The Nature of Leadership (ch 1)
Descriptive or prescriptive theory
Another important distinction among leadership theories is the extent to which they are descriptive or prescriptive. - Descriptive theories explain leadership processes, describe the typical activities of leaders, and explain why certain behaviors occur in particular situations. - Prescriptive theories specify what leaders must do to become effective, and they identify any necessary conditions for using a particular type of behavior effectively - The two perspectives are not mutually exclusive, and a theory can have both types of elements. - A prescriptive theory is especially useful when a wide discrepancy exists between what leaders typically do and what they should do to be most effective Both types of theory are useful because descriptive theories provide a starting point for understanding leadership, while prescriptive theories offer guidance for individuals who want to develop their leadership abilities.
Followers
The term follower is used to describe a person who acknowledges the focal leader as the primary source of guidance about the work. May also include people who do not report directly (e.g., coworkers, team members, partners, outsiders). Do not include people who completely reject the formal leader and seek to remove the person from office ("Rebels", "Insurgents")
Dyadic processes
- The dyadic approach focuses on the relationship between a leader and another individual who is usually a subordinate - The explanation of leader influence is usually in terms of how the leader causes the subordinate to be more motivated and more capable of accomplishing task assignments - Reciprocal influence may be included in the theory, but subordinate influence over the leader is usually much less important than leader influence over the subordinate - An example of a dyadic leadership theory is the leader- member exchange (LMX) theory, which describes how dyadic relationships evolve over time and take different forms, ranging from a casual exchange to a cooperative alliance with shared objectives and mutual trust
Leader‐centered or Follower‐centered theory
- The extent to which a theory is focused on either the leader or followers is another useful way to classify leadership theories. - Most leadership theories emphasize the characteristics and actions of the leader without much concern for follower characteristics
Organizational processes
- The organizational level of analysis describes leadership as a process that occurs in a larger "open system" in which groups are subsystems (Katz & Kahn, 1978) - The survival and prosperity of an organization depend on adaptation to the environment and the acquisition of necessary resources. - Survival and prosperity also depend on the efficiency of the transformation process used by the organization to produce its products and services - Efficiency is increased by finding more rational ways to organize and perform the work, and by deciding how to make the best use of available technology, resources, and personnel - As compared to dyadic or group‐level theories of leadership, organization‐level theories usually provide a better explanation of financial performance by an organization - More attention is given to subjects such as organizational structure and culture, organizational change, executive succession, and influence processes between the CEO and the top management team or board of directors
Power‐influence approach
- This line of research seeks to explain leadership effectiveness in terms of the amount and type of power possessed by a leader and how power is exercised - Power is viewed as important not only for influencing subordinates, but also for influencing peers, superiors, and people outside the organization, such as clients and suppliers - The favorite research method has been the use of survey questionnaires to relate leader power to various measures of leadership effectiveness - Research on influence behavior has been used to determine how leaders influence followers and other people whose cooperation and support are needed by a leader
Trait approach Origins
Early leadership theories attributed managerial success to extraordinary abilities such as tireless energy, penetrating intuition, uncanny foresight, and irresistible persuasive powers. Hundreds of trait studies conducted during the 1930s and 1940s sought to discover these elusive qualities. The predominant research method was to look for a significant correlation between individual leader attributes and a criterion of leader success without examining any explanatory processes
Why is it so difficult to measure leadership effectiveness?
