Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-1 Chapter 3 Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-1

Chapter 3

Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership


Learning Objectives

Identify the three major eras in the study of leadership and their contributions to modern leadership

Explain the methods, results, shortcomings, and contributions of the trait and behavioral approaches to leadership and identify their impact on current approaches

Present the principles of a contingency approach to leadership

Discuss the most significant early theories of leadership and their implications for current theory and practice of leadership


Eras of Modern Leadership

The trait era – 1800s to mid 1940s

Focus on leader personality

The behavior era – mid 1940s to 1970s

Focus on leader behavior

The contingency era – early 1960s to present

Focus on understanding both the leader and the leadership situation


The Trait Era – Assumptions and Findings

Assumptions

Leaders are born

Leaders have special characteristics and traits

Leaders and followers have different traits

Findings

No single trait or set of traits clearly define leaders

Traits play a minimal role

Traits are not the dominant factor in leadership


The Behavior Era – Assumptions and Findings

Assumptions

Behaviors rather than traits matter

Behaviors are observable and measureable

Behaviors can be taught

Findings

Key behaviors are task/structuring and relationships/ consideration

Behaviors alone do not determine effective leadership

No clear findings as to which behaviors are most effective


Examples of Major Leadership Behaviors

Task – Structuring

Set goals

Clarify expectations

Set schedules and timelines

Assign tasks

Relationships - Consideration

Show empathy and understanding

Be friendly and approachable

Allow participation

Nurture followers


The Contingency Era – Assumptions and Findings

No one best way to lead

Simple traits or behaviors alone do not explain or predict leadership

Understanding both leader trait/ behavior and situation is needed

Personal and situational factors affect leadership effectiveness


Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Leadership effectiveness is a function of the match or fit between leader’s style and the leadership situation

The leaders’ style has a trait-like quality and cannot be changed from one situation to another

The leader must change the situation to fit his/her style


Elements of Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Leadership

The leaders’ style

Task or relationship motivation measured by the LPC scale

Situational control

Leader-member relations

Task structure

Position power


Task and Relationship-Motivated Leaders

Task- Motivated (Low-LPC)

Draws self-esteem from task completion

Focuses on task first

Can be harsh with failing followers

Considers competence a key follower trait

Enjoys details

Relationship-Motivated (High-LPC)

Draws self-esteem from interpersonal relationships

Focuses on people first

Likes to please others

Considers loyalty to be key follower trait

Gets bored with details


Fiedler’s Contingency Model - Predictions

SITUATIONAL CONTROL

GROUP

PERFORMANCE

High

Low

HIGH MODERATE LOW

GOOD BAD

HIGH LOW

HIGH LOW

HIGH

LOWLOWHIGH HIGH HIGH

LOW

Low-LPC

High-LPC

HIGH

Leader-Member Relations

Task structure

Position Power


Practical Implications of Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Leaders must understand their own style and their leadership situation

Leaders should focus on changing their leadership situation to match their style rather than try to change their style

A good relationship with followers is key to a leaders’ ability to lead

Leaders can seek training to compensate for lack of task structure


The Normative Decision Model

Leaders are effective when they use decision styles that match the situation

Leaders can learn to change and use different decision styles

Understanding the leadership situation is essential to effectiveness


Elements of the Normative Decision Model

The leaders’ decision style

Autocratic

Consultative

Group/delegation

Situational contingency factors

Quality of the decision

Acceptance of decision by subordinates


Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model

Quality requirements (QR)

Commitment requirement (CR)

Leader information (LI)

Structure of the problem (ST)

Commitment probability (CP)

Goal congruence (GC)

Employee conflict (CO)

Subordinate information (SI)


Practical Implications of the Normative Decision Model

Leaders must understand their leadership situation

Leaders must learn different decision styles

Participation is not always desirable

Leaders’ must pay attention to their followers’ needs and reactions when making decisions


Path-Goal Theory

The leaders’ primary role is to motivate followers to complete their task by removing obstacles

The leader must change his/her behaviors based on needs of the followers


Path-Goal Theory

Effectiveness: Employee

satisfaction and motivation

Leaders’ Actions: Focus on obstacle

removal Become comfortable

with both task and consideration behaviorsUnderstand followers’

perception

Leaderstructuring and

consideration

Situationalcontingencies:Task structureEmployee need

for autonomy


Practical Implications of Path-Goal Theory

Leaders must understand their followers’ perception of the task

Leaders must take their followers’ need for challenge and autonomy into consideration

When followers need challenge or the task is challenging, leaders must avoid being directive

When the task is routine, boring or stressful, leaders must be supportive


Substitute for Leadership Model (SLM)

There are some situations where leaders are not needed

Various factors can substitute for leadership behaviors or neutralize the leader’s actions

Leaders must learn to recognize situations and use appropriate behaviors


SLM: Follower Characteristics

Experience and training substitute for leader structuring

Follower professionalism substitute for leader consideration and structuring

Lack of value for goals neutralizes leader consideration and structuring


SLM: Task Characteristics

Unambiguous tasks substitute for leader structuring

Direct feedback from task substitutes for leader structuring and consideration

Challenging tasks substitute for leader consideration


SLM: Organizational Characteristics

A cohesive team substitutes for leader structuring and consideration

Leaders’ lack of power neutralizes structuring and consideration

Standardization and formalization substitute for leader structuring

Organizational rigidity neutralizes leader structuring

Physical distance from followers neutralizes structuring and consideration


Practical Implications of the SLM

Leaders can use various substitutes to free up their time or to empower and develop followers

Technology can support the development of substitutes

Teams and autonomous work groups can use substitutes positively


Leader-Member Exchange Model (LMX)

Leadership is a personal relationship between leaders and each of their followers

Leaders do not treat every follower the same way

Every follower does not experience leadership the same way

Leaders have closer and richer relationships with followers in their in-group than with those who are in out-group


LMX

FF

FF

FF

FF

FF

FF

FF

F4F4

F3F3

F1F1

F2F2

F5F5

FF

Leader

In-GroupOut-Group

FFFollower/Subordinate


Stages of LMX

Development of Trust

Creation of Emotional Bond

Testing and Assessment


Practical Implications of LMX

Avoid highly differentiated groups

Keep membership fluid and dynamic

Maintain different in-groups for different activities

Base in-group membership on performance and potential

Review criteria for in-group membership regularly

Consider culture when determining membership


Leadership Challenge

India is a vertical collectivistic culture where group membership determines one’s worth

Office manager is acting in accordance with his culture

Carefully evaluate the consequences of not hiring the “cousin”

In-groups are formed differently in different cultures


Leading Change: Goodnight

Challenging work, flexible hours, and many benefits keep employees happy

Goodnight believes in removing obstacles to let employees do their job

He provides opportunities for challenge and performance

The role of the leader at SAS is to facilitate employee performance


Leadership in Action: Caring Dictator

Highly successful leader and organization

Hartnett is autocratic and non-participative

Hartnett provides clear goals and rules

Caring father figure

Careful selection of managers and employees who fit the organization

Leadership works because it fits the situation


All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted,

in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United

States of America.

Documents

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-1 Chapter 3 Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership