Learning Materials
Unit Standard Title:
Analyse leadership and related theories in a work context
Unit Standard No:
120300
Unit Standard Credits:
8
NQF Level:
5
Table of Contents
Unit Standard.............................................................................................................................iii
Chapter 1
Principles and Processes of Team Building ................................................................... 1
1.1
Definitions of leadership ................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Roles and Qualities of a Leader ......................................................................................... 2
1.2.1
Qualities of a Leader...................................................................................................... 3
1.2.2
Attributes of Leaders ..................................................................................................... 6
1.2.3
Leadership Roles............................................................................................................ 7
Chapter 2
Leadership and Management ..................................................................................... 15
2.1
Defining and Differentiating Leadership and Management ........................................... 15
2.2
Differentiating the Roles and Qualities of a Leader with those of a Manager ............... 17
2.3
Accountability and Responsibility pertaining to a Leader and Manager ........................ 19
2.4
Comparing the Role of a Leader to that of a Manager ................................................... 21
Chapter 3
3.1
Leadership Theories .................................................................................................... 24
Trait Theories .................................................................................................................. 25
3.1.1
Intelligence .................................................................................................................. 25
3.1.2
Personality ................................................................................................................... 26
3.1.3
Physical Characteristics ............................................................................................... 26
3.1.4
Supervisory Ability ....................................................................................................... 26
3.2
Personal-Behavioural Theories ....................................................................................... 28
3.2.1
The University of Michigan Studies: Job-Centred and Employee Centred ................. 28
3.2.2
The Ohio State Studies: Initiating Structure and Consideration ................................. 29
3.2.3
A Synopsis of the Personal-Behavioural Theories ....................................................... 29
3.3
Situational Theories......................................................................................................... 30
3.3.1
The Contingency Leadership Model ............................................................................ 31
3.3.2
The Vroom-Yetton Model of Leadership..................................................................... 31
3.3.3
Path-Goal Model ......................................................................................................... 35
3.4
Organisational Leadership............................................................................................... 43
3.5
Charismatic and Transformational leadership ................................................................ 49
3.6
Servant Leadership .......................................................................................................... 51
Chapter 4
4.1
Applying the different roles and qualities of leadership in a work context ................ 53
Case Study 1 .................................................................................................................... 53
Learner Guide
4.2
Case Study 2 .................................................................................................................... 55
4.4
Understanding the leader’s role ..................................................................................... 56
4.5
Role-model and its effect on the work context .............................................................. 58
4.6
Selecting and applying a leadership theory in own work context .................................. 60
4.7 Analysing leadership roles, qualities and abilities in order to formulate own leadership
development strategy ................................................................................................................ 64
References ............................................................................................................................... 68
Page | ii
Learner Guide
Unit
Standard
SAQA US ID
UNIT STANDARD TITLE
120300
Analyse leadership and related theories in a work context
ORIGINATOR
SGB Administration
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
FIELD
SUBFIELD
Field 03 - Business, Commerce and Management Studies
Public Administration
ABET BAND
UNIT STANDARD PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL
TYPE
NQF LEVEL
Undefined
RegularFundamental
Level TBA:
2009 was L5
Level 5
CREDITS
Pre-
8
REGISTRATION STATUS
REGISTRATION START REGISTRATION
DATE
END DATE
SAQA DECISION
NUMBER
Reregistered
2018-07-01
SAQA 06120/18
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT
LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2024-06-30
2027-06-30
2023-06-30
PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
This Unit Standard will be useful to learners who are working within the Public Sector, Local
Government, commercial or community environment. It will enable learners to gain insight into
the role of leadership within a work context, and thus providing them with the skills and
knowledge to add value to one’s job. This Unit Standard will also provide value to public officials
who are involved in integrated development planning or public sector management and
administration specialists.
The qualifying learner is capable of:
•
Explaining the concept of leadership.
•
Differentiating between leadership and management.
•
Analysing and comparing leadership theories.
•
Applying the different roles and qualities of leadership in a work context.
LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
It is assumed that learners are competent in Communication at NQF Level 4.
Page | iii
Learner Guide
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1
Explain the concept of leadership.
Various definitions of leadership are identified and explained with examples in the workplace.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
1.1
At least four definitions are provided.
1.2
The roles and qualities of a leader are explained using examples.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
Qualities of a leader should include at least five examples but are not limited to
humaneness, empathy, objectivity, transparency, accountability, responsibility, honesty,
integrity, assertiveness, consistency, reference to historical and present leaders.
Leadership roles include but are not limited to being a visionary, motivating self and
others, creating synergies, facilitating a developmental environment, being an innovator,
being creative.
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2
Differentiate between leadership and management.
2.1
Leadership and management are defined and differentiated using examples.
2.2
The roles and qualities of a leader are differentiated and compared with those of a
manager in a work context.
2.3
The concepts of accountability and responsibility pertaining to a leader and manager are
discussed and explained in terms of advantages and disadvantages in the workplace.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
Accountability and responsibilities should include at least two examples but are not limited
to complying with related institutional policy and procedures, local government legislation,
levels of authority, structure of organisation.
2.4
The role of a leader and a manager is compared in terms of their complementary roles in
the workplace.
Page | iv
Learner Guide
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3
Analyse leadership theories.
OUTCOME RANGE
At least four different leadership theories must be identified and analysed.
3.1
The various theories of leadership are identified and discussed in a work context.
3.2
Trends and developments relating to the different leadership theories are examined with
examples.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
At least four examples but not limited to trait leadership, leadership base on behaviour
styles, servant leadership, transformational leadership and visionary leadership.
3.3
The various leadership theories are justified in terms of advantages and disadvantages.
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4
Apply the different roles and qualities of leadership in a work context.
4.1
The roles and qualities within leadership contexts are analysed with examples.
4.2
The leadership style of selected leaders are analysed in order to determine its effect in a
context.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
At least three case studies are analysed.
4.3
The term role-model is analysed in order to establish its effect on the work context.
4.4
A leadership theory is selected and applied in own work context.
4.5
Leadership roles, qualities and abilities are analysed in order to formulate own leadership
development strategy.
UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS
•
Any individual wishing to be assessed (including through RPL) against this Unit Standard
may apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the
relevant ETQA, or an ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the relevant
ETQA.
Page | v
Learner Guide
•
Anyone assessing a learner against this Unit Standard must be registered as an assessor
with the relevant ETQA, or an ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the
relevant ETQA.
•
Any institution offering learning that will enable achievement of this Unit Standard or
assessing this unit standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA, or an
ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the relevant ETQA.
•
Moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion.
UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE
The learner must demonstrate an understanding of:
•
Leadership definitions.
•
Leadership theories.
•
Roles of leaders.
•
Leadership functions.
•
Management functions and roles – the difference between management and leadership.
•
Institutional policies, procedures and legislation.
Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO):
UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING
Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking processes to interpret how
leadership theories, roles and values are applied to own work context.
UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING
Work effectively with others as a member of a team, group, organisation or community to
determine leadership needs within own context.
UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANIZING
Organise and manage oneself and one’s activities responsibly and effectively in order to ensure
proactive leadership.
UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING
Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information in order to apply the roles of
leadership in different work contexts.
Page | vi
Learner Guide
UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING
Communicate effectively using visual, mathematical and/or language in the modes of oral and/or
written persuasion to lead effectively.
UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING
Demonstrate an understanding of the world as a set of interrelated systems by recognising that
problem-solving contexts relating to leadership do not exist in isolation and that varying factors
will impact on leadership.
This Unit Standard will enable a learner to articulate to other qualifications in Business
Administration, Generic Management, Public Finance Management and Administration,
Municipal Finance Management and Administration.
Page | vii
Learner Guide
Chapter 1
Principles and Processes of Team Building
Workshop Objectives
This workshop is designed to:
1.1
❖
Explain the concept of leadership.
❖
Differentiate between leadership and management.
❖
Analyse and comparing leadership theories.
❖
Apply the different roles and qualities of leadership in a work context.
Definitions of leadership
(a)
Enabling a group to engage together in the process of developing, sharing and
moving into vision, and then living it out.
(b)
The only definition of a leader is someone who has followers. (Peter Drucker)
To gain followers requires influence (see John Maxwell’s definition below) but
doesn’t exclude the lack of integrity in achieving this. Indeed, it can be argued that
several of the world’s greatest leaders have lacked integrity and have adopted
values that would not be shared by many people today.
(c)
Leadership is influence – nothing more, nothing less. (John C Maxwell)
This moves beyond the position defining the leader, to looking at the ability of the
leader to influence others – both those who would consider themselves followers,
and those outside that circle. Indirectly, it also builds in leadership character, since
without maintaining integrity and trustworthiness, the capability to influence will
disappear.
(d)
Leadership is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well
communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to
realize your own leadership potential. (Warren Bennis)
(e)
Leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the
aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.
The major points of this definition are that leadership is a group activity, is based
on social influence, and revolves around a common task.
Page | 1
Learner Guide
Although this specification seems relatively simple, the reality of leadership is very
complex. Intrapersonal factors (i.e., thoughts and emotions) interact with
interpersonal processes (i.e., attraction, communication, influence) to have effects
on a dynamic external environment.
Each of these aspects brings complexity to the leadership process. It is the purpose
of this book to try to make that complexity a bit more manageable, thus increasing
our ability to understand what effective leadership is.
(f)
Leadership is an attempt at influencing the activities of followers through the
communication process and toward the attainment of some goal or goals.
This definition implies that leadership involves the use of influence and that all
relationships can involve leadership. A second element in the definition involves
the importance of the communication process. The clarity and accuracy of
communication affect the behaviour and performance of followers.
Another element of the definition focuses on the accomplishment of goals. The
effective leader may have to deal with individual, group, and organizational goals.
Leader effectiveness is typically considered in terms of the degree of
accomplishment of one or a combination of these goals.
Individuals may view the leader as effective or ineffective in terms of the
satisfactions they derive from the total work experience. In fact, acceptance of a
leader’s directives or requests rests largely on the followers’ expectations that a
favourable response will lead to an attractive outcome.