Measuring leadership effectiveness is difficult because there are multiple criteria that can be used, and different stakeholders may have different values and preferences. The selection of appropriate criteria depends on the objectives and values of the person making the evaluation, and people have different values. For example, top management may prefer different criteria than other employees, customers, or shareholders. To cope with the problems of incompatible criteria, delayed effects, and the preferences of different stakeholders, it is usually best to include a variety of criteria in research on leadership effectiveness and to examine the impact of the leader on each criterion over an extended period of time. Multiple conceptions of effectiveness, like multiple conceptions of leadership, serve to broaden our perspective and enlarge the scope of inquiry. Additionally, leadership outcomes may be difficult to measure in the short-term, and there may be delayed effects of leadership that are difficult to attribute solely to the leader's actions
Multi‐level theories
Multi‐level theories include constructs from more than one level of explanation Multi‐level theories of effective leadership provide a way to overcome the limitations of single‐ level theories, but it is very difficult to develop a multi‐level theory that is parsimonious and easy to apply
(2) Characteristics of followers (key variables)
Traits (needs, values, self‐concepts) • Confidence and optimism • Skills and expertise • Attributions about the leader • Identification with the leader • Affect (e.g., emotions and moods) and affective displays • Task commitment and effort • Satisfaction with job and leader
Values‐based approach
Values‐based approaches to leadership highlight the importance of deeply held leader values that appeal to and influence followers - Theories of ethical leadership, authentic leadership, servant leadership view leader values as the foundation for the leader's goals and behaviors and their impact on followers - Some leadership approaches emphasize leader and follower values as well as leader behavior (e.g., Charismatic and transformational leadership) - Central to these theories is the notion that the leaders inspire and motivate followers to pursue an idealized vision involving their shared values
Dyadic theories
• How a leader influences subordinate motivation and task commitment • How a leader facilitates the work of a subordinate • How a leader interprets information about a subordinate • How a leader develops a subordinate's skills and confidence • How a leader influences subordinate loyalty and trust • How a leader uses influence tactics with a subordinate, peer, or boss • How a leader and a subordinate influence each other • How a leader develops a cooperative exchange relationship with a subordinate • How a leader influences a follower to identify with the leader • How a leader elicits and impacts follower emotions and vice versa
Three Other Bases for Comparing Leadership Theories
• Leader‐centered versus follower‐ centered • Universal versus contingency • Descriptive versus prescriptive
Ways to classify leadership theory and research:
•Type of variable emphasized (leader, followers or situation) • Type of leader characteristic • Level of Conceptualization
Situational approach
- The situational approach emphasizes the importance of contextual factors that influence leader behavior and how it influences outcomes such as subordinate satisfaction and performance - Major situational variables include the characteristics of followers, the nature of the work performed by the leader's unit, the type of organization, and the nature of the external environment - One line of research is an attempt to discover the extent to which aspects of the leadership situation influence leader behavior. The primary research method is a comparative study of leaders in different situations, and several methods have been used to measure leader behavior - The other type of situational research attempts to identify aspects of the situation that determine which leader traits, skills, or behaviors are most likely to enhance leadership effectiveness. The assumption is that the optimal pattern of leader behavior will depend on aspects of the situation - Theories describing this relationship are sometimes called "contingency theories" of leadership
Five primary types/ approaches to leadership that have been studied
1. The Trait Approach 2. The Behavior Approach 3. The Power-Influence Approach 4. The Situational Approach 5. The Values-based approach
Research methods for studying Leadership effectiveness
1. The use of survey research with questionnaires filled out by the leaders themselves or by subordinates and other people who interact with the leader, such as a leader's boss or other managers in the organization (most common to use followers to evaluate the leader). The questionnaires usually measure how much a leader uses different types of behavior, and researchers examine how a leader's pattern of behavior is related to measures of outcomes influenced by the leader, such as subordinate satisfaction, task commitment, and performance. 2. Descriptions of leader actions and decisions obtained from observation, diaries, critical incidents, or interviews with leaders and their subordinates or followers. The behavior descriptions are coded into categories and related to measures of leadership effectiveness. 3. The use of experiments in which the researchers assess the effects of different patterns of leader behavior on group processes and outcomes. Each type of method for studying leadership has advantages and limitations, and the most appropriate method depends in part on the research question. The use of multiple methods is highly recommended to minimize the limitations of a single method. Unfortunately, multi- method studies are very rare. It is more common for researchers to select a method that is familiar, well accepted, and easy to use rather than determining the most appropriate method for the research question.
Universal or contingency theory
A universal theory describes some aspect of leadership that applies to all types of situations, and the theory can be either descriptive or prescriptive - A descriptive universal theory may describe typical functions performed to some extent by all types of leaders, whereas a prescriptive universal theory may specify functions all leaders must perform to be effective Universal theories propose that certain leadership behaviors or traits are effective in all situations, while contingency theories suggest that the effectiveness of leadership depends on the specific context in which it occurs. It is possible to have a theory with both universal and contingent aspects, such as a theory that identifies certain leadership behaviors as generally effective but also recognizes that their effectiveness may vary depending on the situation
Level of Conceptualization for Leadership Theories
Another way to classify leadership theories is in terms of the "level of conceptualization" used to describe a leader's influence on others. Leadership can be described as: (1) an intra-individual process for leaders (2) a dyadic process involving leader interaction with one subordinate (3) a group process (4) an organizational process.
Indicators of Leadership Effectiveness
Based on the passage, the indicators of leadership effectiveness include: 1. HIGH GROUP PERFORMANCE. Enhanced team or organizational performance and goal attainment, as measured by objective metrics such as sales, profits, productivity, and cost per unit of output, as well as subjective ratings from superiors, peers, or subordinates. 2. FOLLOWER SATISFACTION. Positive follower attitudes and perceptions of the leader, as measured by questionnaires or interviews, including satisfaction with the leader's ability to meet followers' needs and expectations, respect, admiration, trust, integrity, commitment to carrying out requests, and contributions to followers' psychological growth and development. 3. IMPROVED GROUP PROCESSES. Contributions to the quality of group processes, as perceived by followers or outside observers, including enhanced group cohesiveness, member cooperation, member task commitment, member confidence in achieving objectives, problem-solving and decision-making effectiveness, and constructive resolution of disagreements and conflicts. 4. CAREER SUCCESS OF THE LEADER. A successful career as a leader, as evidenced by promotion to higher positions of authority, successful reelection, and a full term of service. It should be noted that the specific indicators of leadership effectiveness may vary depending on the researcher's definition and conception of good leadership, and that multiple criteria may need to be considered and balanced against each other in evaluating leadership effectiveness.
Controversies over leadership definitions
Different viewpoints and debates regarding the definition of leadership. Some of the controversies include: - Specialized role or shared influence process: Some argue that leadership is a specific role or position in which an individual has formal authority over others, while others believe that leadership is a shared influence process where multiple individuals can exhibit leadership behaviors. - Type of influence process: There is a debate over what type of influence process is involved in leadership. Some theorists believe you should limit the definition of leadership to the exercise of influence resulting in enthusiastic commitment by followers, as opposed to indifferent compliance or reluctant obedience. - Purpose of influence attempts: Another point of contention is the purpose behind leadership influence attempts. Some see leadership as a means to achieve organizational goals, while others view it as a way to enhance personal power or status (personal benefits). - Influence based on reason or emotions: Some believe that effective leadership involves appealing to people's rationality and logic, while others think that it requires tapping into their emotions and values. - Direct versus indirect leadership: There is also a debate over whether leadership involves direct interaction with followers or whether it can be exhibited through indirect means, such as setting an example or creating a vision (or cascading). Direct forms of leadership involve attempts to influence followers when interacting with them or using communication media to send messages to them - Leadership versus management: Finally, there is a distinction between leadership and management, with some arguing that they are the same thing while others believe that they are different. Leadership is often associated with inspiring and motivating people to achieve a common goal, while management is seen as the process of planning, organizing, and controlling resources to achieve specific objective. Leading as an influence relationship and managing as an authority relationship. (Integrative approach - not mutually exlcusive or complete separate subjects)
Direct and Indirect Leadership
Effective leadership theories focus on direct and indirect ways leaders can influence people in an organization, including peers, bosses, and lower-level employees. Direct leadership involves direct interaction with followers, while indirect leadership involves influencing people who don't interact with the leader, such as through cascading, formal programs and management systems, and organizational culture. These forms of influence are not mutually exclusive and can be used together for greater impact.
SUMMARY FROM BOOK CHAPTER
Leadership has been defined in many different ways, but most definitions share the assumption that it involves an influence process for facilitating the performance of a collective task. Otherwise, the definitions differ in many respects, such as who exerts the influence, the intended beneficiary of the influence, the manner in which the influence is exerted, and the outcome of the influence attempt. Some theorists advocate treating leading and managing as separate roles or processes, but the proposed definitions do not resolve important questions about the scope of each process and how they are interrelated. No single, "correct" definition of leadership covers all situations. What matters most is how useful the definition is for increasing our understanding of effective leadership. Most researchers evaluate leadership effectiveness in terms of the consequences for followers and other organization stakeholders, but the choice of outcome variables has differed considerably from researcher to researcher. Criteria differ in many important respects, including how immediate they are, and whether they have subjective or objective measures. When evaluating leadership effectiveness, multiple criteria should be considered to deal with these complexities and the different preferences of various stakeholders. Leadership has been studied in different ways, depending on the researcher's methodological preferences and definition of leadership. The various methods all have limitations, and a multi-method approach is more likely to yield accurate results. Most researchers deal only with a narrow aspect of leadership, and most empirical studies fall into distinct lines of research such as the trait, behavior, power, value-based, and situational approaches. In recent years, there has been an increased effort to cut across and integrate these diverse approaches. Level of analysis is another basis for classifying leadership theory and research. The levels include intra-individual, dyadic, group, and organizational. Each level provides some unique insights, but more research is needed on group and organizational processes, and more integration across levels is needed. Another basis for differentiating theories is the relative focus on leader or follower. For many years, the research focused on leader characteristics and followers were studied only as the object of leader influence. A more balanced approach is needed, and some progress is being made in that direction. Leadership theories can be classified as prescriptive versus descriptive, according to the emphasis on "what should be" rather than on "what occurs now." A final basis for differentiation (universal versus contingency) is the extent to which a theory describes leadership processes and relationships that are similar in all situations or that vary in specified ways across situations. Because the requirements for effective leadership are highly dependent on the leadership situation, and flexible leadership is needed to adapt to changing situations, more development and testing of contingency theories are desirable.
The Yukl definition of leadership
Most definitions of leadership reflect the assumption that it involves a process whereby intentional influence is exerted over other people to guide, structure, and facilitate activities and relationships in a group or organization. However, they differ in many respects, including who exerts influence, the intended purpose of the influence, the manner in which influence is exerted, and the outcome of the influence attempt. Yukl: "Leadership is the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it. It is the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives."
Three types of variables are relevant for understanding Leadership effectiveness
One of the more useful ways to classify leadership theory and research is according to the type of variable that is emphasized the most: (1) Characteristics of leaders (2) Characteristics of followers (3) Characteristics of the situation Most leadership theories emphasize one category more than the others as the primary basis for explaining effective leadership, and leader characteristics have been emphasized most often over the past half- century. Another common practice is to limit the focus to one type of leader characteristic, namely traits, behavior, or power. To be consistent with most of the leadership literature, the theories and empirical research reviewed in this book are classified into the following five approaches: (1) the trait approach, (2) the behavior approach, (3) the power-influence approach, (4) the situational approach, and (5) the values-based approach, although some theories and research involve more than one approach.
Behavior approach
The behavior approach began in the early 1950s after many researchers became discouraged with the trait approach and began to pay closer attention to what managers actually do on the job - After identifying observable types of leader behavior, these behaviors were related to measures of outcomes such as the performance of the leader's group or work unit - Most behavior studies examined only one or two broadly defined categories of leader behavior, but the failure to find strong, consistent results encouraged more research on specific types of leader behavior - For example, instead of focusing on task‐oriented behavior, the researcher could examine specific types of task‐oriented behavior (e.g., clarifying, planning, monitoring, problem solving) - The most common research method in the behavior approach has been a survey field study with a behavior description questionnaire filled out by each leader or by subordinates of each leader
Regarding the selection of appropriate criteria to evaluate leadership effectiveness.
There is no simple answer to the question of how to evaluate leadership effectiveness. The selection of appropriate criteria depends on the objectives and values of the person making the evaluation, and people have different values. For example, top management may prefer different criteria than other employees, customers, or shareholders. To cope with the problems of incompatible criteria, delayed effects, and the preferences of different stakeholders, it is usually best to include a variety of criteria in research on leadership effectiveness and to examine the impact of the leader on each criterion over an extended period of time. Multiple conceptions of effectiveness, like multiple conceptions of leadership, serve to broaden our perspective and enlarge the scope of inquiry.
Group‐ Level Theories
• How different leader-member relations affect each other and team performance • How leadership is shared in the group or team • How leaders organize and coordinate the activities of team members • How leaders influence cooperation and resolve disagreements in the team or unit • How leaders influence collective efficacy and optimism for the team or unit • How leaders influence collective learning and innovation in the team or unit • How leaders influence collective identification of members with the team or unit • How leaders influence the shared mental models of team members • How unit leaders obtain resources and support from the organization and other units
Intra-Individual Theories
• How leader traits and values influence leadership behavior • How leader skills are related to leader behavior • How leaders make decisions • How leaders manage their time • How leaders are influenced by role expectations and constraints • How leaders react to feedback and learn from experience • How leaders experience and display affect (e.g., emotions and moods) • How leaders form leadership identities • How leaders can use self‐ development techniques A number of scholars have used psychological theories of personality traits, values, skills, motives, cognitions, and emotions to explain the decisions and behavior of an individual leader. However, the potential contribution of the intra-individual approach to leadership is limited, because it does not explicitly describe and explain how leaders influence subordinates, peers, bosses, and outsiders.
Organizational‐Level Theories
• How top executives influence members at other levels • How leaders are selected at each level (and implications of process for the firm) • How leaders influence organizational culture • How leaders influence the efficiency and the cost of internal operations • How leaders influence human relations and human capital in the organization • How leaders make decisions about competitive strategy and external initiatives • How conflicts among leaders are resolved in an organization • How leaders influence innovation and major change in an organization
Leadership influence - key influence points
• The choice of objectives and strategies to pursue • The motivation of members to achieve the objectives • The mutual trust and cooperation of members • The organization and coordination of work activities • The allocation of resources to activities and objectives • The development of member skills and confidence • The learning and sharing of new knowledge by members • The enlistment of support and cooperation from outsiders • The design of formal structure, programs, and systems • The shared beliefs and values of members
(1) Characteristics of leaders (key variables)
• Traits (motives, personality) • Values, integrity, and moral development • Confidence and optimism • Skills and expertise • Leadership behavior ("style") • Influence tactics • Attributions about followers • Affect (e.g., emotions and moods) and affective displays • Mental models (beliefs and assumptions, e.g. theory X and theory Y)
(3) Characteristics of the situation (key variables)
• Type of organizational unit • Size of organizational unit • Position power and authority of leader • Task structure and complexity • Organizational culture (e.g. Schein) • Environmental uncertainty and change • External dependencies and constraints • National cultural values (cf. Hofstede) • Temporal factors (e.g. Covid‐19)