord and his associates remedied this shortcoming. Although Grove and Gates possess some of the traits identified by Ralph Stogdill. Dozens of leadership traits were identified. and dominance. leadership traits are once again receiving serious research attention. However. hundreds of studies were conducted to pinpoint the traits of successful leaders. Stogdill concluded that five traits tended to differentiate leaders from average followers: (1) intelligence. chairman and CEO of Microsoft. (3) selfconfidence. Unfortunately. have some of these traits: For one thing. Lord concluded that people have leadership prototypes that affect our perceptions of who is and who is not an effective leader. which sought to summarize the impact of traits on leadership. Behavioral theorists examined leadership from a different perspective. Before World War II. Both are piercingly analytical thinkers who combine hands-on technical smarts with take-no-prisoners business savvy. Lord's research demonstrated that people are perceived as being leaders when they exhibit the traits associated with intelligence. Both absolutely hate to lose. Stogdill's and Mann's findings dealt a near deathblow to the trait approach. Among the seven categories of personality traits he examined. however. but it supports leadership expert Warren Bennis's conclusion about leaders and managers. They tried to uncover the different kinds of leader behaviors that resulted in higher work group performance. and Bill Gates. and to this day the pair occasionally squabble like an old married couple. not made. Pradhan 4 . Contemporary Trait Research: Two OB researchers concluded in 1983 that past trait data may have been incorrectly analyzed. Both approaches to leadership can teach current and future managers valuable lessons about leading. We thus tend to perceive that someone is a leader when he or she exhibits traits or behaviors that are consistent with our prototypes. enthusiasm was replaced by widespread criticism. People with these traits often remained followers. they demonstrated that the majority of a leader's behavior could be attributed to stable underlying traits.15). Stogdill's and Mann's Findings: Based on his review. Trait theories focused on identifying the personal traits that differentiated leaders from followers. They share other volatile traits too." Gates has been known to smash in the dashboard of a rental car after a prickly encounter with Grove. decades later. Trait and Behavioral Theories of Leadership This section examines the two earliest approaches used to explain leadership. A leader trait is a physical or personality characteristic that can be used to differentiate leaders from followers. for example. the International OB outlines the relevant leadership traits of Russian leaders from the 1400s to the present time Figure A in page 7. believes that effective leaders need to have in the 21st century: Leadership will always require people who have a vision of where they wish to take "the led.. At the same time. The researchers concluded that these four traits constitute a leader's credibility.. is going through a the information and this new industrialand technology—and In contrast to these traits. And that means pushing the vision down to every level of the organization. (2) Men were rated as more effective leaders than women when their roles were defined in more masculine terms.. Traits play a central role in how we perceive leaders. As you can see. (3) Gender differences in leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. women were perceived as displaying more social leadership. inspiring. organizations may find it beneficial to consider selected leadership traits when choosing among candidates for leadership positions.e. What will make things different in the 21st century. they need to be corrected through training and development. Pradhan 5 . If those traits are inappropriate (i. the world is being fundamentally reshaped by technology revolution.000 people around the world: "What values (personal traits or characteristics) do you look for and admire in your superiors?" The top four traits included honesty. This is a very positive outcome because it suggests that despite barriers and possible negative stereotypes toward female leaders. male leaders were seen as more effective than females when there was a greater percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. Russian organizations need to nurture and develop a similar but different set of leadership traits. a similar positive bias in leadership effectiveness was not found for women. (2) use different leadership styles.22 Gender should not be used as one of these traits. and (4) whether there are situational differences that produce gender differences in leadership effectiveness.. Leadership also requires motivating people. Interestingly. and women were more effective than men in roles defined in less masculine terms. a pair of leadership researchers asked the following open-ended question to more than 20. Specifically. female and male leaders were equally effective. Results from the second meta-analysis revealed that leadership styles varied by gender. Moreover. Important issues concern whether women and men (1) assume varying leadership roles within work groups.. Course Instructor: Madan L. Trait Theory in Perspective: We can no longer afford to ignore the implications of leadership traits. the qualities that Colin Powell. The first meta-analysis demonstrated that men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assumed within work groups. a recent meta-analysis of more than 75 studies uncovered three key findings: (1) Female and male leaders were rated as equally effective. This research suggests that people want their leaders to be credible and to have a sense of direction. It is important to determine the traits embodied in people's schemata (or mental pictures) for leaders. Finally. (3) are relatively more or less effective in leadership roles." Leadership will always require people who are able to organize the effort of [others] to accomplish the objectives that flow from the vision. Consider. Gender and Leadership: The increase of women in the workforce has generated much interest in understanding the similarities and differences in female and male leaders.Leadership More recently. foster discriminatory selection and invalid performance appraisals). Three meta-analyses were conducted to summarize research pertaining to these issues. which is supplanting the industrial revolution……The leaders of information era have to be able use these tools and understand the power of information how that gives them new opportunities. Women used a more democratic or participative style than men. forward-looking. And leadership will always put a demand on leaders to pick the right people. is that the world transformation . Men were seen as displaying more overall leadership and task leadership. former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and White House national security advisor. however. In contrast.. and competent. Men employed a more autocratic and directive style than women. On the horizontal axis is "concern for production. (2) use group rather than individual methods of supervision. this research sought to identify behavioral differences between effective and ineffective leaders. High Structure. one management expert concluded that effective leaders (1) tend to have supportive or employee-centered relationships with employees. It vas believed that leader behavior directly affected work group effectiveness. Rather. high-consideration style would be the one best style of leadership." "Concern for people" is on the vertical axis. These two dimensions of leader behavior were oriented at right angles to yield four behavioral styles of leadership (see Figure 2). low consideration The leader fails to provide necessary structure and demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants. high consideration High Consideration Less emphasis is placed on while the leader concentrates on satisfying employee needs and wants. In summarizing the results from these studies. It was an outgrowth of two events: the seeming inability of trait theory to explain leadership effectiveness and the human relations movement. high consideration Primary emphasis is placed on structuring employee tasks while the leader demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants. Initiating structure is leader behavior that organizes and defines what group members should be doing to maximize output. and (3) set high performance goals. Overall. Blake and Mouton's Managerial/Leadership Grid®: Perhaps the most widely known behavioral styles model of leadership is the Managerial Grid. the other was job centered. Through the years. It initially was hypothesized that a high-structure.800 statements lat described nine categories of leader behavior. the list contained 1. High Initiating Structure University of Michigan Studies As in the Ohio State studies. This led researchers to identify patterns of behavior (called leadership styles) that enabled leaders to effectively influence others. Low Low Structure. instead of on personality traits. Pradhan 6 . Ultimately. the Ohio State researchers concluded there were only two independent dimensions of leader behavior: consideration and initiating structure. high consideration The leader provides a lot of guidance about tow tasks can be completed while being highly considerate of employee needs and wants. Researchers thus concluded that there is not one best style of leadership. They use it to demonstrate that there is one best style of leadership. an outgrowth of the Hawthorne Studies. the effectiveness of the high-high style has been tested many times. Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid® (renamed the Leadership Grid® in 1991) is a matrix formed by the intersection of two dimensions of leader behavior (see Figure 3). At one point. it is argued that effectiveness of a given leadership style depends on situational factors. Figure 2: Four Leadership Styles Derived from the Ohio State Studies Low Structure. The thrust of early behavioral leadership theory was to focus on leader behavior. Consideration involves leader behavior associated with creating mutual respect or trust and focuses on a concern for group members' needs and desires. Course Instructor: Madan L. The Ohio Studies: Researchers at Ohio State University began by generating a list of behaviors exhibited by leaders. Low Low Structure. These behavioral styles parallel the consideration and initiating-structure styles identified by the Ohio State group.® Behavioral scientists Robert Blake and Jane Srygley Mouton developed and trademarked the grid.Leadership Behavioral Styles Theory This phase of leadership research began during World War II as part of an effort to develop better military leaders. results have been mixed. Researchers identified two different styles of leadership: one was employee centered. not born. This is the opposite of the trait theorists' traditional assumption. Course Instructor: Madan L. In support of the 9.9 style. satisfaction. 9.Leadership Figure 3 The Leadership Grid® High 9 1. Moreover. Because it emphasizes teamwork and interdependence. Behavioral Styles Theory in Perspective: By emphasizing leader behavior. At issue is the grid's extensive use as training and consulting tool for diagnosing and correcting organizational problems.9 style is considered by Blake and Mouton to be the best. the behavioral style approach makes it clear that leaders are made. 2 1 Low Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High Concern for Production Blake and Mouton point out that "the variables of the Managerial Grid® are attitudinal and conceptual. and health." In other words." Critics point out that Blake and Mouton's research may be self-serving.9 style for each of the 12 situations. Given what we know about behavior shaping and model-based training. with behavior descriptions derived from and connected with the thinking that lies behind action. Blake and Mouton were able to plot five leadership styles.1 Impoverished management Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership. By scaling each axis of the grid from 1 to 9. . a study demonstrated that employee creativity was increased when leaders were trained to (1) help employees identify problems and (2) enhance employees feelings of self-efficacy. Pradhan 7 . 4 3 1. regardless of the situation.5 6 Concern People 5 Middle-of-the-road management Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level. Blake and Mouton cite the results of a study in which 100 experienced managers were asked to select the best way of handling 12 managerial situations. interdependence through a common stake in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect. Blake and Mouton report.9 Country club management Thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo. orientation . the 9. creativity. something that is learned. as well as specific behaviors. 9. "The 9.9 Team management Work accomplishment is from committed people. For example. leader behaviors can be systematically improved and developed. Between 72% and 90% of the managers selected the 9.9. concern for production and concern for people involve attitudes and patterns of thinking. leads to productivity. 8 7 5. .1 Authority-compliance Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree. " 8 to 8. Let us closely examine three alternative situational theories of leadership that reject the notion of one best leadership style. personal integrity Greasing the wheels of the state Shared power and ownership Delegation and strategic decision making The sky's the limit Overcoming the sin of being a winner Let's do business 8-day week. Situational Theories Situational leadership theories grew out of an attempt to explain the inconsistent findings about traits and styles. The effectiveness of a particular leadership style depends on the situation at hand. but learning to do business straight From cynicism to overpromising Deception in dealings. As situations change. employees prefer structure over consideration when faced with role ambiguity. Situational theories propose that the effectiveness of a particular style of leader behavior depends on the situation. fealty in friendship Currying favor with landowners From helplessness to bravado From inferior quality to "big is beautiful" Behavioral styles research also revealed that there is no one best style of leadership. It is the oldest and one of the most widely known models of leadership.Leadership Figure A: International Organizational Behaviour Russian Leadership Traits in Three Eras TRADITIONAL RUSSIAN SOCIETY (1400S TO 1914) THE RED EXECUTIVE (1917 TO 1991) THE MARKETORIENTED MANAGER (1991 TO PRESENT) LEADERSHIP TRAIT LEADERSHIP MOTIVATION Power Responsibility DRIVE Achievement ti ti Ambition Initiative Energy Tenacity HONESTY AND INTEGRITY Dual ethical standard Using connections (blat) SELF-CONFIDENCE Powerful autocrats Centralization of responsibility Don't rock the boat Equal poverty for all Look both ways Concentrated spasms of labor Life is a struggle Centralized leadership stifled grass-roots democracy Micromanagers and macropuppets Frustrated pawns Service to party and collective good Meticulous rule following and behind-the –scenes finessing "8-hour day. the likelihood that [the leader] can successfully accomplish the job. For instance. Fiedler's Contingency Model Fred Fiedler. Pradhan 8 . personal trust Greasing palms. whether [the leader's self-esteem depends primarily on accomplishing the task or on having close supportive relations with others. and (2) the leader's basic motivation—that is.30. developed a situational model of leadership. firefighting Struggling to accomplish the routine Two sets of books. This directly challenges the idea of one best style of leadership. different styles become appropriate. Fiedler's model is based on the following assumption: The performance of a leader depends on two interrelated factors: (1) the degree to which the situation gives the leader control and influence—that is. an OB scholar. chasing opportunities Struggling to accomplish the new Wild capitalism. Course Instructor: Madan L. until it went on strike over vacation and overtime givebacks. For example. Situational control ranges from high to low. Since structured tasks have guidelines for how the job should be completed. Soon afterward. He inherited Lilco on the brink of bankruptcy from cost overruns and Shoreham-related litigation and turned it into a strong. William Catacosinos. Dr. and position power.000-person workforce. forming eight combinations of situational control (see Figure 4). Good leader-member relations suggest that the leader can depend on the group.Leadership With respect to a leader's basic motivation.: Over the years. Catacosinos's task motivation clearly helped save Lilco from bankruptcy. "I'd stick out my hand and people would just walk away. After discussing the components of situational control and the leadership matching process. especially by rank-and-file workers. Pradhan 9 . High control implies that the leader's decisions will produce predictable results because the leader has the ability to influence work outcomes. But in running the beleaguered company. task structure. This dimension is the second most important component of situational control. These dimensions vary independently. though unpredictable. Catacosinos cut nearly 1.000 jobs from the 6. He suggests that leaders must learn how to match their leadership style to the amount of control within a leadership situation. Task structure is concerned with the amount of structure contained within tasks performed by the work group. then stared down International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1049. the leader has more control and influence over employees performing such tasks. he fired Lilco's president and most of his predecessor's management team. he relies on a result-oriented style that even his critics admit has saved the utility from ruin. and trust of the work group. Consider the basic leadership motivation possessed by Dr. or otherwise obtain compliance from employees. people who know him say he developed a fanaticism for control and for pushing subordinates hard… His first year at Lilco. The three dimensions of situational control are defined as follows: Leader-member relations reflect the extent to which the leader has the support. He became so intensely disliked. which represents 85% of Lilco's workers. stockmarket performer. Fiedler's theory also is based on the premise that leaders have one dominant leadership style that is resistant to change. Dr. Course Instructor: Madan L. Low control implies that the leader's decisions may not influence work outcomes because the leader has very little influence. punish. Fiedler believes that leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated. This dimension is the most important component of situational control. thus ensuring that the work group will try to meet the leader's goals and objectives. a managerial job contains less structure than that of a bank teller. loyalty. that some refused to greet him. chief executive officer of Long Island Lighting Co. we review relevant research and managerial implications. These basic motivations are similar to initiating structure/concern for production and consideration/concern for people. There are three dimensions of situational control: leader-member relations. Situational Control: Situational control refers to the amount of control and influence the leader has in her or his immediate work environment." he says. Position power refers to the degree to which the leader has formal power to is reward. (2) for laboratory studies testing the model. task structure. According to the researchers' findings. the theory was supported for all leadership situations except situation II. and (3) for field studies testing the model. Course Instructor: Madan L. VI. Research and Managerial Implications: The overall accuracy of Fiedler's contingency model was tested through a meta-analysis of 35 studies containing 137 leader style-performance relations. relationship-motivated leaders are expected to be more effective. and VIII. Pradhan 10 . reinforced the notion that there is no one best style of leadership. Leaders are advised to alter their task and relationship orientation to fit the demands of the situation at hand. Finally. For those situations in which the leader has high control (situations I. and position power. while partial support was obtained for situations I. III. three of the eight situations (IV. (1) the contingency theory was correctly induced from studies on which it was based.Leadership Figure 4 Representation of Fiedler’s Contingency Model` Linking Leadership Motivation and Situational Control Fiedler's complete contingency model is presented in Figure above. and III). V. II. the results orientation of task-motivated leaders is predicted to be more effective under conditions of low control (situations VII and VIII). Plotted on the resulting quadrant are lines indicating those situations in which task-motivated (dotted line) and relationship-motivated (solid line) leaders are predicted to be effective. Each situation represents a unique combination of leader-member relations. The horizontal axis breaks out the eight control situations. The vertical axis indicates the level of leader effectiveness. V. These findings suggest that Fiedler's model needs theoretical refinement. This research. A more recent meta-analysis of data obtained from 1. Under conditions of moderate control (situations IV.282 groups also provided mixed support for the contingency model. The major contribution of Fiedler's model is that it prompted others to examine the contingency nature of leadership. task-motivated leaders are hypothesized to be more effective than relationship-motivated leaders. and VII) produced completely supportive results. in turn. II. and VI). For example. storm ahead. kill the product line." says a former PepsiCo executive. emphasizing excellence. Figure 5 A General Representation of House’s Path-Goal Theory Leadership Styles House believes leaders can exhibit more than one leadership style." Course Instructor: Madan L. the history of a business. He proposed a model that describes how expectancy perceptions are influenced by the contingent relationships among four leadership styles and various employee attitudes and behaviors (see Figure 5). Expectancy theory proposes that motivation to exert effort increases as one's effort performance outcome expectations improve. The four leadership styles identified by House are as follows: Directive leadership. Research evidence supports the idea that leaders exhibit more than one leadership style. and demon strating confidence in employee abilities. leader behavior is motivational to the extent it (1) reduces roadblocks that interfere with goal accomplishment. and (3) ties meaningful rewards to goal accomplishment. Pradhan 11 .Leadership Path – Goal Theory Path—goal theory is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. In addition. 39 Descriptions of business leaders reinforce these findings. Encouraging employees to perform at their highest level by setting challenging goals. (2) provides the guidance and support needed by employees. it is called the path-goal theory of leadership. House sees the leader's main job as helping employees stay on the right paths to challenging goals and valued rewards. Because the model deals with pathways to goals and rewards. This contrasts with Fiedler. Achievement-oriented leadership. scheduling work. According to the path-goal model. leader behavior is acceptable when employees view it as a source of satisfaction or as paving the way to future satisfaction. He never gets sucked into the culture. Path-goal theory focuses on how leaders influence followers' expectations. who proposes that leaders have one dominant style. and so cold. and also dispassionately evaluate a business and fix it. "His strength is his ability to charm you and get you on his side. So he's not afraid to cut the fat. shut the factory. and treating workers as equals. PepsiCo's CEO. being friendly and approachable. Participative leadership. Robert House originated the path-goal theory of leadership. Roger Enrico. Providing guidance to employees about what should be done and how to do it. Showing concern for the well-being and needs of employees. and maintaining standards of performance. Supportive leadership. Consulting with employees and seriously considering their ideas when making decisions. reorganize. uses multiple leadership styles to influence others: "Roger is at once one of the warmest and most personable people. He's agile and he's cunning. and need for independence obtained results that were semiconsistent with the theory. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. According to the theory. which varies from low to high. a small set of task and employee characteristics are relevant contingency factors. As follower readiness increases. experience. variety. All these factors have the potential for hindering or motivating employees. because management was pumping up prices on Doritos and other snacks. such as close supervision (see Figure 6). A recent summary of this research revealed that only 138 of 562 (25%) contingency relationships tested confirmed the theory. For example.). In this context. They are employee characteristics and environmental factors. Frito was scrimping on product quality. to a participating. Research has focused on determining whether the various contingency factors influence the effectiveness of different leadership styles. experience. Five important employee characteristics are locus of control. ultimately. Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory Situational leadership theory (SLT) was developed by management writers Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard. This style combines high task-oriented leader behaviors. and need for clarity. firing 1. supportive and achievement leadership are more likely to be satisfying when employees have a lot of ability and experience. Willingness is a combination of confidence. The appropriate leadership style is found by cross referencing follower readiness. Profits were rising. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling. and motivation. Three relevant environmental factors are (1) the employee's task.700 workers and sweeping out management. with low relationship-oriented behaviors. Enrico slashed costs. participating or supporting (S3).Leadership He challenges everything and assumes nothing. Course Instructor: Madan L. (2) the authority system. Although these results were greater than chance. The SLT model is summarized in Figure 6. Managers are encouraged to modify their leadership style to fit these various task and employee characteristics. The four leadership styles represent combinations of task and relationship-oriented leader behaviors (S1 to S4). indifference to organizational rewards. Pradhan 12 . the numbers looked fine. For example. when Enrico took charge at PepsiCo's Frito-Lay division five years ago. the four leadership styles depicted in Figure 6 are referred to as telling or directing (S. it turned out. such as providing instructions. Managerial Implications:There are two important managerial implications. Managers thus should not be hesitant to try new behaviors when the situation calls for them. leaders possess and use more than one style of leadership. need for achievement. Readiness is defined as the extent to which a follower possesses the ability and willingness to complete a task. But Enrico smelled something rotten at the food company. the task characteristics of autonomy. commitment. training and knowledge. This model has two groups of contingency variables (see Figure 16-5). Contingency Factors Contingency factors are situational variables that cause one style of leadership to be more effective than another. persuading or coaching (S2). task ability. and. with one of four leadership styles. however. and delegating (S4). Second. In the most recent description of this model. to a delegating style. On the positive side. and significance and the employee characteristics of ability. Leaders are encouraged to use a "telling style" for followers with low readiness. and (3) the work group. to a selling. First. they provided limited support for the moderating relationships predicted within path-goal theory. these variables affect expectancy or path-goal perceptions. professional orientation. Pagonis has cut logistics costs by $45 million a year—with very few layoffs—and has cut the amount of time it takes to deliver products from suppliers to stores by 50%: Course Instructor: Madan L. It is referred to as charismatic leadership. These competing but related perspectives have created confusion among researchers and practicing managers. various referred to as "charismatic. Mr. display of confidence in self and followers." "heroic. appeal to ideological values. and leader expectations for follower self-sacrifice and for performance beyond the call of duty. charismatic leadership emphasizes "symbolic leader behavior. The two underlying characteristics of transactional leadership are that (1) leaders use contingent rewards to motivate employees and (2) leaders exert corrective action only when subordinates fail to obtain performance goals.Leadership Figure 6 Situational Leadership Theory From Transactional to Charismatic Leadership New perspectives of leadership theory have emerged in the past 15 years. Since he took over his job at Sears. visionary and inspirational messages. Fortunately. integrated theory. This section begins by highlighting the differences between transactional and charismatic leadership. What Is the Difference between Transactional and Charismatic Leadership? Most of the models and theories previously discussed in this chapter represent transactional leadership. Transactional leadership focuses on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. Consider the leadership style of William G "Gus" Pagonis. intellectual stimulation of followers by the leader. Pradhan 13 . Robert House and Boas Shamir have given us a practical." or "visionary" leadership." "transformational. Leaders are seen as engaging in behaviours that maintain in a quality interaction between themselves and followers. We then discuss a model of the charismatic leadership process and its research and management implications. In contrast. head of logistics at Sears." Charismatic leadership can produce significant organizational change and results because it "transforms" employees to pursue organizational goals in lieu of self-interests. Pagonis was a three-star Army general who served as chief of logistics for the US military during the Gulf War. Roebuck & Co. nonverbal communication. and bridging the gap between an organization's present problems and its future goals and aspirations. sits in his fenced-in two-story brick home here. In contrast. promoting high ideals. Dr. Charismatic Leader Behavior: The first set of charismatic leader behaviors involves establishing a common vision of the future. Current management describes him as an arrogant boss who ruined Coastal through a series of missteps and can't bear to let go. Pradhan 14 .. by motion of the board. It does this by attracting commitment. Steven Scott. If done effectively. Major clients and top executives have fled.. They also must gain input from others in developing an effective implementation plan. cooling his heels and sipping iced tea. Scott himself. Scott's vision was to create networks of physician practices and then sell the network services to health care providers: Today. This highlights the fact that charismatic leaders do more than simply establish a vision." According to Burt Nanus. and aspirations. his dream of a physician-led revolution has turned into a nightmare. and behaviors needed to realize the vision. Charismatic leaders need to publicly express confidence in the followers' ability to meet high performance expectations. credible. As you can see. beliefs. a positive self-concept propels employee motivation (motivational mechanisms) toward host of personal outcomes such as personal commitment to the leaders and vision. intrinsic motivation. staffing hospitals Dr. energizing workers. from speaking to Coastal's employees. beliefs. A vision is "a realistic. The third and final set of leader behaviors involves being a role model.000 employees. He also can't enter its offices. attractive future for your organization. Through their actions. even though he owns the building. T The second set of leader behaviors involves two key components: 1. Charismatic leaders set high performance expectations and standards because they know challenging. task meaningfulness and satisfaction. In turn. values. This is essential because employees are more likely to pursue difficult goals when they believe they can accomplish what is being asked of them. these behaviors positively affect followers’ self concepts. their values and personal identity. Charismatic leaders first engage in three key sets of leader behavior. as it pursued the vision of its founder Dr. his hand-picked board ousted him as chief executive officer and put him on "sabbatical.Leadership How Does Charismatic Leadership Transform Followers? Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. charismatic leaders model the desired values. a 48-year-old workaholic obstetrician turned entrepreneur. a leadership expert. creating meaning in employees' lives. Johnson & Johnson obtained input about its vision and implementation plan by surveying all of its 80. needs. and increased performance. Coastal Physician Group's vision produced disastrous results. the "right" vision unleashes human potential because it serves as a beacon of hope and common purpose. Course Instructor: Madan L. 2. selling clinics and trying to resuscitate its original activity. Figure 7 presents a model of how charismatic leadership accomplishes this transformation process. organizational commitment. traits." The CEO who made a practice of calling subordinates at home at night is now barred. **Consider what happened to Coastal Physician Group Inc. For example. establishing a standard of excellence. Coastal is abandoning many of its businesses. the "wrong" vision can be very damaging to an organization. self-sacrificial behavior.. attainable goals lead to greater productivity. They accomplish this transformation by appealing to followers' self-concepts— namely. In May. Pradhan 15 . Research and Managerial Implications The charismatic model of leadership presented was supported by an experiment in which 282 business students performed a simulated assembly task. and goal pursuit. Results revealed that charismatic leadership positively influenced students' quality and quantity goals and their self-efficacy. Follower self-esteem and self-efficacy are heightened by charismatic leader behavior. and charismatic leaders had higher project quality and budget/schedule performance ratings and were identified as more effective role models. charismatic leaders convey the message that effort reflects important organizational values and collective interests. whereas low effort reflects a lack of commitment. Two additional studies demonstrated that both charismatic and transactional leadership were positively associated with a varitety of important employee outcomes. as study of 31 presidential performance. charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. Top Course Instructor: Madan L. goals. Extrinsic rewards cannot be clearly linked to individual performance. 3. Leaders should attempt these two types of leadership while avoiding a “laissez-faire” or “wait-and-see” style. charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. and performance are required of both leaders and followers. A recent meta-analysis of 54 studies further indicated that charismatic leaders were viewed as more effective leaders by both supervisors and followers and had followers who exerted more effort and reported higher levels of job satisfaction than noncharismatic leaders. achievement motivation. Fourth. which then gives followers a sense of "growth and development. This reinforces the organizational value of developing and rolling out a combination of transactional and charismatic leadership training for all employees. followers' self-concepts are negatively affected by destructive charismatic leadership. According to a team of experts. It increases the extent to which followers identify with the leader's values. Second. The situation offers opportunities for "moral" involvement. Charismatic leaders further increase the meaningfulness of actions aimed toward goal accomplishment by showing how goals move the organization toward its positive vision. Laissez-faire leadership is the most ineffective leadership style. It enhances follower motivation. In contrast. the bet leaders are not just charismatic. in turn. First. sacrifices. they are both transactional and charismatic. employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. behavior. 4. which. enhanced the quality and quantity of performance. Third. unethical ones select or produce obedient. Leaders also increase the intrinsic value of goal accomplishment by explaining the organization's vision and goals in terms of the personal values they represent. dependent. These results underscore four important managerial implications.Leadership Effects on Follower Self-Concepts: Charismatic leadership affects three aspects of a follower's self-concept: 1. Whereas ethical charismatic leaders enable employees to enhance their self-concepts. Finally. charismatic leadership is most likely to be effective when 1. Motivational Mechanisms: Charismatic leadership positively affects employee motivation. This helps employees to personally connect with the organization's vision." both of which are important contributors to a positive self-concept. For example. Performance goals cannot be easily established and measured. Exceptional effort. Leaders do this by emphasizing the symbolic value of effort. 5. that is. and aspirations and with the collective interests of all employees. 2. There are few situational cues or constraints to guide behavior. high effort represents commitment to the organization's vision and values. Other studies showed that followers trusted charismatic leaders more than noncharismatic ones. Followers come to learn that their level of effort represents a moral statement. and compliant followers. 3. Charismatic leadership also increases employees' effort expectancies by positively contributing to followers' self-esteem and self-efficacy. One way in which this occurs is by increasing the intrinsic value of an employee's effort and goals. 2. and superleadership. In the second type of exchange. Figure 8 A Role-Making Model of Leadership Course Instructor: Madan L. these models assume a leader treats all subordinates in about the same way. 2. This traditional approach to leadership is shown in the left side of Figure 16-8. or common fate. Theories such as the Leadership Grid® and Fiedler's contingency model assume that leader behavior is characterized by a stable or average leadership style. respect. selecting. Recruiting. servant leadership. E3. Identifying. rewarding. Graen predicts that one of two distinct types of leader-member exchange relationships will evolve. 