1.2
Roles and Qualities of a Leader
Bennis, an established authority on leadership, argues that leadership can be understood
as deriving from a mixture of time, place, predisposition and potential (Bennis and
Thomas 2002). Taking a long view by studying today’s leaders (from the laidback and
informal high technology world) and comparing and contrasting them with a cluster of
interviewees from the immediate post-war world of half a century ago, there is an
explicit acknowledgement of the difference which time (captured here in the concept of
‘era’) can make in the meaning of leadership.
He claims that one of the most reliable indicators and predictors of ‘true leadership’ is an
individual’s ability to find meaning in negative situations and to learn from trying
circumstances. Bennis calls these experiences that shape leaders ‘crucibles’. He provides
a variety of examples to explore the idea of the crucible in detail. From these examples,
essential skills are derived which, he believes, great leaders possess.
Page | 2
Learner Guide
The first three of these are familiar restatements of what leadership is frequently
understood to be, as well as its apparent prerequisites. These essential skills are:
❖
the ability to engage others in shared meaning,
❖
a distinctive and compelling voice, a
❖
sense of integrity (including a strong set of values).
❖
The fourth is identified as ‘adaptive capacity’. This turns out to be ‘an almost
magical ability to transcend adversity, with all its attendant stresses, and to
emerge stronger than before’. It is of course this final aspect which the narratives
of informants were most able and willing to illuminate.
The underlying Bennis and Thomas ‘new model’ is that leadership competences are
outcomes of these formative experiences.
The key competences are said to be
❖
adaptive capacity,
❖
an ability to engage others in shared meanings,
❖
voice and
❖
integrity.
Tellingly, ‘adaptive capacity’ is said to be exemplified through the case of Jack Welch, the
famed erstwhile chief executive officer (CEO) of General Electric. This capacity enabled
him to ‘transform himself from staff-slashing Neutron Jack to Empowerment Jack as the
needs of the corporation shifted’
1.2.1
Qualities of a Leader
This learner guide covers the following qualities of a leader:
❖
humaneness
❖
empathy
❖
objectivity
❖
transparency
❖
accountability
❖
responsibility
❖
honesty
❖
integrity
Page | 3
Learner Guide
❖
assertiveness
❖
consistency
❖
imaginative
Humaneness
In a sense, true humaneness is proactive kindness, for in promoting kindness and
harmlessness, or in preventing cruelty and alleviating suffering, one is essentially
controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than waiting to respond to
it after it happens.
When we witness someone being humane towards another, our innate humane
sensibility is activated, and we are motivated to be humane as well. Whether or not we
choose to act on this impulse is another matter. We all have the right to be treated with
humane respect, and the right to treat others humanely.
Empathy
Empathy is the recognition and understanding of the states of mind, beliefs, desires, and
particularly, emotions of others. It is often characterized as the ability to “put oneself into
another’s shoes”, or experiencing the outlook or emotions of another being within
oneself; a sort of emotional resonance.
Objectivity
Your actions should be based on reason and moral principles. Do not make decisions
based on childlike emotional desires or feelings.
Transparency
Set goals and have a vision of the future. The vision must be owned throughout the
organization. Effective leaders envision what they want and how to get it. They habitually
pick priorities stemming from their basic values.
Accountability
Accountability implies a concern for the welfare of those with whom one works.
Accountability denotes an ambition to leverage one’s position in the economy to the
benefit of society. Accountability at the most fundamental level signifies an obligation to
one’s self- an obligation to lead a meaningful life – both in and out of the workplace
consistent with one’s own values.
Page | 4
Learner Guide
Responsibility
The word responsibility means the obligation to answer for actions. Often this means
answering to authority. Responsibility is also loosely used as the recognition that in order
to achieve one’s purposes, one must act oneself (“take responsibility”) rather than
expecting others to do something.
In ethics, moral responsibility is primarily the responsibility related to actions and their
consequences in social relations. It generally concerns the harm caused to an individual, a
group or the entire society by the actions or inactions of another individual, group or
entire society. This is the mechanism by which blame can be placed, and influences many
important social constructs, such as prosecution under the legal system.
The term often refers to a system of principles and judgments shared by cultural,
religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans subjectively
determine whether given actions are right or wrong.
These concepts and beliefs are often generalized and codified by a culture or group, and
thus serve to regulate the behaviour of its members. Conformity to such codification may
also be called morality, and the group may depend on widespread conformity to such
codes for its continued existence. A “moral” may be a principle (in the summarized form)
as applied in a given situation.
Honesty
Display sincerity, integrity, and candour in all your actions. Deceptive behaviour will not
inspire trust.
Integrity
Have the perseverance to accomplish a goal, regardless of the seemingly insurmountable
obstacles. Display a confident calmness when under stress.
Assertiveness
Display confidence in all that you do. By showing endurance in mental, physical, and
spiritual stamina, you will inspire others to reach for new heights. Take charge when
necessary.
Consistency
Show fair treatment to all people. Prejudice is the enemy of justice. Display empathy by
being sensitive to the feelings, values, interests, and well-being of others.
Page | 5
Learner Guide
Imaginative
Make timely and appropriate changes in your thinking, plans, and methods. Show
creativity by thinking of new and better goals, ideas, and solutions to problems. Be
innovative!
1.2.2
Attributes of Leaders
Attributes establish what leaders are, and every leader needs at least three of them:
Standard Bearers
Establish the ethical framework within an organization. This demands a commitment to
live and defend the climate and culture that you want to permeate your organization.
What you set as an example will soon become the rule as unlike knowledge, ethical
behaviour is learned more by observing that by listening. And in fast moving situations,
examples become certainty. Being a standard bearer creates trust and openness in your
employees, who in turn, fulfil your visions.
Developers
Help others learn through teaching, training, and coaching. This creates an exciting place
to work and learn. Never miss an opportunity to teach or learn something new yourself.
Coaching suggests someone who cares enough to get involved by encouraging and
developing others who are less experienced. Employees who work for developers know
that they can take risks, learn by making mistakes, and winning in the end.
Integrators
Orchestrate the many activities that take place throughout an organization by providing a
view of the future and the ability to obtain it. Success can only be achieved when there is
a unity of effort. Integrators have a sixth sense about where problems will occur and
make their presence felt during critical times. They know that their employees do their
best when they are left to work within a vision-based framework.
Leadership roles include but are not limited to being a visionary, motivating self and
others, creating synergies, facilitating a developmental environment, being an innovator,
being creative.
Page | 6
Learner Guide
1.2.3
Leadership Roles
Leadership roles include:
❖
Visionary
❖
Motivating self and others
❖
Creating synergies
❖
Facilitating a developmental environment
❖
Being an innovator
❖
Being creative
Visionary
No matter how one defines leadership, it typically involves an element of vision – except
in cases of involuntary leadership and often in cases of traditional leadership. A vision
provides direction to the influence process. A leader (or group of leaders) can have one
or more visions of the future to aid them to move a group successfully towards this goal.
A vision, for effectiveness, should allegedly:
•
appear as a simple, yet vibrant, image in the mind of the leader
•
describe a future state, credible and preferable to the present state
•
act as a bridge between the current state and a future optimum state
•
appear desirable enough to energize followers
•
succeed in speaking to followers at an emotional or spiritual level (logical appeals
by themselves seldom muster a following)
For leadership to occur, according to this theory, some people (“leaders”) must
communicate the vision to others (“followers”) in such a way that the followers adopt the
vision as their own. Leaders must not just see the vision themselves, they must have the
ability to get others to see it also. Numerous techniques aid in this process, including:
narratives, metaphors, symbolic actions, leading by example, incentives, and penalties.
Motivating self and others
A person’s motivation is a combination of desire and energy directed at achieving a goal.
Influencing someone’s motivation means getting them to want to do what you know
must be done. A person’s motivation depends upon two things:
Page | 7
Learner Guide
•
The strength of certain needs. For example, you are hungry, but you must have a
task completed by a nearing deadline. If you are starving you will eat. If you are
slightly hungry you will finish the task at hand.
•
The perception that taking a certain action will help satisfy those needs. For
example, you have two burning needs – The desire to complete the task and the
desire to go to lunch. Your perception of how you view those two needs will
determine which one takes priority. If you believe that you could be fired for not
completing the task, you will probably put off lunch and complete the task. If you
believe that you will not get into trouble or perhaps finish the task in time, then
you will likely go to lunch.
People can be motivated by such forces as beliefs, values, interests, fear, and worthy
causes. Some of these forces are internal, such as needs, interests, and beliefs. Others
are external, such as danger, the environment, or pressure from a loved one. There is no
simple formula for motivation – you must keep an open viewpoint on human nature.
There is a complex array of forces steering the direction of each person and these forces
cannot always be seen or studied. In addition, if the same forces are steering two
different people, each one may act differently. Knowing that each person may react to
different needs will guide your decisions and actions in certain situations.
As a leader you have the power to influence motivation. The following guidelines form a
basic view of motivation. They will help guide your decision-making process:
•
Allow the needs of your team to coincide with the needs of your organization.
Nearly everyone is influenced by the needs for job security, promotion, raises,
and approval of their peers and/or leaders. They are also influenced by internal
forces such as values morals, and ethics. Likewise, the organization needs good
people in a wide variety of jobs. Ensure that your team is trained, encouraged,
and has opportunities to advance. Also, ensure that the way you conduct
business has the same values, moral, and ethical principles that you seek in
others. If you conduct business in a dishonest manner, your team will be
dishonest to you, for that will be the kind of people that you will attract.
•
Reward good behaviour. Although a certificate, letter, or a thank you may seem
small and insignificant, they can be powerful motivators. The reward should be
specific and prompt. Do not say something general, such as “for doing a good
job,” rather cite the specific action that made you believe it was indeed a good
job. In addition, help those who are good. We all make mistakes or need help on
an occasion to achieve a particular goal.
•
Set the example. You must be the role model that you want others to grow into.
Page | 8
Learner Guide
•
Develop moral and esprit de corps. Moral is the mental, emotional, and spiritual
state of a person. Almost everything you do will have an impact on your
organization. You should always be aware how your actions and decisions might
affect it. Esprit de corps means team spirit – it is defined as the spirit of the
organization or collective body (in French it literally means “spirit of the body”). It
is the consciousness of the organization that allows the people within it to
identify with and feel a part of. Is your workplace a place where people cannot
wait to get away from; or is it a place that people enjoy spending a part of their
lives?
