Chapter 6

Some leaders are visionaries

Others use their position of power

Others persuade us to do what they want

Basics of leadershipWhat is leadershipRelationship between leaders and followersHow leaders are chosen or emerge

Personality theoryBehavioural theoryLeadership effectivenessContingency Theories

1 .Fiedler’s contingency theory2.Normative theory3-Path-goal theory

Gender differences

leadershipYukl (1994)

“the process through which one member of a group (its leader) influences other group members towards the attainment of group goals.”

1.Leadership is about how a person exerts social influence.

2. The leader is a member of a group and to be effective must be recognised and accepted as the leader (otherwise the leader will have to use power, if he has it)

3. Leadership is about the attainment of group goals. The goals of the leader should coincide with the goals of the group.

Leadership as powerFrench and Raven (1956) updated by Raven (1993)

description exampleReward power

Ability of the leader to provide what others want or remove what they dislike

Referent powerA leader is respected and

looked up to by other members. The leader emphasises the identity of the group and provides a sense of common identity

Manager in an organisation has the power to promote a worker and/or give higher salary

The leader is a role model. The power is maintained as long as the person is respected

Informational powerThe leader may have

privileged access to information s/he uses in a logical argument to persuade the other members

Legitimate powerThe other members accept

the rules and norms of the leader and consider the leader as properly occupying the position.

The Chief executive of an organisation knows more about, for ex., a take-over bid

Army generalsHeads of Government who

are democratically elected. Legitimate power disappears when the person no longer occupies the position

Expert powerThe leader has a high

level of knowledge and is recognised as having a superior ability in a specialised area

Coercive power the leader has the ability

to threaten and/or punish the group members. If they do not conform to the leader’s wishes.

A professor of psychologyA foot-ball player

Use of this power often results in group members obeying the leader, especially where the punishment may involve death or imprisonment.

Power and leadershipThese types of power can be used by the

same leader at different times.

EXAMPLES?

LEADERS AND FOLLOWERSLeaders exist if they have followersLooking at leadership as social influence and the use

leaders make of different types of power fails to capture the reciprocal influence that followers have on leaders.

Lee (1991) claims that effective followers are essential for effective leaders (enthusiastic, committed and self-reliant)

Senge (1990) asserts that organisations who are able to respond to change and to learn about the needs of their customers have leaders empowering the workers. Workers feel that they are part of the decision-making process.

Four categories of followersLee (1991)YES FollowersActive toward leader and job /Low on critical thinkingSheepPassive toward leader and job/low on critical thinkingAlienated followersPassive towards leader and job/High on critical

thinkingEffective followersActive toward leader and job/High on critical thinking

Choosing a leaderLeaders achieve their position by a variety of

means.In democratic countries leaders receive the

support of the people from the votes cast.Dictators may achieve their position through a

military coup.Some leaders inherit their position (the Queen

and the hereditary peers in Britain).In many organisation leaders (such as the C.E.O)

are appointed on the basis of their ability, experience and visionary qualities.

Personality and leadership

EXERCISE!

Think about two people you regard as great leaders.

Write a short description of each.

Personality and leadershipPsychologists have tried to find those personalities traits or characteristics that set great leaders apart from other people

GREAT PERSONALITY THEORY

Personality and leadership two assumptions:

1. a small number of personality traits are associated with great leaders

2. that such characteristics are inherited and not learned through socialisation and experience

Empirical evidence has failed to provide support to either claims, but especially the idea that leaders possess certain special personality traits.

For example, Dean Simonton (1987, 2001) gathered information about one hundred personal attributes of all U.S. presidents, such as their family backgrounds, educational experiences, occupations, and personalities.

Only three of these variables—height, family size, and the number of books a president published before taking office—correlated with how effective the presidents were in office.

Tall presidents, those from small families, and those who have published books are most likely to become effective leaders, as rated by historians.

The other ninety-seven characteristics, including personality traits, were not related to leadership effectiveness at all.

Personality and leadershipMann (1959) conducted a review of over 100

studies which had attempted to correlate different personality traits with leadership.

Only weak evidence was found for leaders possessing the traits of intelligence, extraversion, dominance and sensitivity to other.

It was found that leaders tend to be slightly taller than average. (we choose the leader that fits our stereotype “size matters) “Eagly and Karau , (1991).

