CH. 13: LEADERSHIP
UP-CLOSEL: HOW TO BE AN EFFECTIVE LEADER 346-47
(BIG LISTS GIVEN )Be task-oriented, give careful attention to decision making, leadership self-efficacy, leadership is two-way street, etc.
APPLICATION OF LEADERSHIP THEORIES 266
(LEADERSHIP TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT): LEADERSHIP TRAINING programs take a number of forms, although most follow two general approaches. The FIRST APPROACH TEACHES leaders DIAGNOSTIC SKILLS, that is, how to assess a situation to determine the type of leader behavior that will work best. The SECOND approach TEACHES leaders specific SKILLS or BEHAVIORS that they LACK. FIRST, as in all types of training programs, TRAINING NEEDS MUST be DETERMINED (see Chapter 7). In leadership training it is important to IDENTIFY the SPECIFIC BEHAVIORS or DIAGNOSTIC SKILLS that the TRAINEE LACKS. A SECOND, related concern is the LEADER TRAINEES OPENNESS and ACCEPTANCE of the training program. This has been termed LEADER DEVELOPMENTAL READINESS—which relates to whether a LEADER is PREPARED and MOTIVATED to DEVELOP and ADVANCE his or her leadership SKILLS. THIRD, the more TIME and ENERGY INVESTED in the program, the more successful it is likely to be. Another important consideration is whether the particular LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS taught in the training program will be ACCEPTED in the WORK GROUP and ORGANIZATION. Finally, SOUND EVALUATIONS of LEADERSHIP training programs must be CONDUCTED ROUTINELY to determine whether the programs are indeed successful (Hannum, Martineau, & Reinelt, 2007). Such EVALUATIONS INCLUDE MEASURING the EFFECTS of LEADERSHIP training programs on organizational outcomes such as work group productivity, work quality, and member satisfaction. ONE MEASURE that has been suggested is to ESTIMATE the RETURN on INVESTMENT in LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT, but looking at the costs of the leader development program and the resulting increases in work group performance. (JOB REDESIGN AND SUBSTITUTES FOR LEADERSHIP): Certain CRITICS, such as FIEDLER, have suggested that LEADERSHIP TRAINING may be INEFFECTIVE and a WASTE of organizational RESOURCES. Because FIEDLER believes that a leader's orientation is inflexible, he ARGUED that ORGANIZATIONS should CONCENTRATE on CHANGING the JOB to fit the leader rather than vice versa (Fiedler, 1965). The most obvious example of this approach is his LEADER MATCH PROGRAM, which offers suggestions for altering the work situation to fit the leader's predominantly task-oriented or relationship-oriented pattern, usually by increasing or decreasing task structure or position power. The main problem with this approach is that many work situations may be unchangeable. RESEARCH in REDESIGNING JOBS INDICATES that in certain instances leaders may be unnecessary, leading to a search for "substitutes for leadership. In addition, a LEADER would be REDUNDANT in a SITUATION in which the task is well structured and routine and the work is intrinsically satisfying to workers, because there would be no need for direction or for encouragement. Finally, it has been SUGGESTED that a form of SELF-LEADERSHIP, or self-management, might SUBSTITUTE for the TRADITIONAL SUPERVISION provided by a formal leader. Finally, many of today's work groups and TEAMS in areas that REQUIRE CREATIVE OUTPUT (e.g., software development teams, research and development groups) or high levels of interdependency require that group members SHARE the load of LEADERSHIP. Pearce and Conger (2003) defined SHARED LEADERSHIP "as a dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals"
EVALUATION OF THE BEHAVIORAL THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 348
Although INITIATING STRUCTURE (TASK-orientation) and CONSIDERATION (RELATIONSHIP- orientation) seem to be RELIABLE dimensions describing leader behavior, the BEHAVIORAL approach has ONE MAJOR SHORTCOMING: The two DIMENSIONS REPRESENT very DIFFERENT TYPES of LEADER BEHAVIOR, yet both have been linked to effective management. A TASK-oriented leader might be effective in certain situations under specific circumstances, whereas a relationship-oriented leader might be effective in another situation.