•
Allow your team to be part of the planning and problem-solving process. This
helps with their development and allows you to coach them. Secondly, it
motivates them – people who are part of the decision-making process become
the owners of it, thus it gives them a personal interest in seeing the plan succeed.
Thirdly, communication is clearer as everyone has a better understanding of
what role they must play as part of the team. Next, it creates an open trusting
communication bond. They are no longer just the doers for the organization -they are now part of it! Finally, recognition and appreciation from a respected
leader are powerful motivators.
•
Look out for your team. Although you do not have control over their personal
lives, you must show concern for them. Things that seem of no importance to
you might be extremely critical to them. You must be able to empathize with
them. This is from the German word, einfuhling, which means “to feel with”, or
the ability to perceive another person’s view of the world as though that view
were your own.
The Sioux Indian Tribal Prayer reads, “Great Spirit, help us never to judge another
until we have walked for two weeks in his moccasins.” Also note that empathy
differs from sympathy in that sympathy connotes spontaneous emotion rather
than a conscious, reasoned response. Sympathizing with others may be less
useful to another person if we are limited by the strong feelings of the moment.
•
Keep them informed. Keeping the communication channel open allows a person
to have a sense of control over their lives.
•
Make their jobs challenging, exciting, and meaningful. Make each feel like an
individual in a great team...rather than a cog in a lifeless machine. People need
meaningful work, even if it is tiring and unpleasant; they need to know that it is
important and necessary for the survival of the organization.
Page | 9
Learner Guide
•
Counsel people who behave in a way that is counter to the company’s goals. All
the guidelines before this took the positive approach. But, sometimes this does
not always work. You must let people know when they are not performing to an
acceptable standard. By the same token, you must protect them when needed.
For example, if someone in your department is always late arriving for work and
it is causing disruptions, then you must act. On the other hand, if you have an
extremely good department and occasionally, they are a few minutes late, then
do the right thing...protect them from the bureaucracy!
Creating synergies
Synergy or synergism (from the Greek synergos meaning working together) refers to the
phenomenon in which two or more discrete influences or agents acting together create
an effect greater than the sum of the effects each is able to create independently.
Human synergy relates to interacting humans. For example, if person A alone is too short
to reach an apple on a tree and person B is too short as well. Once person B sits on the
shoulders of person A, they are more than tall enough to reach the apple. In this
example, the product of their synergy would be one apple.
Synergy usually arises when two persons with different complementary skills cooperate.
The fundamental example is cooperation of men and women in a couple. In business,
cooperation of people with organizational and technical skills is very often. In general,
most common reason why people cooperate is that it brings a synergy.
Facilitating a developmental environment
Development is training people to acquire new horizons, technologies, or viewpoints. It
enables leaders to guide their organizations onto new expectations by being proactive
rather than reactive. It enables workers to create better products, faster services, and
more competitive organizations. It is learning for growth of the individual, but not related
to a specific present or future job. Unlike training and education, which can be
completely evaluated, development cannot always be fully evaluated.
This does not mean that we should abandon development programs, as helping people
to grow and develop is what keeps an organization in the cutting edge of competitive
environments. Development can be considered the forefront of what many now call the
Learning Organization.
Development involves changes in an organism that are systematic, organized, and
successive – and are thought to serve an adaptive function. Training could be compared
this metaphor – if I miss one meal in a day, then I will not be able to work as effectively
due to a lack of nutrition. While development would be compared to this metaphor – if I
Page | 10
Learner Guide
do not eat, then I will starve to death. The survival of the organization requires
development throughout the ranks in order to survive, while training makes the
organization more effective and efficient in its day-to-day operations.
Being an innovator
The single most important factor in determining the success of innovation initiatives is
having a leader and a team with the ability and passion to turn ideas into business reality.
Venture capitalists often claim that 80% of their decision to invest is based on the quality
of people in a venture team and only 20% on what those people plan to do.
Different skills are required throughout the life cycle of an innovation project and it is
necessary to have the right people with the right skills at the right time. The process
begins with thinkers or inventors generating ideas and ends with operators managing
business adoption and benefits realisation. Yet research has shown that it is the
innovation leaders – those people who bridge the gap between thinkers and operators,
turning ideas into reality – who are the most vital to innovation success.
Being an innovator means living with change, thinking creatively, and managing change.
Innovators lead by showing us where our industry is likely to go next.
‘Every organisation must prepare for the abandonment of everything it does,’ says the
great management guru Peter Drucker. What does he mean? In ten years time your
business will be completely different from now. There will be more change in the next
ten years than in the last thirty.
Every product or service you provide, every method, every process, every partnership or
delivery system will have been replaced by something better. If this is not the case then
the chances are your business will have been superseded by faster-changing competitors.
In a world full of consumer choice and powerful new technologies, corporate Darwinism
will accelerate – only the fittest and fastest will survive.
The best way to create value is to innovate your way ahead of the competition. You need
to create temporary monopolies where your show is the only one in town. You can do
this by harnessing the creative power of your greatest asset, your people. The goal is to
turn them into opportunistic entrepreneurs who are constantly looking for new ways of
doing business.
How can you energize and inspire people to cope with change and to see problems as
opportunities for innovation? You start by looking at where the business is today and
where you want it to be in the future. You paint a vision of the future for the business. To
build an organization which can drive innovation and prosper through change the leader
has to start with a clear goal for everyone to aim at. Nothing is more important than
Page | 11
Learner Guide
communicating this goal. You cannot develop a passionate, committed and enthusiastic
team if they do not know where they are heading. They have to see the destination and
buy into the voyage.
The vision should be stirring, challenging and believable. There are three big gains for the
organization from having everyone committed to this vision.
•
First, people share a common goal and have a sense of embarking on a journey or
adventure together. This means they are more willing to accept the changes,
challenges and difficulties that the journey will entail.
•
Secondly, it means that more responsibility can be delegated. Staff can be
empowered and given more control over their work. Because they know the goal
and direction in which they are heading they can be trusted to steer their own
raft and to figure out the best way of getting there.
•
Thirdly, people will be more creative and contribute more ideas if they know that
there are unsolved challenges that lie ahead. They have bought into the
adventure, so they are more ready to find routes over and around the obstacles
on the way.
Lego’s mission is ‘to nurture the child in each of us.’ Vision statements should be short
and inspiring. They should avoid vague and woolly clichés about outstanding customer
service. The vision should not be restricted to today’s type of business. It must set a goal
that gives employees enormous freedom in finding ways to achieve it.
The pharmaceutical giant Glaxo Smith Kline has a mission ‘to improve the quality of
human life by enabling people to do more, feel better and live longer’. They do not define
their mission in mundane terms of drugs or medicines or markets but in inspirational
terms of enhancing people’s lives.
Just painting the picture is not enough. It quickly fades from view if it is not constantly
reinforced. Great leaders spend time with their teams. They illustrate the vision, the
goals and the challenges. They explain to people how their role is crucial in fulfilling the
vision and meeting the challenges. They inspire men and women to become passionate
entrepreneurs finding innovative routes to success.
Being creative
Different CEOs with markedly different styles can be successful in similar companies or in
the same company.
The same person might adopt different styles in different
circumstances. For example, you would not manage the Cub Scouts’ softball team the
same way that you manage a project team to update your company’s computer systems.
There is no one correct way to manage. Ultimately the right way to manage is one that
Page | 12
Learner Guide
works for you and which works for the organization in delivering the goals you set out to
achieve.
It is always worthwhile to step back and review your personal management style and to
ask how effective it is in managing your team and achieving your collective goals. As an
aid in this process, let’s contrast two extremes of style that we have designated as the
conventional leader and the lateral leader.
The conventional leader is easily recognizable as goal-oriented, authoritative, and
decisive who is well suited to a structured regime (e.g., the military). The lateral leader,
on the other hand, adopts a different approach to reaching goals. He or she is much
more focused on the creativity and innovation of the team.
To which end of this spectrum do you belong? If it is the conventional leader, then
perhaps you should consider adopting more of the lateral leader’s precepts and
approaches.
The conventional leader’s approach is fine for improving operational
efficiency in a well-defined environment.
However, the more innovative your
organization needs to be, the more of the lateral leader you should be.
Key Concepts for the Conventional Leader
Key Concepts for the Lateral Leader
Action:
Thinking: the process of forming, conceiving or
resolving in the mind.
an activity, deed or operation.
Result: an outcome, decision, win or loss.
Creativity: the ability to bring something new
into being through the force of imagination.
Improvement: a change for the better, the
process of making things more efficient or
more valuable.
Innovation: the act of introducing or
implementing something new or revolutionary.
The Conventional Leader....
The Lateral Leader....
Leads from the front.
Leads from the side.
Directs.
Inspires.
Uses conventional methods and seeks to
improve effectiveness and efficiency.
Develops new methods and seeks to change the
rules, change partners or change the approach
to the problem.
Thinks he knows best (and often does).
Harnesses the abilities of others.
Has a strong sense of direction and
purpose.
Has a vision and uses it to inspire others.
Spends more time on improving day-to-day
Spends more time on finding new strategic
Page | 13
Learner Guide
Key Concepts for the Conventional Leader
Key Concepts for the Lateral Leader
operational matters than strategic issues.
initiatives and partners than on solving
operational or day-to-day matters.
Gives directions and orders.
Ask questions, solicits suggestions and
delegates.
Looks for greater efficiency, more
productivity, faster development, more
aggressive sales and marketing.
Looks for new ways to do things, new
approaches to the customer, new solutions,
new partnerships.
Treats staff as subordinates.
Treats staff as colleagues.
Is decisive, often without prior
consultation.
Solicits views and inputs before making
decisions.
Builds an effective team of managers who
can execute policy and implement plans.
Builds a team of creative, entrepreneurial
individuals
Focus on actions and results.
Focus on directions and innovation to achieve
results.
Instructs.
Empowers.
Hires based on experience, proven track
record and qualifications.
Hires based on experience, creativity and latent
capabilities.
Discourages dissent.
Encourages constructive dissent.
Cares about results above all.
Cares about ideas, peoples and the “vision”.
Promotes himself as the leader and
figurehead with press, customers and
outside world.
Shares exposure and prestige with the team.
Encourages action, activity and work.
Encourages ideas, innovation and fun.
Rewards performance.
Rewards creativity.
Is numbers-oriented and analytical.
Is ideas-oriented, analytical and intuitive.
Sees technology as a means to do things
better, faster and cheaper.
Sees technology as a means to do things
entirely differently.
Overrules ideas and initiatives which he
sees as flawed or wrong.
Encourages all initiative and often implements
ideas or suggestions over which he has
misgivings.
Communicates through memos and e-mail.
Communicates through open discussion.
Page | 14
Learner Guide
Chapter 2
2.1
Leadership and Management
Defining and Differentiating Leadership and Management
The terms “management” and “leadership” are often interchanged. In fact, many
people view them as basically the same thing. Yet management is as distinct from
leadership as day is from night. Both are necessary, however, for a high-performance
organization. By contrasting them and understanding their differences, we can better
balance and improve these essential roles.
One key distinction between management and leadership is that we manage things and
lead people. Things include physical assets, processes, and systems. People include
customers, external partners, and people throughout our team or organization (or
“internal partners”). When dealing with things, we talk about a way of doing. In the
people realm, we’re talking about a way of being.
The difference between managers and leaders is shown in the following table:
Managers
Leaders
•
are transactional
•
are transformative
•
seek to operate and maintain current
systems
•
seek to challenge and change
systems
•
accept given objectives and meanings
•
create new visions and new
meanings
•
control and monitor
•
empower
•
trade on exchange relationships
•
seek to inspire and transcend
•
have a short-term focus
•
have a long-term focus
•
focus on detail and procedure
•
focus on the strategic big picture
•
execute
•
direct
•
processes
•
people
•
facts
•
feelings
•
intellectual
•
emotional
•
head
•
heart
Page | 15
Learner Guide
Managers
Leaders
•
position power
•
persuasion power
•
problem solving
•
possibility thinking
•
reactive
•
proactive
•
doing things right
•
doing the right things
•
rules
•
values
•
goals
•
vision
•
light a fire under people
•
stoke the fire within people
•
written communications
•
verbal communications
•
standardization
•
innovation
•
Management is like investment – getting the best return from all resources –
your own energy, talent and time plus all other resources at your disposal.
•
Management requires efficiency, profitability, depends on minimal inputs for
maximum returns.
•
To manage well, regularly review your priorities, just as you would your
investments.
•
The same person can both lead and manage – they are different functions.
•
Managers are like sports coaches – they inspire and develop people to get the
best performance out of them.
•
They also provide structure and measure output.
•
Leaders champion change. They may or may not manage people.
•
Management is a role, a set of responsibilities.
•
Leadership is not a role. It is an occasional act, like creativity.
Page | 16
Learner Guide
2.2
Differentiating the Roles and Qualities of a Leader with those of a
Manager
“Leadership and management are two distinctive and complementary systems of
action. Each has its own function and characteristic activities. Both are necessary for
success in an increasingly complex and volatile business environment...strong
leadership with weak management is no better, and is sometimes actually worse, than
the reverse. The real challenge is to combine strong leadership and strong management
and use each to balance the other.” — John Kotter, Management/Leadership Author
and Professor of Organizational Behaviour, Harvard Business School
Warren Bennis, Professor of Business Administration at the University of Southern
California, has been extensively studying and writing about leadership for many
decades. He explains why leaders are so much more successful than managers in
harnessing people power: “Management is getting people to do what needs to be done.
Leadership is getting people to want to do what needs to be done. Managers push.
Leaders pull. Managers command. Leaders communicate.”
Both management and leadership are needed to make teams and organizations
successful. Trying to decide which is more important is like trying to decide whether the
right or left wing is more important to an airplane’s flight. I’ll take both please!
“Too many managers treat “their people” as assets with skin wrapped around them.”
High-performing teams and organizations balance the discipline of systems, processes,
and technology management on a base of effective people leadership. Here are some
key of the key distinctions between the two:
Page | 17
Learner Guide
The Management-Leadership Balance
Management
Leadership
Systems, processes, and technology
People – context and culture
Goals, standards, and measurements
Preferred
purpose
Control
Commitment
Strategic planning
Strategic opportunism
A way of doing
A way of being
Directing
Serving
Responding and reacting
Initiating and originating
Continuous improvement of what is
Innovative breakthroughs to what could
be
future,
principles,
and
Both management and leadership skills are needed at the organizational, team, and
personal levels. It’s not a case of either/or, but and/also. Futurist, Joel Barker provides
another helpful distinction between the two roles; “managers manage within
paradigms, leaders lead between paradigms”. Both are needed. Trying to run an
organization with only leadership or management is like trying to cut a page with half a
pair of scissors. Leadership and management are a matched set; are both needed to be
effective.
Systems and processes (management) for example, are critical to success. You and your
organization can be using the latest technologies and be highly focused on customers
and those serving them (leadership), but if the methods and approaches you’re using to
structure and organize your work is weak, your performance will suffer badly. People in
your organization can be “empowered”, energized, and enlightened; but if your
systems, processes, and technologies don’t enable them to perform well, they won’t.
Developing the discipline and using the most effective tools and techniques of personal
and organization systems and processes is a critical element of high performance.
Page | 18
Learner Guide
But as the sweeping movement to teams, “empowerment”, and involvement intensifies,
many more daily management tasks are moving to the front lines where they belong. So
leadership becomes even more critical. Unfortunately, many people in so-called
leadership positions aren’t leaders. They’re managers, bureaucrats, technocrats, bosses,
administrators, department heads, and the like; but they aren’t leaders. On the other
hand, some people in individual contributor roles are powerful leaders. Leadership is an
action, not a position.
A leader doesn’t just react and respond, but rather takes the initiative and generates
action. A leader doesn’t say “something should be done”, but ensures something is done.
An effective leader is a “people person”. Effective leaders connect, stay in contact with,
and are highly visible to everyone on their team and in their organization. Leaders have
developed the skills of supercharging logic, data, and analysis with emotion, pride, and
the will to win. Their passion and enthusiasm for the team or organization’s vision and
purpose is highly contagious. They fire the imaginations, develop the capabilities, and
build the confidence of people to “go for it”. Leaders help people believe the impossible
is possible, which makes it highly probable.
Do you like to be managed or led? You’re not alone. Very few people want to work for a
manager. Most of us would much rather be led by a leader. To manage is to control,
handle, or manipulate. To lead is to guide, influence, or persuade. You manage things –
systems, processes, and technology. You lead people. The roots of the rampant morale,
energy, and performance problems found in many organizations are Technomanagers
who treat people as “human resources” to be managed. If you want to manage someone,
manage yourself. Once you master that, you’ll be a much more effective leaders of
others.
2.3
Accountability and Responsibility pertaining to a Leader and Manager
We make many decisions every day at all levels of the organization. This is how we
move forward and accomplish our business goals. We as individuals are accountable for
making good decisions and for the outcomes those decisions produce.
Our fellow employees look to us for leadership and to see if we take responsibility for
our own actions. Each of us must act as a leader by taking responsibility for everything
we do.
Here are some perspectives on accountability:
(a)
Accountability is allowing others to build trust in you: your company, your
executives, your actions and your vision for the world.
Page | 19
Learner Guide
(b)
Accountability is liberating. Accountability is when you overcome fear and
accept responsibility for the consequences of your actions. An accountable
person is more concerned about what is right than what others will think. An
accountable person acts in good faith at all times allowing others to trust in
them and depend on them.
(c)
Accountability requires a willingness to answer questions from those people
affected by your actions. As a person becomes more influential accountability
becomes ever more important.
(d)
Accountability means walking the walk once you have talked the talk. There is a
lot of smoke and mirrors out there in today’s murky business world with
promises made that are often unfulfilled. Holding one’s self accountable is a
noble task that instantly earns the respect and credibility of those around you,
for standing behind your opinions with conviction is far more fulfilling than
achieving the outcomes of right or wrong.
(e)
Accountability to me means that when the smoke clears, the person left
standing is the one with the moral courage to say “I am the one who did this,”
even when no one else knew who was actually responsible for the event in
question. As a leader, you may have to challenge others when they have failed
to assume responsibility for their actions.
(f)
Accountability is the reciprocal of leadership. Whereas leadership involves
having influence, accountability is the capacity to be influenced. Within a just
system, every act of power must be counterbalanced by an equally-weighted
responsibility. Therefore, every change in the world should provoke the
question: At what cost?
(g)
Accountability goes beyond acknowledging and recognizing the responsibility to
act in the best interest of others. Accountability also has the embedded
responsibility of accepting the outcomes of decisions made, whether they be
positive or negative. A true leader goes beyond simply admitting an error in
judgment, but takes the necessary steps to improve undesired outcomes. On
the other hand, a leader also shares the rewards of success with those who help
make that success happen. A leader is merely an extension of the people who
chooses to follow. Therefore, true accountability will most likely manifest itself
where there is mutual trust.
Page | 20
Learner Guide
2.4
Comparing the Role of a Leader to that of a Manager
Definition:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
are analytical, structured, controlled,
deliberate and orderly
are experimental, visionary, flexible,
unfettered and creative
Primary Problem-Solving Method:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
use the power of the logical mind
use the power of intuition
Competitive Strategy/Advantage Focus:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Concentrate on Strategy
Nurture Culture
Consider Dangers
Sense Opportunity
Follow Versions
Pursue Visions
Isolate
Correlate
Determine Scope of Problems
Search for Alternative Solutions
Seek Markets
Serve People
Think Rivals / Competition
Think Partners / Cooperation
Design Incremental Strategies
Lay Out Sweeping Strategies
Correct Strategic Weaknesses
Build on Strategic Strengths
Organizational Culture/Capability:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Wield Authority
Apply Influence
Seek Uniformity
Pursue Unity
Administer Programs
Develop People
Formulate Policy
Set Examples
Instruct
Inspire
Manage by Goals / Objectives
Manage by Interaction
Control
Empower
Easily Release Employees
Would Rather Enhance Employees
Page | 21
Learner Guide
Employ Consistency
Elicit Creativity
External/Internal Change:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Yearn for Stability
Thrive on Crisis
Duplicate
Originate
Fasten Things Down
Unfasten Them
Drive Toward Compromise
Work to Polarize
See Complexity
See Simplicity
React
Proactive
Plan
Experiment
Reorganize
Redevelop
Refine
Revolutionize
Individual Effectiveness Style:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Ask How (Seek Methods)
Wonder Why (Seek Motives)
Think Logically
Think Laterally
Perpetuate Hierarchies
Strive for Equality
Are Sceptical
Are Optimistic
Plan Around
Confront
Take Charge
Encourage Delegation
Like Formality
Prefer Informality
Venerate Science
Revere Art
Perform Duties
Pursue Dreams
Bottom-Line Performance/Results:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Scrutinize Performance
Search for Potential
Are Dependent
Are Independent
Compensate People
Satisfy Them
Conserve Assets
Risk Them
Pursue the Tangible
Seek the Intangible
Page | 22
Learner Guide
Inhabit the Present
Reside in the Future
Concentrate on Short-term Results
Seek Long-term Results
Want Good
Demand Better
Examples:
Managers . . .
Leaders . . .
Henry Ford, Ford Motor Company
Ray Kroc, McDonald’s
Harold Geneen, ITT
Walt Disney, Disney Studios
John Akers, IBM
Ross Perot, EDS and Perot Systems
Charles Knight, Emerson Electric
Steven Jobs, Apple Computer
George Bush, President of the U.S.
Bill Clinton, President of the U.S.
[adapted from Mind of a Manager, Soul of a Leader by Craig Hickman, John Wiley & Sons]
Page | 23
Learner Guide
Chapter 3
Leadership Theories
Leadership is an attempt at influencing the activities of followers through the communication
process and toward the attainment of some goal or goals.
This definition implies that leadership involves the use of influence and that all relationships can
involve leadership. A second element in the definition involves the importance of the
communication process. The clarity and accuracy of communication affect the behaviour and
performance of followers.
Another element of the definition focuses on the accomplishment of goals. The effective leader
may have to deal with individual, group, and organizational goals. Leader effectiveness is typically
considered in terms of the degree of accomplishment of one or a combination of these goals.
Individuals may view the leader as effective or ineffective in terms of the satisfactions they derive
from the total work experience. In fact, acceptance of a leader’s directives or requests rests
largely on the followers’ expectations that a favourable response will lead to an attractive
outcome.
Reward and legitimate power are primarily specified by an individual’s role in a hierarchy. This
role can, of course, be in a formal or an informal group. The degree and scope of a leader’s
expert and referent power are dictated primarily by personal attributes. Some leaders, because
of personality or communication difficulties, cannot influence others through expert or referent
power.
Figure 3-1 summarizes the key sources and perceived bases of interpersonal power. It also
presents some of the possible moderating factors between the sources and perceived bases of
power and outcomes (goals). The model suggests that (1) a successful leader is one who is aware
of sources of power and the importance of perceived power; (2) the leader doesn’t rely on
coercive power; (3) the sources of a leader’s power include place, time, and information and
personality characteristics; and (4) the accomplishment of goals will depend not only on power
sources and perceptions but also on follower needs, the situation, and the experience of the
leader.
Descriptions and listings are not very helpful in working toward a clear picture of leadership as
practiced in organizations. Figure 3-1 is more meaningful than using a description of leadership. It
calls attention to the sources of power used by leaders, factors that moderate the leader’s
effectiveness, and the goals of leadership behaviour. This type of perspective is more meaningful
than simply classifying individuals as gamesmen or jungle fighters. We need to explain,
understand, and trace gamesman behaviours and performance.
Page | 24
Learner Guide
Power sources and perceptions
Sources of leader
power
• Place
Potential
Leader’s
style
and experience
• Timing
• Information
• Personality
moderators
Follower’s
needs,
experience,
and goals
Outc
ome
Performance
of followers
s
Satisfaction of
followers
Perceived power
types
• Legitimate
• Reward
Goals
accomplished
The situation mix
(e.g. time,
resources)
• Expert
Followers
and
organisation
• Reference
• Coercive
Figure 3-1 A leadership model: Sources, Moderators, Outcomes
3.1
Trait Theories
Much of the early work on leadership focused on identifying the traits of effective
leaders. This approach assumed that a finite number of individual traits of effective
leaders could be found. Thus, most research was designed to identify intellectual,
emotional, physical, and other personal traits of successful leaders.
The personnel testing component of scientific management supported to a significant
extent the trait theory of leadership. In addition to being studied by personnel testing,
the traits of leaders have been studied by observation of behaviour in group situations,
by choice of associates (voting), by nomination of rating by observers, and by analysis of
biographical data.
3.1.1
Intelligence
In a review of 33 studies, Stogdill found a general trend that indicated that leaders were
more intelligent than followers. One of the most significant findings was that extreme
intelligence differences between leaders and followers might be dysfunctional. For
example, a leader with a relatively high IQ who is attempting to influence a group with
Page | 25
Learner Guide
members with average IQs may be unable to understand why the members do not
comprehend the problem. In addition, such a leader may have difficulty in
communicating ideas and policies. Being too intelligent would be a problem in some
situations.
3.1.2
Personality
Some research results suggest that such personality traits as alertness, originality,
personal integrity, and self-confidence are associated with effective leadership. Ghiselli
reported several personality traits that tend to be associated with leader effectiveness.
For example, he found that initiative and the ability to act and initiate action
independently were related to the level in the organization of the respondent. The
higher the person went in the organization, the more important this trait became.
Ghiselli also found that self-assurance was related to hierarchical position in the
organization.
Finally, he found that individuals who exhibited individuality were the most effective
leaders. Some writers argue that personality is unrelated to leadership. This view is too
harsh if we consider how personality has been found to be related to perception,
attitudes, learning, and motivation. The problem is finding valid ways to measure
personality traits. This goal has been difficult to achieve, but progress, although slow, is
being made.
3.1.3
Physical Characteristics
Studies of the relationship between effective leadership and physical characteristics
such as age, height, weight, and appearance provide contradictory results. Being taller
and heavier than the average of a group is certainly not advantageous for achieving a
leader position.
However, many organizations believe that it requires a physically large person to secure
compliance from followers. This notion relies heavily on the coercive or fear basis of
power. On the other hand, Truman, Gandhi, Napoleon, and Stalin are examples of
individuals of small stature who rose to positions of leadership.
3.1.4
Supervisory Ability
Using the leaders’ performance ratings, Ghiselli found a positive relationship between a
person’s supervisory ability and level in the organizational hierarchy. The supervisor’s
ability is defined as the “effective utilization of whatever supervisory practices are
Page | 26
Learner Guide
indicated by the particular requirements of the situation.” Once again, a measurement
of the concept is needed, and this is a difficult problem to resolve.
A summary of some of the most researched traits of leaders is presented in Table 3-1.
These are some of the traits that have been found most likely to be characteristic of
successful leaders. Some studies have reported that these traits contribute to
leadership success.
Table 3-1 Traits associated with leadership effectiveness
Intelligence
Personality
Abilities
Judgement
Adaptability
Ability to enlist cooperation
Decisiveness
Alertness
Cooperativeness
Knowledge
Creativity
Popularity and prestige
Fluency of speech
Personal integrity
Sociability (interpersonal skills)
Self-confidence
Social participation
Emotional balance and control
Tact, diplomacy
Independence (non-conformity)
However, to claim that leadership success is primarily or completely a function of these
traits is oversimplified and too broad.
Although traits such as those in Table 3-1 have in some studies differentiated effective
from ineffective leaders, there still exist many contradictory research findings. There
are a number of possible reasons for the contradictory results.
First, the list of potentially important traits is endless. Every year new traits, such as the
sign under which a person is born, handwriting style, and order of birth, are added to
personality, physical characteristics, and intelligence. This continual “adding on” results
in more confusion among those interested in identifying leadership traits.
Second, trait test scores are not consistently predictive of leader effectiveness.
Leadership traits do not operate singly, but in combination, to influence followers. This
interaction influences the leader-follower relationship.
Third, the patterns of effective behaviour depend largely on the situation. The
leadership behaviour that is effective in a bank may be ineffective in a laboratory.
Finally, the trait approach does not provide insight into what the effective leader does
on the job. Observations are needed that describe the behaviour of effective and
ineffective leaders.
Despite these shortcomings, the trait approach is not completely invalid. Stogdill
concisely captures the value of the trait approach in the following statement:
Page | 27
Learner Guide
The view that leadership is entirely situational in origin and that no personal
characteristics are predictive of leadership... seems to over-emphasize the situational
and underemphasize the personal nature of leadership.
However, after years of speculation and research on leadership traits, we are not even
close to identifying a specific set of such traits. Thus, the trait approach appears to be
interesting, but not very efficient for identifying and predicting leadership potential.
3.2
Personal-Behavioural Theories
In the late 1940s, researchers began to explore the notion that how a person acts
determines that person’s leadership effectiveness. Instead of searching for traits, these
researchers examined behaviours and their impact on the performance and satisfaction
of followers. Today there are a number of well-known personal-behavioural theories of
leadership. For each theory, we will outline how leadership behaviours were classified
and studied.
3.2.1
The University of Michigan Studies: Job-Centred and Employee Centred
In 1947, Likert began studying how best to manage the efforts of individuals to achieve
desired performance and satisfaction objectives. The purpose of most of the leadership
research of the Likert inspired team at the University of Michigan has been to discover
the principles and methods of effective leadership. The effectiveness criteria used in
many of the studies included:
•
Productivity per work hour or other similar measures of the organization’s
success in achieving its production goals.
•
Job satisfaction of members of the organization.
•
Turnover, absenteeism, and grievance rates.
•
Costs.
•
Scrap loss.
•
Employee and managerial motivation.
Studies have been conducted in a wide variety of organizations: chemical, electronics,
food, heavy machinery, insurance, petroleum, public utilities, hospitals, banks, and
government agencies. Data have been obtained from thousands of employees doing
different job tasks, ranging from unskilled work to highly skilled research and
development work.
Page | 28
Learner Guide
Through interviewing leaders and followers, the researchers identified two distinct
styles of leadership, referred to as job-centred and employee-centred.
The job-centred leader practices close supervision so that subordinates perform their
tasks using specified procedures. This type of leader relies on coercion, reward, and
legitimate power to influence the behaviour and performance of followers. The concern
for people is viewed as important but as a luxury that a leader cannot always afford.
The employee-centred leader believes in delegating decision making and aiding
followers in satisfying their needs by creating a supportive work environment. The
employee-centred leader is concerned with followers’ personal advancement, growth,
and achievement. These actions are assumed to be conducive to the support of group
formation and development.
The Michigan series of studies does not clearly show that one particular style of
leadership is always the most effective. Moreover, it only examines two aspects of
leadership – task and people behaviour.
3.2.2
The Ohio State Studies: Initiating Structure and Consideration
Among the several large research programs on leadership that developed after World
War II, one of the most significant was headed by Fleishman and his associates at Ohio
State University. This program resulted in a two-factor theory of leadership. The studies
isolated two leadership factors, referred to as initiating structure and consideration.
The definitions of these factors are as follows:
3.2.3
•
Initiating structure involves behaviour in which the leader organizes and defines
the relationships in the group, tends to establish well-defined patterns and
channels of communication, and spells out ways of getting the job done.
•
Consideration involves behaviour indicating friendship, mutual trust, respect,
warmth, and rapport between the leader and the followers.
A Synopsis of the Personal-Behavioural Theories
A review of the two prominent personal-behavioural theories and research indicates
several common themes. The two theories each attempt to isolate broad dimensions of
leadership behaviour.
The logic of this appears to be that multi-dimensions confound the interpretation of
leadership behaviour and complicate the research designs developed to test the
particular theory.
Page | 29
Learner Guide
The common bases of these theories are presented in Table 3-2. The personalbehavioural approaches have provided practitioners with information on what
behaviours leaders should possess. This knowledge has resulted in the establishment of
training programs for individuals who perform leadership tasks.
Each of the approaches is also associated with highly respected theorists, researchers,
or consultants, and each has been studied in different organizational settings. Yet the
linkage between leadership and such important performance indicators as production,
efficiency, and satisfaction has not been conclusively resolved by either of the two
personal-behavioural theories.
Table 3-2 A Review of Two Personal-Behavioural Leadership Approaches
Leadership
Factors
Prime
Initiator(s) of
the Theory
How Behaviour
is Measured
Subjects
Researched
Principal Conclusions
Employeecentred
and
job-centred
Likert
Through
interview
and
questionnaire
responses
of
groups
of
followers
Formal leaders
and followers in
public utilities,
banks, hospitals,
manufacturing,
food,
government
agencies
Employee-centred and jobcentred styles result in
production improvements.
Through
questionnaire
responses
of
groups
of
followers, peers,
the immediate
superior, and the
leader.
Formal leaders
and followers in
military,
education, public
utilities,
manufacturing,
and government
agencies.
The combination of initiating
structure and consideration
behaviour which achieves
individual, group, and
organisational effectiveness
depends largely on the
situation.
Initiating
structure and
consideration
3.3
Fleishman,
Stogdill, and
Shartle
However, after a brief period
of time the job-centred style
creates pressure that is
resisted through absenteeism,
turnover, grievance, and poor
attitudes. The best style is
employee-centred.
Situational Theories
The search for the “best” set of traits or behaviour has failed to discover an effective
leadership mix and style for all situations. What has evolved are situation-leadership
theories that suggest that leadership effectiveness depends on the fit between
personality, task, power, attitudes, and perceptions. There are three publicized and
researched situation-oriented leadership approaches:
•
the Fiedler contingency model,
Page | 30
Learner Guide
3.3.1
•
the Vroom-Yetton normative model, and
•
the path-goal theory.
The Contingency Leadership Model
The contingency model of leadership effectiveness was developed by Fiedler. The
model postulates that the performance of groups is dependent on the interaction
between leadership style and situational favourableness. Leadership is viewed as a
relationship based on power and influence. Two important questions are considered:
(1) To what degree does the situation provide the leader with the power and
influence needed to be effective, or how favourable are the situational factors?
and
(2) To what extent can the leader predict the effects of his or her style on the
behaviour and performance of followers?
A Critique of the Contingency Model
Fiedler’s model and research have elicited a number of pointed criticisms and concerns.
Graen and others present evidence that research support for the model is not strong,
especially if studies conducted by researchers not associated with Fiedler are examined.
The earlier support and enthusiasm for the model came from Fiedler and his students,
who conducted numerous studies of leaders.
Despite these incisive criticisms, Fiedler’s contingency model has made significant
contributions to the study and application of leadership principles. Fiedler called direct
attention to the situational nature of leadership. His view of leadership stimulated
numerous research studies and much-needed debate about the dynamics of leader
behaviour. Certainly, Fiedler has played one of the most prominent roles in encouraging
the scientific study of leadership in work settings. He pointed the way and made others
uncomfortably aware of the complexities of the leadership process.
3.3.2
The Vroom-Yetton Model of Leadership
Vroom and Yetton have developed a leadership decision-making model that indicates
the kinds of situations in which various degrees of participative decision making would
be appropriate. In contrast to Fiedler, Vroom and Yetton attempt to provide a
normative model that a leader can use in making decisions. Their approach assumes
that single leadership style is appropriate for every situation. Unlike Fiedler, Vroom and
Yetton assume that leaders must be flexible enough to change their leadership styles to
Page | 31
Learner Guide
fit situations. It was Fiedler’s contention that the situation must be altered to fit the
fairly rigid leadership style.
In developing their model, Vroom and Yetton made a number of assumptions. These
were:
a.
The model should be of value to leaders or managers in determining which
leadership styles they should use in various situations.
b.
No single leadership style is applicable to all situations.
c.
The main focus should be the problem to be solved and the situation in which the
problem occurs.
d.
The leadership style used in one situation should not constrain the styles used in
other situations.
e.
There are a number of social processes that will influence the amount of
participation by subordinates in problem solving.
Applying these assumptions resulted in a model that was concerned with leadership
decision making.
Decision Effectiveness: Quality and Acceptance
The Vroom-Yetton model emphasizes two criteria of decision effectiveness:
•
quality and
•
acceptance.
Decision quality refers to the objective aspects of a decision that influence
subordinates’ performance aside from any direct impact on motivation. Some kinds of
job-related decisions are linked to performance, while other kinds of job-related
decisions have relatively little effect on performance.
For example, determining workflow patterns and layout, performance goals and
deadlines, or work assignments usually has an important influence on group
performance. On the other hand, selecting work area locations for water coolers or
deciding what type of cafeteria furniture to buy has no effect on group performance.
When decision quality is important for performance and subordinates possess ability
and information that the leader does not possess, the Vroom-Yetton model would
indicate that the leader use a decision procedure that allows subordinate participation.
Decision acceptance is the degree of subordinate commitment to the decision. There
are many situations in which a course of action, even if technically correct, can fail
Page | 32
Learner Guide
because it is resisted by those who have to execute it. In judging whether a problem
requires subordinate commitment, the leader needs to look for two things:
(1) Are subordinates going to have to execute the decision under conditions in which
initiative and judgment will be required? and
(2) Are subordinates likely to “feel strongly” about the decision? If the answer to
either or both of these questions is yes, then the problem possesses an acceptance
requirement. When subordinates can accept a decision as theirs, they will be more
inclined to implement it effectively.
Five Decision-Making Styles of Leaders
Figure 3.2, below, shows the Vroom-Yetton model. The framework poses seven
"yes/no" questions, which you need to answer to find the best decision-making process
for your situation.
Figure 3.2 The Vroom-Yetton Model
As you answer each of the questions, you work your way through a decision tree until
you arrive at a code (A1, A2, C1, C2, or G2). This code identifies the best decisionmaking process for you and your team. (Note that, in some scenarios, you won't need
to answer all of the questions.)
The Vroom-Yetton model makes a distinction between two types of decision problem
situations facing leaders: individual and group. Individual problem situations are those
whose solutions affect only one of the leader’s followers. Problem situations that affect
Page | 33
Learner Guide
several followers are classified as group problems. The five leadership decision styles
that fit the individual and group situations are:
1)
Autocratic (A1): You use the information that you already have to make the
decision, without requiring any further input from your team.
2)
Autocratic (A2): You consult your team to obtain specific information that you
need, and then you make the final decision.
3)
Consultative (C1): You inform your team of the situation and ask for members'
opinions individually, but you don't bring the group together for a discussion. You
make the final decision.
4)
Consultative (C2): You get your team together for a group discussion about the
issue and to seek their suggestions, but you still make the final decision by
yourself.
5)
Collaborative (G2): You work with your team to reach a group consensus. Your
role is mostly facilitative, and you help team members to reach a decision that
they all agree on.
A Critique of the Vroom-Yetton Model
The Vroom-Yetton model has been specifically criticized on a number of issues. First,
the reliance on self-report data is considered a major threat to the validity of the
model. Leaders (managers) are asked to list the details of one successful and one
unsuccessful decision-making situation that they personally faced.
The experience reporting occurs after the manager has studied the five decision styles
and rational problem solving and practiced choosing a decision process for each of 30
decision scenarios.
It has been proposed by one critic that managers report successful decisions as using a
rational decision process that was appropriate to the situation, regardless of their
actual behaviour. The self-reported behaviour would tend to match the rational model,
and the Vroom-Yetton model would thus be validated. Jago and Vroom report that
subordinates’ perceptions of managerial behaviour do not correlate significantly with
the superior’s own descriptions of the same behaviour.
This raises another question about the validity of manager (leader) behaviour selfreports.
Second, the methods just described to determine a leader’s view of successful and
unsuccessful behaviour are also subject to experimenter and social desirability effects.
Since managers have previously studied rational problem solving, there may be an
Page | 34
Learner Guide
experimenter influence on the results. Furthermore, there may be a tendency to want
to appear more participative than one actually is in decision-making situations. It is
socially desirable to permit followers or subordinates to participate.
Despite the criticisms, the Vroom-Yetton approach to leadership is an important
contribution. The model was developed after thorough experimentation with similar
models. In addition, tests of the model are at least as rigorous and, in most cases, seem
more carefully planned and executed than tests of other leadership approaches.
Also, one important organizational implication of the model involves training. If current
and future research support the validity of the model, more effective leadership will
result if leaders are trained or instructed to use the model. Training would enable
leaders to choose the appropriate level of follower/subordinate participation.
3.3.3
Path-Goal Model
Like the other situational or contingency leadership approaches, the path-goal model
attempts to predict leadership effectiveness in different situations. According to this
model, leaders are effective because of their positive impact on followers’ motivation,
ability to perform, and satisfaction. The theory is designated path-goal because it
focuses on how the leader influences the followers’ perceptions of work goals, selfdevelopment goals, and paths to goal attainment.”
The foundation of path-goal theory is the expectancy motivation theory.
Motivational
Force
Force Directing
Specific
Behavioural
Alternatives
Expectancy
Instrumentality
Valence
Perceived
=
probability
that
effort will lead
to good
Performance
Perceived
X
probability
that
good Performance
will lead to desired
outcomes
Value of expected
X
outcomes
to the
individual
Self-Efficacy
Trust
Values
Goal Difficulty
Control
Needs
Perceived Control
Policies
Goals
Figure 3-2 Graphic representation of the Expectancy Motivation Theory
Preferen
ces
Page | 35
Learner Guide
We use the Expectancy Theory of motivation to help us understand how individuals
make decisions regarding various behavioural alternatives. This model deals with the
direction aspect of motivation, that is, once behaviour is energized, what behavioural
alternatives are individuals likely to pursue.
The following are propositions of Expectancy Theory:
A.
When deciding among behavioural options, individuals select the option with
the greatest motivation forces (MF).
MF = Expectancy x Instrumentality x Valance
B.
The motivational force for a behaviour, action, or task is a function of three
distinct perceptions which are:
1.
Expectancy – Probability (E→P): The expectancy is the belief that one’s
effort (E) will result is attainment of desired performance (P) goals. This
belief, or perception, is generally based on an individual’s past
experience, self-confidence (often termed self-efficacy), and the
perceived difficulty of the performance standard or goal.
a.
b.
Examples include:
i.
If I spend most of tonight studying, will it improve my
grade on tomorrow’s math exam?
ii.
If I work harder than everyone else in the plant, will I
produce more?
iii.
If I make more sales calls, will I make any more sales?
Variables affecting the individual’s Expectancy perception:
i.
Self-Efficacy – efficacy is a person’s belief about his or
her ability to perform a particular behaviour successfully.
Does the individual believe that he or she has the require
skills and competencies required to perform well and the
required goals?
ii.
Goal Difficulty – Goals that are set too high or
performance expectations that are made too difficult,
lead to low expectancy perceptions. When individuals
perceive that the goals are beyond their ability to
achieve, motivation is low because of low Expectancy.
iii.
Perceived Control Over Performance – For Expectancy to
be high, individuals must believe that some degree of
Page | 36
Learner Guide
control over the expected outcome. When individuals
perceive that the outcome is beyond their ability to
influence, Expectancy, and thus motivation, is low. For
example, many profit-sharing plans do not motivate
individuals to increase their effort because these
employees do not think that they have direct control
over the profits of their large companies.
2.
Instrumentality – Probability (P→R): The instrumentality is the belief
that if one does meet performance expectations, he or she will receive
a greater reward. This reward may come in the form of a pay increase,
promotion, recognition or sense of accomplishment. It is important to
note that when it is perceived that valued rewards follow all levels of
performance, then instrumentality is low. For example, if a professor is
known to give everyone in the class an “A” regardless of performance
level, then instrumentality is low.
a.
b.
Examples include:
i.
If a get a better grade on tomorrow’s math test will, I get
an “A” in math?
ii.
If I produce more than anyone else in the plant, will I get
a bigger raise? A faster promotion?
iii.
If I make more sales, will I get a bonus? A greater
commission?
iv.
If I make more sales, will I believe that I am the best
salesperson, or be recognized by others as the best
salesperson?
Variables affecting the individual’s instrumentality perception:
i.
Trust – When individuals trust their leaders, they’re
more likely to believe their promises that good
performance will be rewarded.
ii.
Control – When workers do not trust the leaders of their
organizations, they often attempt to control the reward
system through a contract or some other type of control
mechanism. When individuals believe they have some
kind of control over how, when, and why rewards are
distributed, Instrumentality tends to increase.
Page | 37
Learner Guide
iii.
Policies – The degree to which pay, and reward systems
are formalized in written policies has an impact on the
individuals’ Instrumentality perceptions.
Formalized
policies linking rewards to performance tend to increase
Instrumentality.
3.
Valance – V(R): The valance refers the value the individual personally
places on the rewards. This is a function of his or her needs, goals,
values and Sources of Motivation.
a.
b.
c.
Examples include:
i.
How much I really want an “A” in math?
ii.
Do I want a bigger raise? Is it worth the extra effort? Do I
want a promotion?
iii.
Do I need a sales bonus? Is the extra time I spend making
extra sales calls worth the extra commission?
iv.
Is it important to me that I am the best salesperson?
Variables affecting the individual’s Valance for outcomes:
i.
Values
ii.
Needs
iii.
Goals
iv.
Preferences
v.
Sources of Motivation
Potential Valued Outcomes may include:
i.
Pay increases and bonuses
ii.
Promotions
iii.
Time off
iv.
New and interesting assignments
v.
Recognition
vi.
Intrinsic satisfaction from validating one’s
abilities
vii.
Intrinsic satisfaction from knowing that your efforts had
a positive influence in helping someone.
skills and
Page | 38
Learner Guide
Expectancy and Instrumentality are attitudes, or more specifically,
they are cognitions. As such, they represent an individual’s perception
of the likelihood that effort will lead to performance and performance
will lead to the desired outcomes.
These perceptions represent the individual’s subjective reality, and
may or may not bear close resemblance to actual probabilities. These
perceptions are tempered by the individual’s experiences (learning
theory), observations of others (social learning theory), and selfperceptions.
Expectancy Theory can be used to define what is termed a strong
situation. Strong situations act to have base is a strong influence on
the behaviour of individuals, often overriding their personalities,
personal preferences, and other dispositional variables.
C.
Consequences: There are highly valued positive or negative outcomes
perceived to be associated with behaviour in the situation. This is the same as
Valance in Expectancy Theory
D.
Likelihood: There is a high perceived probability that these consequences will
follow behaviour (e.g., “I am certain that if I swear at my boss, she will fire
me”). This is the same as Instrumentality in Expectancy Theory.
E.
Specificity: Required behaviour is well defined and understood by the
individual (e.g., “Wear a black tuxedo” is more specific than “dress
appropriately”). This is a part of what determines Expectancy in Expectancy
Theory.
Some early work on the path-goal theory asserts that leaders will be effective by
making rewards available to subordinates and by making those rewards contingent on
the subordinates’ accomplishment of specific goals. It is argued that an important part
of the leader’s job is to clarify for subordinates the kind of behaviour that is most likely
to result in goal accomplishment. This activity is referred to as path clarification.
This early path-goal work led to the development of a complex theory involving four
specific styles of leader behaviour (directive, supportive, participative, and
achievement) and three types of subordinate attitudes (job satisfaction, acceptance of
the leader, and expectations about effort-performance-reward relationships.)
The directive leader tends to let subordinates know what is expected of them. The
supportive leader treats subordinates as equals.
Page | 39
Learner Guide
The participative leader consults with subordinates and uses their suggestions and ideas
before reaching a decision.
The achievement-oriented leader sets challenging goals, expects subordinates to
perform at the highest level, and continually seeks improvement in performance.
Research studies suggest that these four styles can be practiced by the same leader in
various situations. These findings are contrary to the Fiedler notion concerning the
difficulty of altering style. The path-goal approach suggests more flexibility than the
Fiedler contingency model. On the other hand, the path-goal approach is similar to that
of Vroom and Yetton in that it also argues for flexibility in leader behaviour.
The Main Path-Goal Propositions
The path-goal theory has led to the development of two important propositions:
1.
Leader behaviour is effective to the extent that the subordinates perceive such
behaviour as a source of immediate satisfaction or as instrumental to future
satisfaction.
2.
Leader behaviour will be motivational to the extent that it makes satisfaction of
subordinates’ needs contingent on effective performance and it complements
the environment of subordinates by providing the guidance, clarity of direction,
and rewards necessary for effective performance.
According to the path-goal theory, leaders should increase the number and kinds of
rewards available to subordinates. In addition, the leader should provide guidance and
counsel to clarify the manner in which these rewards can be obtained.
This means that the leader should help subordinates clarify realistic expectancies and
reduce the barriers to the accomplishment of valued goals. For example, counselling
employees on their chances of receiving a promotion and helping them eliminate skill
deficiencies so that a promotion becomes a more realistic possibility are appropriate
leadership behaviours.
The leader works at making the path to goals for subordinates as clear as possible. The
style that is best suited to accomplish this is selected and applied. Thus, the path-goal
approach requires flexibility from the leader to use whatever style is appropriate in a
particular situation.
The Situational Factors
Two types of situational or contingency variables are considered in the path-goal
theory. These variables are the personal characteristics of subordinates and the
Page | 40
Learner Guide
environmental pressures and demands with which subordinates must cope in order to
accomplish work goals and derive satisfaction.
An important personal characteristic is subordinates’ perception of their own ability.
The higher the degree of perceived ability relative to the task demands, the less likely
the subordinate is to accept a directive leader style. This directive style of leadership
would be viewed as unnecessarily close. In addition, it has been discovered that a
person’s locus of control also affects responses.
Individuals who have an internal locus of control (they believe that rewards are
contingent upon their efforts) are generally more satisfied with a participative style,
while individuals who have an external locus of control (they believe that rewards are
beyond their personal control) are generally more satisfied with a directive style.
The environmental variables include factors that are not within the control of the
subordinate but are important to satisfaction or to the ability to perform effectively.
These include the tasks, the formal authority system of the organization, and the work
group.
Any of these environmental factors can motivate or constrain the subordinate. The
environmental forces may also serve as a reward for acceptable levels of performance.
For example, the subordinate could be motivated by the work group and receive
satisfaction from co-workers’ acceptance for doing a job according to group norms.
The path-goal theory proposes that leader behaviour will be motivational to the extent
that it helps subordinates cope with environmental uncertainties. A leader who is able
to reduce the uncertainties of the job is considered to be a motivator because he or she
increases the subordinates’ expectations that their efforts will lead to desirable
rewards.
Figure 3-3 presents the features of the path-goal approach. The path-goal approach has
not been subjected to a complete test. Parts of the model, however, have been
examined in field settings.