Mullen et al. (1989) suggest that only two traits seem to offer correlation with leadership: intelligence and talkativeness. (the act of talking makes a person prominent in a group. Mullen et al.(1989)

Five reasons why this approach failed

1. No central personality traits clearly correlate with leadership

2. The trait approach does not take account of the situation or the context where the leader is operating.

3. The idea that a group possesses just one leader is often incorrect.

4. The focus on the person rather than on the situation may be an example of the fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977) “too much emphasis on personality factor and too little on situation”. (e.g. Only a minority of the population are personally acquainted with the Prime Minister)

5. The great person theory cannot predict in advance who will become a leader.

Characteristics of successful leaders(Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991)There has been a recent revival of interest in the “trait approach”.

Drawing upon both traditional personality traits but also characteristics representing knowledge and experience, K&L suggest 8 characteristics of successful leaders.

1.Drive: desire to succeed2.Honesty and integrity : trustworthiness, reliability.3.Leadership motivation: desire to achieve shared

outcomes.4.Self-confidence: trust in leadership ability5.Cognitive ability: ability to deal with complex

information.6.Knowledge of the business7.Creativity : original, visionary thinking8.Flexibility: ability to respond and adapt to change.

Behavioural theory of leadership

Another way in which psychologists can remain focussed on the individual is to look at the actual behaviour performed by leaders. This approach has been much more productive over time and remains of contemporary importance.

It Implies that leaders can be trained – focus on the way of doing things.

60 years ago Hemphill (1950) conducted a ground-breaking study in which a large number of people rated the behaviour of leaders on a thousand different aspects.

Statistical analysis revealed two main behavioural dimensions: group-centred and directive behaviours.

Behavioural stylesGroup centred or “consideration” behaviours

are those shown by a leader considering interpersonal relationships in the group, developing a sense of trust between group members and looking after the emotional well-being of the group.

By contrast, directive behaviours or “initiating structure” are more related to the task the group faces and include allocating tasks to the group members, ensuring norms and rules are upheld, ensuring performance measures.

Behavioural stylesStogdill (1974)characterised these two behavioural

styles as two independent dimensions with each along a high-low continuum.

It might seem that if a leader is high on one dimension then the s/he will be low on the other dimension.

But the two are not mutually excluding dimensions.A leader con be high, moderate or low on both

dimensions.

Is there a combination that is better for effective leadership?

Behavioural stylesBlake and Mouton (1985) found that leaders who

are high on both dimensions, or can be trained to be so, lead teams to high level of performance.

Bales and Slater (1955) discovered similar behavioural styles to initiating structure and consideration the task leader and the socio-emotional leader.

In contrast to Stogdill they claimed that different people occupied these leadership roles.

While there may be disagreement over whether one leader can or cannot occupy these two roles, these two leadership styles do seem fundamental, and have been found to apply in many different contexts and in different cultures (Bass, 1990).

Behavioural stylesLippet and White (1943) had a different

approach in their highly influential and classic study.

These researchers investigated the effects of three leadership styles – autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire – on group productivity, group atmosphere and how well group members liked their leader.

The research was conducted using adult leaders with schoolboys working on tasks such as making models from bars of soap.

Behavioural styleAutocratic leaderGives order, primarily

task-oriented, aloof from group members

Democratic leaderAsks for suggestions,

discusses and interacts with group members

Laissez-faire leaderLeaves group to make

own decisions, not directive, does not intervene

Not well liked by group members, dependent group atmosphere, high productivity when present.

Liked by group members, positive and friendly group atmosphere, good productivity when leader present or absent.

Not well liked by g.m., friendly group atmosphere, poor productivity with leader present and absent.