DEFINING LEADERSHIP 341-342
Often, the leader of a work group is the person who holds a particular position or title, But there are also informal leaders. Regardless, a true leader should be able to guide a group towards achieving a goal
ON THE CUTTING EDGE: TRANSCULTURAL LEADERSHIP: TRAINING LEADERS IN 21ST CENTURY
One MODEL of LEADERSHIP TRAINING (Conger, 1993) suggests that future leaders will need, among other things, the following areas of training: GLOBAL AWARENESS—Leaders will need to be knowledgeable of worldwide issues that may affect the organization and the organizations and organizational members it must interact with. CAPABILITY of MANAGING HIGHLY DECENTRALIZED ORGANIZATIONS—As more and more work is done in independently functioning work teams, leaders will need to play more of a "coaching" or "consultant" role, than the traditional authority role of "boss." SENSITIVITY to DIVERSITY ISSUES—Leaders will be looked to as "diversity experts," so they must be able to deal effectively with groups that have different values and worldviews. INTERPERSONAL SKILLS—The changing and expanding role of work group leaders (e.g., from "bosses" to "coaches") will require them to become more interpersonally skilled. COMMUNITY BUILDING SKILLS—Effective leaders of the future will have to build work groups into cooperating, interdependent "communities" of workers. The leader will need to build group cohesiveness and commitment to goals. More and more, group members will turn to leaders for the "vision" of where the work group and the organization is going.
COMPARING AND CONTRASTING THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 364
One OBVIOUS DIFFERENCE among the contingency theories is HOW they VIEW the LEADERS PRIMARY TASK. The models also DIFFER in how they DEFINE EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP. ALL other contingency models assume that leaders are more flexible and require leaders to change their behavior in accordance with the situation. Finally, charismatic and transformational leadership theories seem at the same time, to combine and to move beyond both the trait approaches and the contingency approaches to leadership.
CHARISMATIC AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORIES 360
THIS FOCUSES ON TRULY EXCEPTIONAL LEADERS. (CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP THEORY): FOCUSES ON EXCEPTIONAL LEADER AND IDENTIFIES/DEFINES THE CHARACTERISTICS THESE LEADERS POSSESS THAT INSPIRE FOLLOWERS. ACCORDING TO HOUSE, charismatic leaders have the ability to COMMUNICATE SHARED GROUP GOALS, and they convey confidence in their own abilities as well as those of their followers. Speculation that exceptional characteristics are associated with HIGH SOCIAL SKILLS AND ABILITY TO RELATE TO FOLLOWERS. CONGER and Kanungo (1987, 1988) propose that the KEY CHARACTERISTICS of charismatic leaders INCLUDE sensitivity to followers and the situation/environment, ability to inspire, and a desire to change the status quo. ANOTHER APPROACH EMPHASIZES THIRD PARTY CALLED SURROGATES WHO PROMOTE AND DEFEND THE TOP LEVEL LEADER. (TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY): TRANSACTIONAL occurs when the relationship between leader and followers is based on some sort of exchange or "TRANSACTION," LEADER/FOLLOWER IS INVOLVED IN EXPLICIT OR IMPLICIT AGREEMENT WHERE FOLLOWERS DEVOTE TIME. TRANSFORMATIONAL involves the leader CHANGING the values, beliefs, and attitudes of follower, INSPIRES FOLLOWERS BY PROVIDING VISION OF WHERE GROUP IS HEADED. Four components make up transformational leadership and can be referred to as the four "Is." (1) These are IDEALIZED INFLUENCE—refers to the transformational leader being a positive role model for followers. Transformational leaders "walk the talk" and would not behave in a manner inconsistent with their beliefs or values. As a result, transformational leaders are respected and admired by followers. (2) INSPIRATIONAL MOTIVATION—Like charismatic leaders, transformational leaders are able to arouse and inspire followers by providing a compelling vision of a positive future and important and meaningful outcomes. (3) INTELLECTUAL STIMULATIONS —Transformational leaders stimulate followers' curiosity and their innovation and creativity. This is done in an intellectually challenging way, allowing followers to have input into brainstorming sessions and in decision making. (4): INDIVIDUALIZED CONSIDERATION—involves the leader's personalized attention to each follower's feelings, needs, and concerns. Through this individualized attention, each follower is developed to his or her full potential RESEARCH on TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP has GROWN because of the development of an instrument that measures both elements of transactional and transformational leadership, the MULTI FACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (MLQ; Bass & Avolio, 1997). The MLQ surveys the followers of a particular leader who evaluate the leader on the four components of transformational leadership. In addition to the MLQ, alternative measures of transformational leadership have also been developed
PATH GOAL THEORY 355
PTG theory states that leader is meant to help work group achieve the GOALS THEY DESIRE, these goals usually involve increasing worker motivation to perform the job. To help the group reach its goals, the leader may adopt one of four categories of behavior—directive, achievement-oriented, supportive, and participative—the selection of which depends on the characteristics of the situation. ACHIEVEMENT-oriented behavior focuses on specific work outcomes and may involve setting challenging goals for the group and measuring and encouraging improvements in performance. SUPPORTIVE behavior concentrates on the interpersonal relations among group members by showing concern for workers' well-being and providing a friendly work environment. Finally, PARTICIPATIVE behavior encourages members to take an active role in work group planning and decision making through actions such as soliciting information from workers about how to do the job and asking for opinions and suggestions. DIRECTIVE and ACHIEVEMENT-oriented behaviors are two kinds of INITIATING structure behavior, while the SUPPORTIVE and PARTICIPATIVE behaviors are two kinds of CONSIDERATION behaviors. the biggest DISAPPOINTMENT is that it has NOT LED to a specific type of INTERVENTION for use on the job (Miner, 1983). On the POSITIVE side, like Fiedler's contingency model, the path-goal theory offers a rather detailed assessment of the situation in an effort to relate the leader's behavior to the characteristics of a specific situation.