5. Figure 8 shows that E1. and promoting people with high morals and standards. In contrast. respect and liking. We spend more time discussing leader-member exchange theory and substitutes for leadership because they have been more thoroughly investigated. Additional Perspectives on Leadership This section examines four additional approaches to leadership: leader-member exchange theory. As a result of this process. and a sense of common fates. In this relationship. leaders are characterized as overseers who fail to create a sense of mutual trust. E2. and publicly praising employees who exemplify high moral conduct. Pradhan 16 . the leader (designated by the circled L) is thought to exhibit a similar pattern of behavior toward all employees (El to E5). Graen contends that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships with each of the people reporting to them. substitutes for leadership. In other words. leaders and followers develop a partnership characterized by reciprocal influence. Graen’s Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Model of Leadership George Graen. and E4 are members of the out-group on the right side of Figure 8. The forming of vertical dyads is said to be a naturally occurring process. Creating and enforcing a clearly stated code of ethics. 3. mutual trust. In this case. 4. One type of leader-member exchange is called the Internal/in-group exchange. Developing performance expectations around the treatment of employees—these expectations can then be assessed in the performance appraisal process.Leadership management can create and maintain ethical charismatic leadership by 1. an industrial psychologist. believes popular theories of leadership are based on an incorrect assumption. Training employees to value diversity. Behavioral scientists call this sort of relationship a vertical dyad. resulting from the leader's attempt to delegate and assign work roles. referred to as an external/outgroup exchange. and E5 are members of the leader's in-group. and satisfaction with leadership. Further. But this basic assumption is questioned by this model of leadership. job satisfaction.Leadership Research Findings: If Graen's model is correct. support. the OB researchers who developed this model. and receipt of bonuses over a seven-year period. Substitutes for Leadership Virtually all leadership theories assume that some sort of formal leadership is necessary. but also career outcomes. this should enhance the job satisfaction and performance of employees and also reduce turnover. Consequently. Pradhan 17 . such as taking a test. neutralize. Characteristics of the subordinate. the task. work group assignments. In addition to training. neutralize. This improvement resulted in an estimated annual cost savings of more than $5 million. try to become an in-group member by being cooperative and loyal. Table 9 lists the various substitutes for leadership. either accept the situation. Managers should consciously try to expand their in-groups. such employees would be guided more by their own initiate than by managerial directives. it shows that there are more substitutes for taskoriented leadership than for relationship-oriented leadership. job design. leaders behavior that imitates structure would tend to be resisted by independent-minded employees with high ability and vast experience. different characteristics are predicted to negate different types of leader behavior. and the design of organizational processes and systems. and the organization can act as substitutes for traditional hierarchical leadership. there should be a significant relationship between the type of leader-member exchange and job-related outcomes. 2. Research supports this prediction. tend to negate task-oriented but not relationship-oriented leader behavior (see Table 9). and job performance than did employees in the out-group. Managers can positively influence the substitutes through employee selection. or enhance the effects of leadership. Course Instructor: Madan L. Although the list in Table 9 is not all-inclusive.The type of leader-member exchange was found to predict not only turnover among nurses and computer analysts. or improve the impact of a leader's behavior. the key to improving leadership effectiveness is to identify the situational characteristics that can substitute for. Managers need to give employees ample opportunity to prove themselves. For example. in-group members were found to have higher organizational commitment. and cooperativeness to their manager. 4. For example. Substitutes for leadership can this increase or diminish a leader’s ability to influence the work group. or quit.66 Positive leadermember exchange also was associated with greater levels of perceived environmental control. Specifically. A large US government installation in the Midwest conducted such a training program. whatever the circumstances. a recent study sought to determine the demographic and organizational characteristics that foster the quality of an LMX. New employees should offer their loyalty. Finally. Results revealed that LMX was of lower quality when leaders and followers had different genders. tasks that provide feedback concerning accomplishment. The key implication is that managers should be attentive to the substitutes listed in Table 9 because they directly influence employee attitudes and performance. The quality of an LMX also was negatively associated with the number of employees reporting to a manager and the work load. Results indicated a 19% increase on an objective measure of productivity. 3. supervisory fairness. such as promotability. Kerr and Jermier's Substitutes for Leadership Model According to Steven Kerr and John Jermier. Managerial Implications: Graen's model underscores the importance of training managers to improve leader-member relations. If you are an out-group member. salary level. Ideally. For example. OB researcher Robert Vecchio offers the following tips to both followers and leaders for improving the quality of leader-member exchanges: 1. some OB scholars propose that there that can substitute for. These situational variables are referred to as substitutes for leadership. putting the needs of others. Unambiguous and routine 6. Provides its own feedback concerning accomplishment 8. Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. Results demonstrated that only 38% of the respondents ever had an effective coach or mentor. The term servantleadership was coined by Robert Greenleaf in 1970. Superleadership is equally relevant within teams as well as any general leadership situation. training. cohesive work groups 13. and f responsibility) 10. Pradhan 18 . Course Instructor: Madan L. Inflexibility (rigid. The need for this form of leadership is underscored by a recent survey of 1. Productive thinking is the cornerstone of superleadership.046 Americans. Table 10 presents 10 characteristics possessed by servant-leaders. knowledge 2. experience. "Professional" orientation 4. transformational approach to life and work. Intrinsically satisfying OF THE ORGANIZATION 9. ' b di t X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Servant Leadership Servant-leadership is more a philosophy of managing than a testable theory. Specifically. Superleadership has the potential to free up a manager's time because employees are encouraged to manage themselves. Organizational rewards not within the l dSpatial distance between superior and t l 14. One can hardly go wrong by trying to adopt these characteristics. Servant-leadership is not a quick-fix approach to leadership. Indifference toward organizational rewards OF THE TASK 5. it is a long-term. Rather. Closely knit. managers are encouraged to teach followers how to engage in productive thinking. Super Leadership A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. This is expected to increase employees' feelings of personal control and intrinsic motivation. Highly specified and active advisory and staff f ti 12.Leadership Table 9: Substitutes for Leadership RELATIONSHIPORIENTED OR CONSIDERATE LEADER BEHAVIOR IS UNNECESSARY TASK ORIENTED OR INITIATING STRUCTURE LEADER BEHAVIOR IS UNNECESSARY CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SUBORDINATE 1. unbending rules and d ) 11. Future research is needed to test the validity of recommendations derived from this new approach to leadership. including employees. as their first priority. goals. Greenleaf believes that great leaders act as servants. Ability. and community. customers. Formalization (explicit plans. Servant-leadership focuses on increased service to others rather than to oneself. Methodologically invariant 7. Need for independence 3. Table 16-1 summarizes the differences between leading and managing. Review of trait theory research. Empathy 3. An individual's good intentions are assumed even when he or she Servant-leaders strive to make themselves and others whole in the face of failure or suffering. using the Ohio State studies and the Leadership Grid9 as points of reference. and masculinity. Servant-leaders are very self-aware of their strengths and limitations. Managers typically perform functions associated with planning. They commit to fostering an environment that encourages Servant-leaders strive to create a sense of community both within and outside the work organization. Results revealed that individuals tend to be perceived as leaders when they possess one or more of the following traits: intelligence. Foresight 8. investigating. Servant-leaders try to empathize with others' feelings and emotions. Servant-leaders seek an appropriate balance between a short-term. forward-looking. Leadership is defined as a social influence process in which the leader tries to obtain the voluntary participation of employees in an effort to reach organizational objectives. and competent. Building community DESCRIPTION Servant-leaders focus on listening to identify and clarify the needs and desires of a group. However. Results demonstrated that (a) men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assume. dominance. Credible leaders are honest. Pradhan 19 . Servant-leaders have the ability to foresee future outcomes associated with a current course of actor or situation. A recent study further demonstrated that employees value credible leaders. Servant-leaders assume that they are stewards of the people and resources they manage. (b) leadership styles varied by gender. and (c) gender differences in ratings of leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. conceptual orientation.Leadership Table 10 Characteristics of the Servant leaders SERVANT LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS 1. day-to-day focus and a long-term. Servant-leaders are committed to people beyond their immediate work role. Although leadership and management overlap. Conceptualization 7. Research also examined the relationship between gender and leadership. Research did not support the premise that there is one best style of leadership. Commitment to the growth of people 10. The Ohio State studies revealed that there were two key independent dimensions of leadership behavior: consideration and initiating structure. teams of researchers reanalyzed this historical data with modernday statistical procedures. Authors of the Leadership Grid® proposed that leaders should adopt a style that demonstrates high concern for production and people. and control. and discussing the idea of one best style of leadership. Awareness 5. Healing 4. Servant-leaders rely more on persuasion than positional authority when making decisions and trying to influence others. and leaders deal with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job. Historical leadership research did not support the notion that effective leaders possessed unique traits from followers. Listening 2. Servant leaders take the time and effort to develop broader based conceptual thinking. Summary of Key Concepts Leadership's definition and difference between leading versus managing. Leadership entails more than having authority and power. Persuasion 6. Stewardship 9. organizing. Course Instructor: Madan L. each entails a unique set of activities or functions. inspiring. Servant-leadership is more a philosophy than a testable theory. or achievement-oriented styles of leadership. the task. task structure. Graen's leader-member exchange model of leadership. or enhance the effects of leadership. leaders alternately can exhibit directive. These substitutes contain characteristics of the subordinates. Path-goal theory has received limited support from research. House's path-goal theory and Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory. According to path-goal theory. (c) Employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. supportive. According to situational leadership theory (SLT). Relationship. These leader behaviors. There are four managerial implications: (a) The best leaders are both transactional and charismatic. with each employee. A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. The effectiveness of these styles depends on various employee characteristics and environmental factors. to a delegating style. Managerial implications of charismatic leadership. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. values. Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. in turn. Leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated. positively affect followers' self-concepts. Leaders accomplish this by first engaging in three key sets of leader behavior. finally. Charismatic leaders motivate employees to pursue organizational goals above their own self-interests. including employees. Course Instructor: Madan L. and the organization. These leader-member exchanges qualify as either in-group or out-group relationships. Transactional leaders focus on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. and (b) managers are advised to modify their leadership style to fit a small subset of task and employee characteristics. neutralize. Task-motivated leaders are effective under situations of both high and low control. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling to a selling to a participating and. Situation control is composed of leader-member relations. and aspirations. beliefs.motivated leaders are more effective when they have moderate situational control. Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. as their first priority. Pradhan 20 . Servant-leadership and superleadership. and position power. (d) Top management needs to promote and reinforce ethical charismatic leadership because charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. It is based on the premise that great leaders act as servants.Leadership Fiedler's contingency model According to Fiedler's contingency model. needs. Substitutes for leadership There are 14 substitutes for leadership (see Table 9) that can substitute for. putting the needs of others. (b) Charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. There is an important difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. As follower readiness increases. How charismatic leadership transforms followers. and community. George Graen believes that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships. leadership style interacts with situational control. Research supports this model of leadership. Both forms of leadership are important for organizational success. Research shows that substitutes directly influence employee attitudes and performance. Research does not support Difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. referred to as vertical dyads. customers. There are two important managerial Implications: (a) leaders possess and use more than one style of leadership. participative. Fiedler believes leader effectiveness depends on an appropriate match between leadership style and situational control. A positive self-concept then unleashes employee motivation toward achieving a host of preferred outcomes. Leadership THREE KNOWN MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ONE UNKNOWN Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan 21 . We thus develop an environmental typology with matching leadership styles typology. our results are surprising in that our resulting leadership classification contains only three known modes instead of the customary four. transactional and transformational modes of leadership. Course Instructor: Madan L. charismatic. We propose that the traditional distinctions between the classic modes of leadership. We advance the idea that the transformational mode is not an option contingent on circumstances like the former three. However. We thus offer an interesting avenue for consideration by future leadership practitioners and researchers. Pradhan 22 . namely the visionary. but is a requisite in all practical instances.Leadership Abstract This paper develops a macro-model of organizational leadership based on the role of the external environment in shaping the type of leadership required to manage an organization. are hard to reconcile with a classification of the possible environmental types of the future. . Implicit in the utility and agency theories derived from economics is the notion of motivation through a quid pro quo." Such changes in the external environment call for new challenges in organizational structures. 1996. research on organizational leadership has remained rather silent on the impact of the external environment on the adoption of a particular leadership style. selecting and articulating the right vision. 1988. Recently.g. firms are preoccupied with constantly revamping themselves. 1999). transformational leadership (e. a recent paper by Avolio. replacing them with more ad hoc arrangements such as contracting and alliances (Pearce. 1993). We thus depart from established practice in leadership studies. 1998). In such an exchange relationship. over time. The purpose of the present contribution is to provide a conceptual framework that helps understand the leadership challenges of the twenty-first century required by constant changes in firms’ external environments. 1988. this paper intends to explore the impact of a firm’s external environment on transformational leadership patterns. Worse still. 1986). the more technological the times have become. Curiously. and work with others to initiate changes that will create a viable future for the organization (Ireland & Hitt. thereby calling for new leadership challenges. Increased international competition and technological change have served to break stable bureaucracies. this powerful idea. Howell and Sosik (1999) investigates the moderating influence of humor on leadership style effects. Westley & Mintzberg. Transactional leadership is characterized by an exchange relationship between leader and followers. Pfeffer. 1998. 1996). Jung & Avolio. Gardner & Avolio.g. 1998) is a type that has been hailed from time immemorial. As change becomes the constant of today’s corporate life (Porter.Leadership It is intriguing that the technologically oriented passing century has brought an increasing interest in leadership theory and practice. & Bigley. This is a disquieting state of affairs as we cross into a new century whose make up is bound to be more technological and more networked. Finkelstein & Hambrick. Yet in today’s fast-moving environment. this paper will depart from established practice and will offer the view that the upcoming challenges of the next century will necessitate a greater focus on and an increased use of transformational leadership. dyadic Course Instructor: Madan L. Charismatic leadership (Conger & Kanungo.. “…the accelerated pace of globalization and technological change requires management systems and organizational arrangements that are adroit in processing equivocality and sophisticated in cultivating cooperation across organizational and cultural boundaries. 1998). Bass. than the recent decades. 1990). From this latter perspective has been derived the notion of transactional leadership (Hater & Bass.g. Singer & Singer. By so doing. Only a few researchers have examined the impact of macro-organizational factors and characteristics on leadership behaviors (Hooijberg & Choi. Howell & Avolio.g. Tichy & Devanna. 1977. management practices and leadership. Gardner & Avolio. Our argument is that. think strategically. transformational leadership will have to subsume all traditionally promoted forms of leadership. Nor do the existing disjointed leadership models. 2000). Extant organizational theories have not fully plumbed the depth of the pits and obstacles to be bridged over. Pradhan 23 . Transformational leadership is usually seen as one of many types (Kuhnert & Lewis. maintain flexibility. is the toughest task and the truest test of great leadership. envision. Visionary or strategic leadership has been hailed by historians and rediscovered by management theorists (Finkelstein & Hambrick. For instance. Some even examine peripheral elements loosely linked to leadership styles. such as our separate conceptions of charismatic leadership (e.. Instead of investigating such micro-levels of leadership as the small-group.. provide enduring guidance on how to manage future structure forms. followers are rewarded for good performance and punished when their performance falls short of expectations. There have been several traditional categories of leadership. Branyiczki. 1989). 1987. 1999: 43). As Griesinger (1990: 496) put it. However. A plethora of recent papers examine the influence of leadership style on performance under various conditions (e. hence more challenging. organizations are facing more turbulent environments. According to Nanus (1992). the greater the interest in leadership theory and practice. transformational leadership (Bass. 1990). American leadership theories have also introduced a new type. 1998) and visionary or strategic leadership (e. 1990. Strategic leadership refers to the leader’s ability to anticipate. such as the Internet and corporate intranets. Technological changes derived from progress in IT. Pradhan 24 . several parameters are involved and change is the norm. These changes are shaping not only the type of organizations but also the management of these organizations. In addition. and a consequence of the rise of IT to dominance of the workplace. not just its most amenable subparts. The second part analyzes the concept of transformational leadership. The resulting syndromes may be many in number. managers must find new ways of managing their organizations. One element of the New Economy. whereas in a dynamic environment. We structure our argument in four parts. However. and rising Course Instructor: Madan L. 1994. Given this operational requirement. 1989). Their study. in order to address the issue theoretically. however. this is resulting in a democratization of the workplace. is the increasing number of knowledge workers. As these changes become more pervasive. the fourth and last part discusses avenues for research and practice. particularly in information technology (IT) and its derivatives. Technological and social change of this magnitude affects not only the organizational structure but also calls for either devising new sorts of leadership or. According to these authors. if an organization operates in an ever-changing environment. From the standpoint of governance and requisite leadership. A stable environment is characterized by fewer changes. Porter. we broaden our focus to the organizational level or its primary subsystems (Shrivastava & Nachman. We focus on transformational leadership at the macroorganizational level because effective transformational leaders are becoming increasingly concerned with moving the entire organization in new directions. The first major dimension of change that affects organizational governance is an external one: it is the rate of technological change and its resulting globalization. It is characterized by accelerated change. the internal macro-characteristics they cite determine the discretionary behavior of the leader. On the face of it. 1990). have examined the impact of macro-organizational characteristics on leadership behaviors. technology and formal structure. have forever changed the way we work – and even the way we live. both technological and social. Unfortunately. Nicholson (1998) enumerates seven deadly syndromes of management. matching the existing leadership modes to the principal categories of environmental challenge. Considerable change is taking place in technology. Yet. Changes in the external environment result in changes within the organization. The first part discusses the major changes in the external environment of today’s organizations. like Hooijberg and Choi (1998). it very much matters to organization whether they are confronting a rather stable or a very dynamic environment (Emery & Trist. this paper clusters the sources of environmental change into two broad categories that could yield a contextual environmental typology. The New Economy that is emerging as the way of the 21st century represents an accentuation of the characteristics of the ending decades of the 20th. D’Aveni. its leaders may have a tendency to develop flexibility to adjust to the changes in the external environment. Finally. To add to the contribution of those few researchers who. the extent and variety of change is overwhelming. considerable change is occurring in the workforce as a result of differential ethnic demographics and worker movements – whether solicited or unwelcome. focused primarily on such macro-characteristics of the organization as its size. The second dimension to consider embodies the cluster of internal response factors that are affecting the organizations that aim to survive and remain functional into the next century. at least. it would be helpful to reduce the categories of environmental change to two main clusters so as to obtain a 2x2 typology of environmental conditions of the usual manageable kind. they did not consider the impact of variables in the external environment. Osborn and Hunt (1975) noted that leaders adapt to the macroorganizational characteristics of the organizations within which they work. The third part presents our model of the relationship between the external environment and different patterns of transformational leadership. These social changes are compounded by rising public expectations concerning public ethics and corporate social responsibility. 