Types of Leadership StyleAutocratic:

Leader makes decisions without reference to anyone else

High degree of dependency on the leaderCan create de-motivation and alienation

of staffMay be valuable in some types of business

where decisions need to be made quickly and decisively

Types of Leadership StyleDemocratic:

Encourages decision making from different perspectives – leadership may be emphasised throughout the organisationConsultative: process of consultation before

decisions are takenPersuasive: Leader takes decision and seeks to

persuade others that the decision is correct

Types of Leadership StyleDemocratic:

May help motivation and involvementWorkers feel ownership of the firm and its

ideasImproves the sharing of ideas

and experiences within the businessCan delay decision making

Types of Leadership StyleLaissez-Faire:

‘Let it be’ – the leadership responsibilities are shared by all

Can be very useful in businesses where creative ideas are important

Can be highly motivational, as people have control over their working life

Can make coordination and decision making time-consuming and lacking in overall direction

Relies on good team workRelies on good interpersonal relations

Fiedler’s contingency theoryFiedler’s (1965, 1971, 1981) contingency theory of

leadership draws on Bales’ finding that small group often have two leaders.

In order to predict leadership effectiveness Fiedler stated that an assessment of the situational favourableness had to be made. For Fiedler, leadership effectiveness is contingent, or depends upon, the behavioural styles and whether the situation is favourable or unfavourable.

Fiedler developed what has come to be a well known measure of leadership style through the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale.

LPC scaleThe LPC scale asks a leader to think about a

person whom s/he found it difficult to work with. The scale uses 16 bipolar adjectives with an 8 point scale.

Pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 unpleasant

Friendly Unfriendly

Warm cold

Interesting boring

efficient inefficient

Co-operative

Unco-operative

What type of leader are you?

LPC scaleLeaders who generally show positive attitude

to their LPC are categorised as socio-emotional leaders, while those who show a negative attitude to their LPC are task-oriented leaders.

Scores can range from 8 to 48 with a low score indicating a socio-emotional leader and a high score a task oriented leader.

Fiedler’s contingency theoryTo assess the situation, Fiedler used three

indicators:1.Leader-follower relationships. Categorised as

good or poor.2.The task structure- whether the task set the

group was clear and unambiguous or not. Categorised as high or low.

3.Position of power of the leader- whether or not the leader has authority over the other members in the group. Categorised as strong or weak.

Since these three situational factors are categorised as a dichotomy eight different situations are described as a result and an overall assessment of situation favourableness (favourable, moderate or unfavourable) is made.

Finally Fiedler predicted that task oriented leaders would be most effective in highly favourable situations (I, II and III) and unfavourable situations (VII and VIII), while socio-emotional leaders would be effective in moderately favourable situations (IV, V, VI)

The logic behind it is:That unfavourable situations require a leader to

give guidance and direction.In highly favourable situations relationship

between GM are good, the task is clear, thus allowing the task oriented leader to concentrate and successfully achieve the group goals.

Moderately favourable situations require a leader to support GM in order to improve interpersonal relationships so that the group can then move on to deal with the group task. Fiedler found that leader-follower relationships are the most important situational factors in moderately favourable situations.

30 years of research on Fiedler’s theoryStrube and Carcia (1981) conducted a meta

analytic review of over 170 studies and generally found strong support for the theory.

Peter et al. (1985) reviewed both laboratory and field studies and found much less support for the theory from the latter group.

Criticism of Fiedler’s contingency theory1. LPC scale is not a stable measure2. As leader become more experienced they may

change their leadership style.3. The three components of situational

favourableness are quite difficult to assess.4. Field studies have provided less support to

the theory.The theory has given great insight into leadership effectiveness. More research in “real-life”settings is needed to refine the LPC scale and better asses situational favourableness is needed.

Normative theoryOne of the key tasks faced by any leader is that of

decision-making, and when working with a small group of people one matter that Fielder’s theory is silent about concerns the extent to which the followers should participate in decision making.

Should the leader be autocratic and make decisions without consultation and involvement of other GM?

Should the leader reach a decision through participation and consensus?

This is at the heart of Vroom and Yelton’s (1973) normative theory of leadership.

They suggest three basic styles of leadership decision-making1.Autocratic

Leader makes decisions unilaterally and without follower participation or involvement

2 ConsultativeLeader consults with GM and the makes decision unilaterally

3.Group decision- leader consults and seeks view of other GM and reaches decision by consensus

Vroom &YeltonLeadership effectiveness is contingent upon

two main situational factors:1- the extent to which a high-quality decision

is required2- the extent to which it is important that the

other group members accept the decision that is made.

IFIt is important that a very high quality

decision is madeThe leader does not have enough information

upon which to base the decisionIt is important that the GM accept and are

committed to the decision what decision-making style is best?