CONTINGENCY THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 350- INCLUDES: FIELDER'S CONTINGENCY MODEL PATH-GOAL THEORY DECISION MAKING MODEL LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE
The CONTINGENCY THEORY, which EXAMINES the INTERACTION of CHARACTERISTICS of the LEADER and the SITUATION, stating that EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP DEPENDS on the proper MATCH between the two. However, contingency theories recognize no one best style of leader- ship behavior. Rather, leader effectiveness depends, or is contingent on, the interaction of leader behavior and the situation. (FIELDER'S CONTINGENCY MODEL): PROPOSED BY FRED FIEDLER, Fiedler's contingency model argues that effective leadership DEPENDS on a MATCH between a leader's behavioral style and the degree to which the work situation gives control and influence to the leader. Fiedler's theory DIVIDES leaders BASED on their PRIMARY MOTIVATION— task-oriented or relationship-oriented—which he sees as relatively fixed and stable. To measure a leader's orientation, Fiedler developed a SELFISH-REPORT measure referred to as the LPC measure, which stands for LEAST PREFERRED coworker. The LPC requires leaders to RATE the PERSON with whom they had WORKED LEAST WELL— "the person with whom you had the most difficulty in getting a job done." These ratings are done using BIPOLAR ADJECTIVE RATING SCALES, such as pleasant/unpleasant and friendly/unfriendly. The LPC is SCORED by SUMMING the RATINGS on the scales. This total score indicates whether a person is a task-oriented or relationship-oriented leader. The RATIONALE behind this scoring system is that TASK-ORIENTED LEADERS will be very CRITICAL of a poor worker because they value task success. A relationship-oriented leader, on the other hand, values interpersonal relationships and is likely to rate the least preferred coworker more leniently. The NEXT STEP is DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS of the work situation to FIND the proper MATCH BETWEEN LEADERSHIP style and the SITUATION. The characteristics of a work situation are defined using THREE VARIABLES—LEADER-MEMBER relations, TASK STRUCTURE, and POSITION POWER 1ST VARIABLE: LEADER-MEMBER relations is the RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN the LEADER and FOLLOWERS—in other words, how well liked, respected, and trusted the leader is by subordinates. 2ND: TASK STRUCTURE, assesses how well a job is structured by considering such factors as whether the group's output can be easily eval- uated, whether the group has well-defined goals, and whether clear proce- dures for reaching those goals exist. Tasks can be defined as "STRUCTURED" or "UNSTRUCTURED." 3RD: POSITION POWER, or the leader's authority over subordinates, which is usually defined as the leader's ability to hire, fire, discipline, and reward. Position power is assessed as either strong or weak. according to Fiedler's contingency model, the KEY to EFFECTIVE leadership is the leader's control and influence in a specific situation, MOST FAVORABLE outcome is which the leader-member relations are good, the task is structured, and the leader has strong position power. The LEAST FAVORABLE situation for the leader is one where leader-member relations are poor, the task is unstructured, and the leader has weak position power. Criticisms of fielder model discussed on 3Hello, I am a student from an online Psychological Science class from UCI, and was notified about the research opportunity regarding the role of texting in close relationships from my class. Are participants still needed for this study? Criticisms of fielder contingency model discussed on 553-54. FIELDERS CONT. MODEL WAS THE FIRST HIGLY VISIBLE LEADERSHIP THEORY, EMPHASIZED IMPORTANCE OF BOTH SITUATION/LEADER CHARACTERISTICS, STIMULATED RESEARCH + LED TO ALT. CONTINGENCY THEORIES, LED TO DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM BY FIELD. N HIS COLLEAGUES TO APPLY THEORY TO LEADERSHIP SITUATIONS. LEADER MATCH teaches managers to recognize their own leadership orientation using LCP.
BEHAVIORAL THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 344-346 INCLUDE: OHIO STATE LEADERSHIP STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN STUDIES
The general FAILURE of the UNIVERSALIST theories to ISOLATE the characteristics associated with leader effectiveness led to a change in focus. In the late 1940s and throughout the 1950s, TWO RESEARCH PROJECTS, one CONDUCTED at OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY and the other at the UNIVERSITY of MICHIGAN, INVESTIGATED the behaviors exhibited by effective leaders. Both projects arrived at some very similar conclusions concerning leaders, their behavior, and effective leadership. THEORIES BASED on these studies and focusing on the particular behaviors that related to effective leadership are called BEHAVIORAL THEORIES of LEADERSHIP. (OHIO STATE LEADERSHIP STUDIES): Using a statistical process called FACTOR ANALYSIS, they found that these hundreds of behaviors could all be narrowed into two general categories: INITIATING STRUCTURE and CONSIDERATION. INITIATING structure INCLUDES leader activities that DEFINE and ORGANIZE, or structure, the work situation, such as ASSIGNING specific TASKS, defining work group roles, meeting deadlines, making task- related decisions, and maintaining standards of work performance. CONSIDERATION describes behaviors that show a genuine CONCERN for the feelings, attitudes, and needs of subordinates by developing rapport with them and showing them mutual respect and trust. Such activities include asking subordinates for their opinions and input, showing concern for the feelings of workers, ETC. The Ohio State researchers CONCLUDED that these two dimensions, INITIATING STRUCTURE and CONSIDERATION, were INDEPENDENT of each other. That is, a leader's score on one did not relate to the score on the other. This means that BOTH CATEGORIES of LEADER BEHAVIOR are ASSOCIATED with effective leadership but that they do NOT necessarily COEXIST. Although the results had the positive effect of stimulating research on leader behaviors, it is clear that the OHIO State studies FALL SHORT when it comes to making FIRM PREDICTIONS about the relationships between leader behaviors and specific work outcomes in all types of working situations. (UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LEADERSHIP STUDIES): Studying leaders in a number of large industrial organizations, the MICHIGAN researchers FOUND that successful LEADERS TENDED to EXHIBIT patterns of BEHAVIOR that were labeled TASK-ORIENTED, AKA production-ORIENTED, and RELATIONSHIP-ORIENTED, also referred to as EMPLOYEE-ORIENTED. TASK-oriented behaviors are CONCENTRATED on PERFORMING the JOB that the work group faces and are thus similar to those of the initiating structure factor. The LEADER is CONCERNED with SETTING WORK STANDARDS, supervising the job, and meeting production goals. RELATIONSHIP-ORIENTED behaviors INCLUDE showing CONCERN for EMPLOYEES' well-being and involving them in decision- making processes. The primary DIFFERENCE BETWEEN the OHIO STATE and University of MICHIGAN studies was that the MICHIGAN RESULTS TENDED to CONSIDER RELATIONSHIP-oriented leader BEHAVIORS to be more effective than task-oriented behaviors. MOST FAMOUS study examined behavior of leaders in a large insurance company. The FINDINGS indicated that BOTH TASK-oriented and RELATIONSHIP-oriented leadership behavior patterns were POSITIVELY RELATED to work group performance.
LEADER MEMBER EXCHANGE MODEL 359
The leader-member exchange model (LMX) takes a different approach and considers that EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP is determined by the QUALITY of the INTERACTION between the LEADER and a PARTICULAR WORK GROUP MEMBER. According to this theory, the WORKER IS THE SITUATION. Basically, the model (which was FORMALLY called the VERTICAL DYAD LINKAGE MODEL) states that the types of one-on-one, or dyadic, relationships that develop between the leader and each follower will be somewhat different, CAN RANGE FROM LOW QUALITY TO HIGH QUALITY. The AUTHORS of the LMX theory claim that their approach is an IMPROVEMENT over other leadership theories because PREVIOUS MODELS ASSUME that leaders act in a relatively UNIFORM WAY toward all subordinates, LMX GENERALLY EMPHASIZES HOW A LEADER'S PARTICULAR BEHAVIOR AFFECTS THEIR SPECIFIC JOB OUTCOMES. THIS MODEL IS POPULAR AND HAS LED TO RESEARCH.
UNIVERSALIST THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 342-344 INCLUDES: GREAT MAN/WOMAN THEORY TRAIT THEORY
Universalist theories of leadership search for the ONE key CHARACTERISTIC or a cluster of key characteristics HELD by EFFECTIVE leaders, arguing that leaders with these traits will be successful regardless of the situation. Universalist theories represent the EARLIEST and SIMPLEST APPROACHES to the study of leadership. (GREAT MAN/WOMAN THEORY): The great man/woman theory, which is much OLDER than any of the formal social science disciplines, reflects the adage that "great leaders are BORN, NOT MADE." This isn't a formal theory, more of a belief that personal qualities and abilities make certain great persons natural leaders. (TRAIT THEORY): In the early part of this century, PSYCHOLOGISTS made many ATTEMPTS to ISOLATE the specific TRAITS, or consistent and enduring physical and personality attributes, that are associated with leader success. The TRAIT THEORY of LEADERSHIP refers to several of these investigations. Much of this RESEARCH INVOLVED IDENTIFYING certain PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, including height, appearance, and energy level; other characteristics, such as intelligence; and personality traits, like EXTROVERSION, DOMINANCE, or achievement that were associated with effective leaders. Since 80s, been a resurgence of this, meta-analytic studies with what is called the BIG5 core personality traits (the Big 5 are extraversion, conscientiousness, openness to experience, agreeableness, and emotional stability) show that in COMBINATION, these FIVE TRAITS correlate fairly strongly with measures of leadership emergence and effectiveness. research on more complex "CONSTELLATIONS" of leader characteristics, such as FLEXIBILITY, charisma, or social intelligence, also suggests that possession of these complex traits are important for leadership. For example, Kenny and Zaccaro (1983, p. 678) DESCRIBED FLEXIBILITY as "the ability to perceive the needs and goals of a constituency and to adjust one's personal approach to group action accordingly." The major PROBLEM with the original TRAIT approach to leadership was that it was too GENERAL.
DECISION MAKING THEORY 356
VROOM AND HIS COLLEAGUES DEVELOPED A CONTINGENCY THEORY OF LEADERSHIP CALLED DECISION MAKING THEORY THATS BASED ON PREMISE THAT LEADERS ARE DECISION MAKERS. This model makes PREDICTIONS ON PROPER LEADER BEHAVIOR AND IT GIVES PRESCRIPTIONS FOR DECISION MAKER TO FOLLOW. This theory uses a series of YES/NO QUESTIONS that leaders must answer. This presents a TREE FRAMEWORK FOR THE LEADER TO USE, WITH EACH OF THE SEVEN QUESTIONS REPRESENTING A CHOICE POINT THAT LEADS TO CORRECT ANSWER. RESEARCH HAS SUPPORTED THIS THEORY DUE TO ITS NORMATIVE NATURE. Its EFFECTIVE BECAUSE IT CONSIDERS HOW A LEADER'S INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR.. MAJOR PROBLEM OF MODEL IS ITS COMPLEXITY.
APPLYING I/O PSYCH: THE LEADERSHIP GRID: THE MARKETING OF LEADERSHIP THEORY
the Leadership Grid, FKA the MANAGERIAL GRID. This leadership intervention program ENCOMPASSES TWO core DIMENSIONS—PEOPLE EMPHASIS and PRODUCTION EMPHASIS. These are attitudinal in character and are to be distinguished from the behavioral dimensions identified in the research originating with the Ohio State and University of Michigan studies. The Leadership Grid is based on what has been called Situational Leadership Theory. The basic premise of the theory and the Leadership Grid is that the best leaders are those who SHOW both HIGH CONCERN for the task and production and high concern for people. Each leader is rated on two 9-point scales, the first assessing the leader's production orientation, the second measuring the leader's people orientation. The best leader receives a score of 9, 9, meaning someone high in both produc- tion and people orientation (labeled a "team manager"); the worst leader receives a 1, 1 rating, meaning someone low in both production and people orientation (labeled an "impoverished manager"; see the accompanying diagram). By stating that there is one best leadership style (the 9, 9 leader), the Leadership Grid takes a universalist approach, which is a departure from the results of the Ohio State. Although this has been critiqued for its UNIVERSALIST APPROACH. LEADERSHIP GRID 349: Country club, team management, middle of the road, impoverished, authority compliance