1973. we have to examine the main change undercurrents that are sweeping industrialized economies. CHALLENGES FACING ORGANIZATIONS More than two decades ago.Leadership or individual levels. According to Nadler and Tushman (1990: 82): Envisioning…involves the creation of a picture of the future. Inspirational motivation. beyond their prescribed duties. Avolio and Bebb (1987) found that transformational leaders attract strong feelings of identity. Charisma involves not only the possession of personal characteristics but also the capacity to envision a future for the organization. 1987. the leader provides a vehicle for people to develop commitment. 1978. he/she must have the support of followers. Pawar & Eastman. of a desired future state with which people can identify and which can generate excitement. TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Transformational leadership (Avolio & Bass. 1997: 83). One away to translate this cluster of internal response variable is to adopt the classic characterization of organizations by Burns and Stalker (1961) into mechanistic or organic types. As the leader attempts to change the organization.Leadership expectations of greater workplace fairness and corporate social responsibility (Ackoff. it seems to be the way of the future because of the ever-increasing importance claimed by and ceded to teamwork. 1994. 1997. Inspirational motivation requires that the leader energize members of the organization. By creating vision. These two variables. In contrast. namely the rate of environmental change (of the external environment) and the degree of response of the organization to the knowledge management challenge (in other words. Bass. Leading such workers may require new approaches to leadership. Pradhan 25 . However. 1999). Burns. transformational leadership entails behaviors intended to move the organization in a new and more effective direction. Tichy & Devanna. whereas an organic structure is more flexible. In sum. 1985. a common goal around which people can rally. Transformational leaders communicate clearly the importance of the company’s mission and objectives to employees. It is important to note that the literature ascribes to transformational leadership four important characteristics: Charisma. 1981. Bass. Intellectual stimulation. charismatic leadership can be wasteful of organizational energies in that it implies the careful cultivation of traits and characteristics for followers to view in their leader (Gardner & Avolio. Flexibility ensures that the organization has the capacity to proact or respond quickly to changing competitive conditions and thus build or maintain a competitive advantage (Hill. Failure to receive such support may undermine the success of the newly privatized firm. individualized consideration and inspirational motivation to followers. 1986. Individualized consideration implies that the leader treats followers with respect and dignity and serves as a mentor. Bennis & Nanus. 1998). 1978). as such. to teach them to see difficulties as problems to be solved. Individualized consideration. its internal environment) constitute the dimensions of the typology we present in Figure 1 as the context for the analysis of leadership into four functional types. Drucker. and to emphasize rational solutions. 1998. transformational leadership is a shared process (Burns. 1989) refers to the sort of leadership in which leaders possess charisma and provide intellectual stimulation. Yukl. 1988. and a way for people to feel successful. 2000). 1998. Pawar & Eastman. Bass & Avolio. 1997). This characteristic brings to transformational leadership a measure of similarity to charismatic leadership. 1990: 83). Such clear communication allows fellow employees to strive. Transformational leadership also seeks a bonding between individual and collective interests allowing subordinates to work for transcendental goals (Bass. and often reach. A mechanistic structure is more rigid. “Transformational leaders create a dynamic organizational vision that often necessitates a metamorphosis in cultural values to reflect greater innovation” (Pawar & Eastman. Waldman. “The leader psychologically helps people act or perform in the face of challenging goals” (Nadler & Tushman. we discuss the concept of transformational leadership. Bass. Course Instructor: Madan L. Avolio. A citation from Bass (1990: 21) simply makes the point that: Intellectually stimulating leaders are willing and able to show their employees new ways of looking at old problems. & Goodheim. Before we present our typology. 1985. Because such leaders are able to formulate a clear vision. Because followers believe that the leader has extraordinary Course Instructor: Madan L. purely visionary leadership is a key trait of leadership.Leadership excitement and expectations. the degree of correspondence between the transformational process required by the organization’s position and the actual transformational leadership process. II. They are able both to unite followers and change followers’ goals and beliefs (Kuhnhert & Lewis. Transformational leaders’ organizations do better financially (Bass. Stable-Mechanistic Environment. what leadership modes are most adequate to meet them? Research on leadership (Westley & Mintzberg. the pure leadership modes generally envisioned may become increasingly dysfunctional in the future. The transformational leader will have to develop a new organizational culture. the effectiveness of a transformational leader is the result of three factors. According to Pawar & Eastman (1997). Hater & Bass (1988) found that managers identified independently as top performers were rated higher on transformational leadership than the randomly chosen group of ordinary managers. Our view is that a modicum of visionary leadership is a sine qua non feature of any leadership style. as opposed to being yet another leadership mode such as charismatic leadership or transformational leadership. their primary motivator to follow a leader would be the trading or the mere promise of tangible rewards according to Agency Theory. they are likely to motivate employees in sharing that vision. These are: the organization’s relative position on the continuum of organizational receptivity (openness to change). 1989) has discussed the concept of visionary or strategic leadership. possessing vision has been identified as a key trait of successful leaders. and the transformational leader’s capabilities for undertaking the appropriate transformational process. For Conger & Kanungo (1988). by focusing on ideas and creating a vision for their followers. Howell and Avolio (1993) found that transformational leadership directly and positively predicted unit-level performance. the external environment in which the organization operates plays a role in rendering executive actions more or less effective (Duncan. each a composite of transformational leadership with one of the other traditional “pure” modes. & Terborg. Throughout the literature. Singer & Singer. We are thus advancing the idea that the only viable forms of leadership in the 21st century will be those with a strong transformational content. one of its quintessential attributes. Because followers do not see any threats in the external environment. Stable-Organic Environment. Porter. 1990). 1990). However. In an empirical study on a sample of 78 managers. as well as new policies and strategies in hiring and motivating employees. Howell. Steers. Koh. SEARCHING FOR THE MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Recalling the looming challenges discussed above. Consequently. The most effective matching leadership style will be the transactional-transformational hybrid. In such a situation. 1987). In a study conducted in a different cultural setting (Singapore). Transformational leaders are effective for several reasons. Actually. 1985. although the literature appears silent on this point. Transformational leaders motivate subordinates to perform beyond expectations (Bass. 1995) found a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational performance. A transformational leader inspires change in the entire organization. 1988. it has to contain elements of transformational leadership. transformational leaders portray vivid representations of a future vision for followers. Empirical research (Hater & Bass. Koh. I. To sustain a viable leadership style. Pradhan 26 . He/she creates a vision for both managers and employees within the organization. The typology proposed in Figure 1 introduces four hybrid types of transformational leadership. This represents the case of a stable external environment with the firm having a mechanistic structure. 1990). & Avolio. 1972. & Terborg (1995) reported a high level performance of highschool students whose institutions were managed by charismatic leaders. followers will establish an exchange relationship with the leader. An emotional bond between leader and followers characterizes this leadership type likely to be most effective in the case of a stable external environment but an organic internal environment. Steers. new compensation and performance appraisal systems. 1993. be they charismatic or transformational. 1987). & Volberda. they will tend to comply with his or her decisions. For two reasons. Van den Bosch. and no fully appropriate characterization readily comes to mind.. Type IV is the most interesting mode of leadership. we temporarily describe it in Figure 1 as the “pure transformational” type. even though leaders cannot directly alter such factors. Future researchers should explore the extent to which such diffusion of transformational leadership skills is possible in an organization. Gibbons (1992) considered environmental complexity and scarcity as external factors influencing the form of the required transformational leadership. Secondly.Dynamic-Organic Environment. the leader may set the vision along with followers. Dynamic-Mechanistic Environment. Brown & Eisenhardt. However. they can take actions to reduce constraints. Ross. market conditions. and social influences limit the effectiveness of the transformational leader? Pfeffer (1977) suggests that organizational effectiveness depends on factors beyond the leader’s control such as economic conditions. whereby the organization operates in a dynamic environment and its internal environment is characterized by a matching flexible structure. visionary-transformational leadership is needed to create a discomfort with the current state and align followers with a vision capable of pointing the way and transforming the organization to meet looming challenges. serve as role models for their lower-level subordinates. Pradhan 27 . an effective strategy of instilling transformational leadership in an organization would be to provide transformational leadership training to top-level managers who will. government policies and technological change. 1998. III. As advocated by Pawar and Eastman (1997). To what extent do factors such as political constraints. In such an environment. The emerging literature on new organizational forms (e. unusual perspicacity and vision are needed for the leader to be able to steer his/her cumbersome and possibly clumsy ship in the midst of troubled waters. 1999. 1993. For want of its still elusive name. 1994). Carley & Lee. Dijksterhuis . 1989). Implications for Practice Course Instructor: Madan L. CONCLUDING REMARKS: IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Implications for Research Transformational leadership has a falling dominoes effect (Bass et al. Ross. 2000). First.Leadership qualities. our conceptual investigation of the appropriateness of leadership modes to environmental conditions has led us to discover an unknown fourth mode of leadership that the literature has still not properly explored.g. but it is still novel for the leadership literature. We propose that the most appropriate mode of leadership would be the charismatictransformational composite. expand choices and make the situation more favorable (Yukl. whereas procedures and decisions concerning work requirements are left to the discretion of employees – thus contributing actively to the democratization of the workplace at the same time as having meaningful leadership. (1987) found that the degree of transformational leadership behavior observed at a superior level was also seen at the next lower level of management. 1998. The pure transformational type of leadership has the appropriate managerial mind-set that allows the creation of strategic flexibility and develops human capital to have the skill sets appropriate to respond to a dynamic environment (Hill. And yet this is the case most worthy of analysis at the dawn of this upcoming technological century. The flexible internal environment allows employee empowerment and self-managed teams. Bass et al. This is the situation of the future.. it is the way of the future as more and more firms are likely to be structured organically according to new organizational forms (Bartlett & Ghoshal. In the unusual case of a dynamic external environment while the firm’s internal environment still remains mechanistic. we offer it as a subject for further exploration by the leadership research community. While temporarily calling this “missing mode” pure transformational leadership. Therefore. 