Consultative or group decisionIf There is limited time?

consultative

IFThe leader believes for good reasons that the

other group members do not have the knowledge or the experience to make the right decision

And the group will act on the decision made?Autocratic style

The model is normative because V&Y provide a set of rules to guide leaders in deciding which style of leader-participation should be adopted. Vroom and Jago (1978) have updated the model.

It is so complex that a computer programme is necessary to work out the best decision-making style. It is very attractive in organisations.

Normative theoryStrengths Weaknesses

It takes account of followers or other group members

Suggest that a leader is able to change his or her style of decision-making to suit different circumstances

Heilman et al. (1984) found that managers preferred a participative style even when the model recommended an autocratic one.

Followers prefer a participative style of leadership almost always when the leaders are using an autocratic style

In high conflict situations leaders may revert to autocratic style against the model.

Path-goal theoryHouse and Baetz(1979) suggested that the

leader’s role is to ensure that the group progresses along the appropriate path to achieve its goals.

Leaders may adopt one of four styles while at the same time taking account of two contingency or situational factors: 1 the characteristics of followers and 2 the environment in which the group is working

The four leadership styles are1. DirectiveThe leader provides clear guidance, lets followers

know what is expected from them, and produces work schedule,

2. SupportiveThe leader establishes good relationships with

followers and shows concern for their needs.3. ParticipativeThe leader consults with followers and encourages

them to be involved in decision-making4. Achievement-orientedThe leader sets challenging goals and seeks

improvement in followers performance.

IFThe task is unstructured the best leadership style

is? Directive

The followers are highly skilled and experienced the most effective style is?

SupportiveFollowers who have a high need for affiliation (to

be with others and get on with them) will do best withSupportive or participative style of leadership

Path-goal theoryGood empirical support (Schriesham and De

Nisi, 1981, Wofford and Liska, 1993)It focuses on the role of followers.

Transformational

leadership

Transformational LeadershipLeaders who are regarded as exceptional and

as agent of social, political, and economic change.

These leaders are transformational in that they inspired people to change.

This approach to exceptional leadership is not a return to the “great person theory” but is seen as the effect and reactions that charismatic or transformational leaders have on their followers.

Transformational LeadershipConger (1991) identifies four main characteristics

of leader-follower relationships;1. Followers show high level of devotion, loyalty

and reverence to the leader.2. Followers are both enthusiastic and committed

to the ideas and vision of the leader.3. Followers willingly make self-sacrifices for the

general good of the group as a whole.4. Followers show levels of performance and

behaviour greatly beyond what would normally be expected

Transformational leadershipHowell and Frost (1989) have analysed the key

behaviour of transformational leaders show when having such a profound influence on the followers:

1. a vision or dream that the leader is able to communicate in vivid, exciting and emotional ways.

2. such leaders convince their followers that they have a path or means to get them from where they are now to a realisation of a dream.

3. they offer a framing in which the followers are justified to behave the way they want them to behave.

4. they exhibit total confidence in what they say and do, deep regard for the needs of their followers, excellent interpersonal communication skills and an inspiration power of oration. (House et al., 1991).

Transformational LeadershipInterest in transformational or charismatic

leadership has been intense in 1990s because of the dramatic change one person can bring about.

Bass (1997) claims that with the rapid development of communication systems, the internet and electronic commerce transformational leadership will increase in the future.

Transformational leadership is a two-edged swords since both good and evil may result (Hitler and Lenin).

Gender and LeadershipLeaders mentioned up to now are predominantly

maleThis raises the question of whether or not males and

females differ in leadership styles and/or leadership effectiveness or if cultural stereotypes prevent women from occupying top positions.

Eagly and Johnson (1990) conducted a meta-analytic review of over 250 studies of leadership to see if males and females differ in their leadership styles.

The most important overall finding is that male and female leaders show similar approaches but

Males are generally more directive and autocratic, while females are democratic and participative in their leadership styles.

Gender and LeadershipResearch clearly show that women experience

a “glass ceiling” and that when they break through the glass they are viewed more positively and are more likely to be more effective in maintaining a leadership that is participative and democratic.

Female transformational leaders show the same behavioural style and approach to their followers as do males.

Exceptional leadership transcends the sex of the leader.