1994) tries to capture its essence. economic conditions. The external environment does not pose any particularly threat because only few parameters are subject to frequent change. in turn. M.’ must now give way to integrating thinking and acting at all levels. B. Bartlett. 13: 7-19. & Bebb. New York: Free Press. Biography and the assessment of transformational leadership at the world-class level. Bass. A. Mahwah. C. 42 (2): 219-227. Leaders: The strategies for taking charge.. M. Boston: HBS Press. interdependent. K. & Nanus. G. 1994. M. M. A. Schriesheim (Eds.. Leadership. 1998. 1987. Avolio. New York: Wiley. envisioning. M.. New York: Harper & Row. H. P. Leadership and performance beyond expectation. Transformational leadership and the falling dominoes effect. B. 12: 73-87.. 1993. 1998). S. J. A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: Humor as a moderator of leadership effects. for it can make a big difference in the organization’s performance. B. Transformational leaders can be trained in areas such as critical evaluation and problem detection. M.. M. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. & Ghoshal. A. However. 14: 23-46. he/she can dramatically improve organizational effectiveness. R. In J. 1988. Howell. J. Avolio. M. impression management. The old model. “in an increasingly dynamic. Burns. ‘the top thinks and the local acts. Bass. transformational leadership can be taught and learned. communication skills for conveying a vision. L. 1990. military. Pradhan 28 . and unpredictable world. Hunt. A transformational leader should be able to formulate a vision that is both clear and appealing to her or his followers. (Winter): 19-31. Bass. B. B. Thousand Oaks. G. 1999. the transformational leader should articulate a strategy for bringing that vision to life. B.. J. J. Strategic Management Journal. The management of innovation. M.... M. New York: Harper & Row.). the process of change and development regarding the leader is generally a longterm effort that requires continual updating. J. and how to empower employees (Bass. B. J. B. B. 1998. London: Course Instructor: Madan L. Bass. W. & C. Bass. G. feedback and modification (Bass. Journal of Management. Lexington. S. Academy of Management Journal. L. Avolio. The first step in training managers to lead the transition to private enterprise should start by identifying the appropriate skills and abilities. R. MA: Lexington Books. Bennis. B. Avolio. Baliga. 1985.. J. B. and beyond. Transformational leadership. In addition to formulating the vision. To the extent that a transformational leader is inspirational and sets the guidelines for reaching organizational goals and objectives. & Eisenhardt.. Emerging leadership vistas: 2949. Transformational leadership: Industry. 1998). Bass. Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Dachler. B. Organizational Dynamics. & Avolio. B.Leadership According to Bass (1998). D. From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision.. 1978. J. Waldman. Beyond the M-form: Toward a managerial theory of the firm. CA: Sage.” As Senge (1990: 1) put it. L. it is simply no longer possible for anyone to figure it all out at the top. M. As Bass (1998: 80) points out: “Where it is in short supply. 1981. T. & Goodheim. Burns. Creating the corporate future. & Bass. M. B. 1987. 1961.. 1985. Brown. and educational impact. transformational leadership should be encouraged.” REFERENCES Ackoff. Group & Organization Studies. Competing on the edge: Strategy as structured chaos. J. charisma. & Sosik. & Stalker. & Kanungo. & Trist. H..). & Hitt. B. A.). Management challenges for the 21st century. of R. J. Where do new organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of coevolution. Finkelstein. & Hambrick. (with the part. Stamford. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1998. Impact of organizational evolution on leadership roles and behaviors. 1990. R. J. & Choi. New York: HarperBusiness. Howell.. Journal of Applied Psychology. B. 45: 1-18. 17: 313-327. MN: West Publ. 15: 478-499. M. Dijksterhuis. Ireland D. Organization Science. J. Kanungo (Eds. The impact of organizational characteristics on leadership effectiveness models: An examination of leadership in private and public sector organizations.A. 1994. Koh. 78: 891-902. (Winter): 7-17. D.Leadership Tavistock. W. Organizational Dynamics. Conger. 1988. F.. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Advances in Strategic Management. 16: 319- Course Instructor: Madan L. Academy of Management Journal. B. Drucker. The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and student performance in Singapore. In J. & Terborg. A.. P. Jung. Conger & R. 23: 32-58. 1998. Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions. & Avolio. New York: Free Press. J-S. Academy of Management Proceedings: B1-B8. Hill. D. Gardner. R. Human Relations. M. F. Administrative Science Quarterly. Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. CT: Jai Press. R. W.. I. Paul. S. B. W. Duncan. & Bass. 73: 695-702. F. Minneapolis-St. Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on Organizations. 42 (2): 208-218. K. locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business unit performance. Academy of Management Review. 1992. 1999. Dynamic organizations: organizational adaptation in a changing environment. L. 13: 43-57. 15: 269-297. Hater. Steers. 1972. Pradhan 29 . New York: Plenum. Hypercompetition. R. D’Aveni. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership. Griesinger. R. A. R. & Avolio. transactional leadership. M. M.. W. 1995.. Transformational leadership. J. 1999. Hooijberg. Gunther).. 1973. Baum (Ed. J. L. 1999. A. The charismatic relationship: A dramaturgical perspective. Gibbons. 1998. & Avolio.. J. Towards a social ecology. 2000. J. P. Academy of Management Executive. In J... & Lee. Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. 10 (5): 569-582. H. J. 1999. Superiors’ and subordinates’ evaluation of transformational and transactional leadership. N. A. The new frontier: Transformation of management for the new millennium. Academy of Management Review. D. The human side of economic organization. L. E. Emery. 1988.. J.C. E. T. 1993. Carley. 1996. A. B. Van den Bosch. M... N. J. & Volberda. Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. S.. . G. Hunt & L. New York: Free Press. L. & Tushman. F. CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-of management and levels-of-analysis effects. N. and satisfaction. Sloan Management Review. & Bigley. 1987. & Eastman. Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. M. 24: 266-285. J. L. 1992. & Mintzberg. 11: 148-162. M. P. C. J. 1994.. (Journal of) Strategic Change. Pearce. A. M. Kent. S. 19: 411-426. 15: 251-289. 1998. An adaptive-reactive theory of leadership: The role of macro-variables in leadership research. Osburn. M. Journal of Social Psychology. H. G.. & Devanna. 130: 385-396. The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: A conceptual examination. 2000.). Yukl. D. An improved organizational concept for high-technology firms. P. D. Porter. J. H. Pawar.. subordinates’ leadership preference. Senge. Kuhnhert. Managerial and Decision Economics. A. Academy of Management Review. 1998..A. 32: 77-97. E. S. 1986. E. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Covert leadership: Notes on managing professionals. Leadership frontiers. 1989. 10: 17-32. 12: 640-657. J. 1989. S. K. New York: Wiley. L. & Nachman. & Hunt. Pfeffer. M. In J.. S. A. Academy of Management Review. OH: Kent University Press. P.. Competitive strategy. Nigel. Journal of Management. G. N. Academy of Management Review. B. Tichy. 1990. Harvard Business Review (November-December): 140-147.. B. G. 1989.. The transformational leader. 1999. A. Course Instructor: Madan L.. 2: 104-112. Visionary leadership and strategic management. Westley. W. 3: 341-355. The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. 1977. The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review. Larson (Eds. Strategic Management Journal. Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Insufficient bureaucracy: Trust and commitment in particularistic organizations. 1975. 1989. 10: 51-66. Waldman. I. Singer. Strategic Management Journal. Seven deadly syndromes of management and organization: The view from evolutionary psychology. K. & Yammarino. Organization Science. F. 22: 80-109. California Management Review. 1990.. A. Nanus. Situational constraints on transactional versus transformational leadership behavior. & Lewis.. Nicholson. 1980. Nadler. Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. Pradhan 30 . Branyiczki. (Fall): 1-17 Shrivastava. R. K. Ross.Leadership 333. Visionary leadership. 1997. & Singer. Mintzberg. Strategic leadership patterns. All managers are. Ability to change managerial style to suit the occasion 58 This list is a mix of abilities or skills (1.Leadership (Additional Readings on Leadership) Leaders have a key role to play in developing effective organizations. The members of the group do not need to be made comfortable. Ability to make deals and negotiate 66 7. leaders: they can only do their job with the support of their team. A need to achieve results 75 4. But what are the factors that influence and develop these qualities? A study of chief executives in the UK produced the following ranked list of influences on success: Rating out of 100 1. 2. Wide experience in many functions 68 6. 3. WHAT IS LEADERSHIP? Leadership is achieving results through people. energies and talents of the team. It happens when there is an objective to be reached or a task to be carried out. Ability to work with people 78 2. But if they achieve something worth while together they will gain satisfaction from that. And as Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus (9) conclude: Leaders articulate and define what has been previously implicit or unsaid. and when more than one person is needed to do it. To gain the commitment and cooperation of their team. in fact. 5 and 9). 7. then they invent images. They build up the morale of their groups. To make the best use of the skills. and have the ability to set the direction and take people with them. who must be inspired or persuaded to follow them. To meet this overall aim leaders have three main objectives: 1. have a very clear idea of what they want to do about those issues. In short. Leadership experiences early in career 74 5. Successful leadership sometimes seems to depend on having the right qualities at the right time. As John Kotter (33) has written: The direction-setting aspect of leadership does not produce plans. they consolidate or challenge prevailing wisdom. gain commitment to achieving the organization's mission and motivate them to achieve their goals. These describe a business. 6. Early responsibility for important tasks 75 3. They are nurtured by experience and the situations in which potential and existing Course Instructor: Madan L. Ability to have better ideas than colleagues 62 9. by definition. not grudging submission. It highlights the fact that natural abilities are only part of the picture. By so doing. The overall aim of leaders is to achieve the task with the help of their group. To get the group into action to achieve agreed objectives. Willingness to take risks 63 8. 3. 8 and 10) and the types of experience which have developed those abilities (2. Leaders aim to get people to do what they think is necessary by obtaining willing cooperation. Leadership is therefore about encouraging and inspiring individuals and teams to give of their best to achieve a desired result. technology or corporate culture in terms of what it should become over the long term and articulate a feasible way of achieving this goal. Pradhan 31 . They set people in the right direction. an essential factor in leadership is the capacity to influence and organize meaning for members of the organization. it creates visions and strategies. Having talents 'stretched' by immediate bosses 60 10. LEADERSHIP QUALITIES Effective leaders focus on a fairly small range of key issues. metaphors and models that provide a focus for new attention. they will often be under pressure to do more than they would if left to their own devices. which will be high when the group is productive and works well together. 4. success factors and personality trails. Sir John Harvey-Jones of ICI. • • • • • • • • • TYPES OF LEADER Leaders can be defined in terms of characteristics. Bill Richardson (51) suggests that visionary leaders are: • • Relatively comfortable in situations of ambiguity and can live without hard-and-fast answers until trends and solutions emerge Seldom original . people who see and do things differently. their new approaches are based on making connections between what is happening somewhere else and how it might be applied to their own area Seekers of excellence. In the words of Tom Peters (46): 'The vision and managers' consistent. To answer the question 'Who is a leader?' it is also helpful to exploit how these combine to produce different types of leader. a positive attitude and a combination of the qualities of courage. capable of ensuring that the meaning and implications of their vision are shared throughout the organization Calculated risk-takers Fixers. shrewdness and common sense. VISIONARY LEADERSHIP Visionary leaders have the capacity or the gift to create or reorientate organizations towards success. Leadership is largely an acquired skill.they listen but they make up their own minds Achievement orientated they are determined to obtain results and to find ways around the obstacles which inevitably confront the visionary as new ideas are pushed to fruition Reward orientated they want rewards. and their cool. in the sense that Tom Peters (46) expressed it: 'fix what's been wrong in every place you've been' Independent . Examples include Jan Carl/on of SAS. Non-charismatic leaders rely mainly on their know-how.their visions are formed by listening and observing. although experience may have taught them how best to project themselves. their ability to give an impression of quiet confidence. is the sea anchor. their personality and their inspirational qualities. financial and non-financial. or unconventional insiders . daily actions in support of it. These are natural characteristics. seeing mismatches between how things are done now and how they could be improved Orientated towards action . a leader needs intelligence. which recognize their achievements Optimistic they believe the world is full of opportunities and that most things are possible. They are able to envision what the organization should become and what it should achieve and to ensure that their vision is realized. Leadership types can be classified in a number of ways and the following are some of the most typical categorizations: 1.Leadership leaders have found themselves.' Visionary leaders can be mavericks.they prefer to talk rather than to write or plan Good communicators. recruited into an organization. Barry Sullivan of First Chicago.people from within the organization who clearly hold different views from the mainstream about how the organization should operate. Charismatic leaders rely on their aura. Lord King and Sir Colin Marshall of British Airways. the basis for keeping people from running around as the waves of change toss them to and fro. analytical approach to dealing with problems. and Jack Welch of General Electric. Pradhan 32 . They are often outsiders. Course Instructor: Madan L. Charismatic/non-charismatic. To start with. Successful leaders build on these natural talents as they gain experience and develop the wide range of skills they need. The leader's role is to ensure that the group's purpose is fulfilled.Leadership 2. eventually perhaps. the degree to which the situation is structural or ambiguous.that is why their group exists. The situation comprises the nature of the task. and within the group. the result is frustration. is related to both the leadership style and the degree to which the situation provides the leader with the Opportunity to exert influence. Not only does the situation affect the type of leadership required but it will also create conditions under which new and different types of leader will emerge who are appropriately qualified to meet changing demands. The visionary/enablers inspire people with their vision of the future. 2. THE ROLE OF THE LEADER Leaders have two essential roles. 3. Pradhan 33 . Autocratic/democratic. These three needs are interdependent and are best expressed as three overlapping circles. In these circumstances the group is ready to be directed and told what to do. and the type of authority the leader has . They can be divided into those concerned with the team and its morale and sense of common purpose. Fiedler called this his contingency theory of leadership and emphasized the situational aspects of being a leader: Leadership performance then depends as much on the organization as on the leader's own attributes. criticism and. culture and environment. Group needs . If it is not. The latter will do better in a somewhat unstructured or ambiguous situation. formal backing and a relatively well simciured task. the impact of the organization . and transformational leaders who motivate others to strive for higher-order goals rather than merely short-term interest. the sort of people in the working group. Controller/manipulators are concerned mainly with operating the internal system. In emergency or crisis conditions the task-orientated leader is likely to be more effective than the considerate leader who is concerned with interpersonal relationships. Except perhaps for the unusual case. it is simply not meaningful to speak of an effective leader or an ineffective leader. Maintain effective relationships .to harmonize the needs of the individual with the needs of the task and the group. These relationships are effective if they are conducive to achieving the task. The visionary/enabler or the controller/manipulator. jobs and security for compliance. disintegration of the group. and those concerned with individuals and how they are motivated. They have to: 1. or where his or her power as a leader is restricted. John Adair (1) has suggested that these demands are best expressed as three areas of need which leaders are there to satisfy. as Fielder (18) pointed out. 3.to build up and maintain team spirit. Autocratic leaders impose their decisions and tend to surround themselves with yes-men. 4. These are: 1. Democratic leaders encourage people to participate and involve themselves in decisiontaking.given or assumed. THE LAW OF THE SITUATION The type of leadership exercised and success as a leader depend to a large extent on the situation and the leader's ability to understand its and act accordingly.its policies. They will exert their authority to achieve results but will rely more on know-how and persuasive ability than the use of position power. They use their position to force people to do what they are told. Transactional or transformational. Individual needs . The performance of a group. Task needs .to get the job done 2. His research indicated that a task orientated approach worked best for leaders in the favourable conditions when the leader has power. Achieve the task . Course Instructor: Madan L. we can only speak of a leader who tends to be effective in one situation and ineffective in another. Burns (10) distinguishes between transactional leaders who exchange money.between themselves and the members of the group. disharmony. Close cooperation between the three areas under his control was essential. 13. 6. What sort of issues are likely to motivate them? 17. 14. Edward Smith Ted Smith was the planning manager in a large engineering works.emphasized throughout the need for teamwork ami demonstrated his commitment by ensuring that at interdcpariMKiit. gave instructions and. 1 k. 5. measured and a little bit distant. 12. discussed problems. 9. the people involved. In each case the style was influenced by three factors: the environment. 11. What needs to be done and why? What results have to be achieved? What problems have to be overcome? Is the solution to these problems straightforward or is there a measure of ambiguity? Is this a crisis situation? What is the time-scale for completing the task? What pressures are going to be exerted on the leader? The team 8. Pradhan 34 . He had to be cool. and the personality of the manager. How are they likely to respond leadership techniques or styles the leader may adopt? Case studies The following are descriptions of the leadership style deployed by three highly effective managers.Leadership LEADERSHIP CHECKLIST The task 1. 7. 2. Charismatic-type leadership was out. And the latter were encouraged to meet their tectioni regularly. It was a highly responsible job and his staff included highly qualified engineers as well as large numbers of clerks doing routine work. Ted's job was to make sure that his departments ran like clockwork. Sometimes he would deliberately throw his managers a problem and tell them to go away and solve it. What is the composition of the team? How well is the team organized? Do the members of the team work well together? What will they want to get out of this? How can the commitment of this particular team be achieved? How are results to be obtained by satisfying their needs? How are they likely to respond to the various leadership styles or approaches which may be adopted? The individuals in the team 15. and let him know the outcome ol" their actions. 10. He had some 200 people working in the departments under his control who dealt with process planning. At these meetings he was prepared to switch quickly from being someone who knew exactly what he wanted and who expected people to do exactly as they were told (because it was sensible and right for them to do so) to someone who was prepared to listen to different views. 3. The only time he was ever seen to express anger was when work suffered because of of each member to the of the individually various Course Instructor: Madan L. weigh them up and decide. Everyone in the deportment had to believe he knew what he was doing and what he wanted. Ted also ensured that his managers transmitted the content of these meetings down to first line MipctvitOI level. calm. shop loading and production control. What are the strengths and weaknesses team? 16. as and when necessary.il meetings problems of lack of cooperation or poor communications were given priority. 4. He therefore held regular meetings with all his subordinates at which he quickly and efficiently reviewed progress. Everyone had to know exactly what to do and when they had to do it. Staff were deliberately kept to a minimum at headquarters and Jones had only four executives responsible directly to him.he knows his stuff and he's right'. Robinson was a despot. Business was highly competitive and the pressures on maintaining. although a benevolent one. The firm had grown fast by acquisition and was highly decentralized. Robinson's management style was rumbustious. He therefore had to consult on any changes or innovations he wished to introduce and. also responsible for the implementation of group personnel policies in each of the divisions and on these matters the divisional personnel directors were responsible to him. Jones adopted a highly informal. But his deep understanding of the business and his ability to think faster on his feet than anyone else meant that. He led. markets and people had to be made often and quickly. He could only influence them. He did not suffer fools gladly and he cracked down on any repeated inefficiencies or mistakes. in most cases. He gave them broad guidelines on how they should develop their ideas in the divisions but encouraged them to think and act for themselves. Pradhan 35 . while his autocratic behaviour was sometimes resented at the time. At meetings of the executive directors he would sometimes say that he wanted the views of those present but stated quite clearly that he had already made up his mind and would Deed I lot of convincing to change it. and he felt that he had to get genuine acceptance for new policies before they could be introduced. market share were considerable. This was simply because they knew he could accomplish whatever was required in the volatile environment in which they worked. under the watchful eyes of 'big fat Nellie' behind the bar. they followed. Elwyn Jones Elwyn Jones was the personnel director of a large conglomerate in the food industry with over 80. He adopted precisely the same approach with the divisional personnel directors. Jones was not in a position to dictate to divisions what he wanted them to do.which he did. almost permissive approach. however. those subjected to it would say on almost every occasion 'you've got to give it to the old so-and-so . he had to solicit cooperation on the testing of new ideas. he consumed pink gins with his colleagues and discussed strategies on entirely equal terms. never mind increasing. With his headquarters staff. and the chairman and the key institutions (who were represented by the non-executive directors on the board) relied implicitly on his judgement. James Robinson Jim Robinson was the managing director of a medium-sized business (1000 employees) in the fast-moving consumer goods sector of industry. He had come up the hard way and his experience had always been in similar firms. He made the key decisions himself. Course Instructor: Madan L. but they let Robinson get on with it as long as he delivered the results they wanted . He was more likely to withdraw to the local pub where. He knew much more about the business as a whole than any of the other four executive directors.Leadership feuds between departments. He was. Tough decisions about products. of course) and spent a pleasant couple of days talking generally about their mutual interests. There was a non-executive chairman and three outside non-executive directors on the board. although once or twice a year they all got together in a country hotel (one recommended by the Good Food Guide. He never called a formal meeting.000 employees.