One study found that when task structure (the repetitiveness or routineness of the job)
was high, directive leader behaviour was negatively related to satisfaction, whereas
directive leader behaviour was positively related to satisfaction when task structure
was low.
Also, when task structure was high, supportive leadership was positively related to
satisfaction, whereas under low task structure there was no relationship between
supportive leader behaviour and satisfaction.
Page | 41
Learner Guide
A Critique of the Path-Goal Model
The path-goal model, like the Vroom-Yetton model, warrants further study. There is still
some question about the predictive power of the path-goal model. One researcher
suggested that subordinate performance might be the cause of changes in leader
behaviour instead of, as predicted by the model, the other way around. A review of the
path-goal approach suggested that the model had resulted in the development of only
a few hypotheses.
These reviewers also point to the record of inconsistent research results associated
with the model. They note that research has consistently shown that the higher the task
structure of subordinate jobs, the higher will be the relationship between supportive
leader behaviour and subordinate satisfaction.
However, the second main hypothesis of the path-goal model has not received
consistent support. This hypothesis – the higher the task structure, the lower the
relationship between directive leader behaviour and subordinate satisfaction – has
received only some support.
Follower/subordinate
characteristics
Locus of control
•
Leader behaviour/styles •
•
Directive
•
Supportive
•
Participative
•
Achievementoriented
Experience
Ability
Follower/subordinates
Outcomes
•
Perceptions
• Satisfaction
•
Motivation
• Performance
Environmental factors
•
•
Tasks
•
Formal authority
system
Work group
Figure 3-3 The Path-Goal Model
On the positive side, one must admit that the path-goal model is an improvement over
the trait and personal-behavioural theories. It attempts to indicate which factors affect
the motivation to perform. In addition, the path-goal approach introduces both
Page | 42
Learner Guide
situational factors and individual differences when examining leader behaviour and
outcomes such as satisfaction and performance. The path-goal approach makes an
effort to explain why a particular style of leadership works best in a given situation. As
more research accumulates, this type of explanation will have practical utility for those
interested in the leadership process in work settings.
3.4
Organisational Leadership
There are five in particular which are essential in any systematic analysis of
organizational leadership. These five factors are:
1.
context,
2.
perceived leadership need,
3.
behavioural requirements,
4.
capabilities and
5.
development methods.
Moreover, each of these key factors interrelates with all of the others. Together they
form the leadership constellation.
Context
Despite the seemingly unabated search for the essential attributes of leaders, there is
also abundant reference to the importance of context in current leadership research.
There are extensive literatures exploring the importance of international cultural
differences, industrial sector differences, organizational structural differences and other
contextual variables.
For example, various researchers have explored the idea that concepts of leadership
may differ between different national cultures. Sometimes even regional groupings are
contrasted.
Thus, the differences between the understandings of leadership in Anglo-Saxon, Arab
and Asian traditional cultural values have been studied (Mellahl 2000). This and other
studies have challenged the idea of the universality of leadership values and themes.
The findings carry implications for the content and methods of leadership development
and training.
Similar findings emerged from an extensive 22-country study across Europe which
revealed cultural variation in notions about leadership (Brodbeck 2000). The study
suggests that there are pre-existing leadership ‘prototypes’ or expectations about
Page | 43
Learner Guide
leaders in the different cultures; these affect the willingness of followers to go along
with certain roles and styles of leaders. Brodbeck identifies a set of dimensions which
reveal core differences in leadership prototypes. Cultural differences in the
understanding of and attitudes to leadership have also been explored in another study
by Brodbeck in the even more widely variant comparative contexts of Europe and
Africa. These differences, he notes, carry important implications for leadership
development methods (Brodbeck et al. 2002).
In addition to national context differences, other studies have pointed up the
importance of industry sector as a factor influencing receptivity to types of leadership.
For example, the leading analysts of transformational and charismatic leadership (Bass
1985a, 1985b; Avolio and Bass 1988) have noted how sector plays a part in the way
these roles are performed, how effective they are and how they are perceived.
Much leadership discussion and research is conducted as if the organizational context
did not matter. One strong attempt to link contextual features with transformational
leadership is revealed in the work of Pawar and Eastman (1997). They showed how a
combination of four factors –
•
different organizational emphases on efficiency or adaptation,
•
the relative dominance of the technical core versus the boundary spanning units,
•
the type of organizational structure and
•
the mode of governance-impact on organizational receptivity to transformational
leadership.
Perceived need
There have been a number of attempts to explain why the topic of ‘leadership’ is so
especially salient at the present time. Usually, the argument is that the nature of the
contemporary competitive environment – with high uncertainty, a need for agile and
speedy response to customer expectations and client demand –necessitates a shift
from the orderly, planned and bureaucratic mode to a more adaptive and
entrepreneurial mode.
The perceived ‘need for leadership’ deriving from this kind of analysis thus reflects a
perceived shift in the environment-response equation. There are, however, also other
accounts which lead to different interpretations.
For example, a very different form of explanation, both in terms of the focus on
leadership as a priority and for the kind of leadership solution seen as appropriate, can
be found using so-called ‘institutional theory’ (DiMaggio and Powell 1983).
Page | 44
Learner Guide
From this perspective, activity can be viewed as a record of managerial responses to
perceived informed action by their competitor or comparative reference point
organizations.
There does indeed seem to be more than a little emulation taking place among the
impressive array of organizations queuing up to ‘do something’ about the leadership
question. This is seen most clearly in the phenomenal growth in ‘corporate universities’
and ‘academies’, but is replicated more generally in relation to leadership
‘interventions’ and ‘programmes’ of all kinds.
The perceived ‘need for leadership’ and hence for leadership development can be
interpreted in a different way when viewed from a sociological perspective. One major
approach is to explain the phenomenon from the angle of interpreting ‘authority’.
The classic works of Reinhard Bendix (1956) and of John Child (1969) illuminate the
ways in which occupants of elite positions – and their ‘spokespersons’ – seek to
legitimize authority, power and privilege. As Bendix and John Child both point out,
virtually all accounts of the contributions and roles of managers and leaders contain
dual aspects – that is, they express ideological as well as technical dimensions (Child
1969). As Bendix observed:
Wherever enterprises are set up, a few command and many obey. The few however
have seldom been satisfied to command without a higher justification even when they
have abjured all interest in ideas, and the many have seldom been docile enough not to
provoke such justifications. (Bendix 1956:1)
Behavioural requirements and competences
Research has continued unabated on the subject of the behaviours and capabilities
required of leaders. To be adjudged a competent leader, an individual would usually be
expected to possess a range of capabilities. In addition, leaders are also expected to
make a series of ‘accomplished performances’ – that is, to display requisite behaviours.
These latter usually depend on the former. Thus, capability and behavioural
requirements are intimately intertwined. Hence, competency frameworks normally
express both required skills and required behavioural accomplishments.
The capabilities or ‘attributes’ of leaders have proved to be a source of endless
fascination. We noted earlier Warren Bennis’s recent description of what he believes
are the central hallmarks – the ability to find meaning in negative situations, a
compelling voice, integrity and adaptive capacity. But other researchers, practitioners,
trainers and consultants have emphasized different attributes.
Page | 45
Learner Guide
The continuing variation in the competency frameworks thus echoes the problems of
the early work on leader traits, which also suffered from multiple and non-congruent
profiles of leaders.
However, some have argued that beneath the variety there are a number of more or
less commonly agreed core capabilities. For example, numerous surveys reveal that
large numbers of respondents identify leaders as having and displaying vision, strategic
sense, an ability to communicate that vision and strategy, and an ability to inspire and
motivate (Council for Excellence in Management & Leadership 2001).
To what extent respondents to such surveys are truly capturing respondents’ own
interpretations of their direct experience of leaders or simply reflecting conventional
wisdom about accomplished leadership is very hard to determine.
But there does seem to be evidence that the stylized preferred account of the nature of
leadership does change over time – and, as we saw earlier, varies also by culture. Of
course, leadership may still be important, even though, as the literature reveals, it
derives from, and varies with, social context.
Current work on behavioural requirements and capabilities is very varied, but it can be
organized within three main categories – or what might be termed meta-capabilities.
The first meta-capability emphasizes big picture sense-making. This includes the ability
to scan and interpret the environment; to differentiate threats to, and opportunities
for, the organization; to assess the organizations’ strengths and weaknesses; and to
construct a sensible vision, mission and strategy.
As has constantly been emphasized in the literature and in the dominant mode of
thinking over the past couple of decades, the result of this big picture work may entail a
transformative agenda for the focal organization. Indeed, the distinct impression is
easily gained that in modern perception leadership work is of this nature almost by
definition.
Steady-state maintenance, it often appears, is not so much one variant of leadership as
one might logically suppose, but rather a function of that ‘other’ subordinate position,
namely management. What this expresses, of course, is that leadership is closely
identified with change-making. The crucial capability here, then, is correctly to discern
the direction of change.
This inevitably points next to the second meta-capability – the ability to deliver change.
This capability hinges on a cluster of constitutive skills such as mobilizing support,
communicating, energizing and inspiring followers, active listening, adopting a
supportive stance, enabling others by investing in their training and development, and
Page | 46
Learner Guide
empowering them to take decisions. An element within this meta-capability which has
received a great deal of attention in recent years is that of ‘emotional intelligence’
(Goleman et al. 2002; Humphrey 2002; Vitello-Cicciu 2002; Wolff et al. 2002). This is a
catch-all construct designed to capture a number of interpersonal skills such as selfawareness, self-management and social awareness (such as empathy).
There are two levels to this behavioural attribute and therefore to this capability. The
first level includes team or group leadership – or, as it is sometimes termed, ‘near
leadership’. At this level interpersonal skills are at a premium.
The second level is termed ‘distant leadership’ and it refers to those situations where
the leader is not in direct personal contact with the followers – perhaps because of
their large number – and so has to lead through the multiple tiers using means other
than interpersonal skills.
Different kinds of leadership capabilities are needed for the accomplishment of these
different roles. It is also worth noting that there may be misalignment of the
perceptions between distant and near group followers (Waldman 1999).
These two levels of distant and near refer, of course, to the conventional idea of the
hierarchical leader-that is, a leader who occupies some position of authority. Other
skills will be required of those exercising lateral leadership. The necessary skills in such
circumstances have been identified by Fisher and Sharp (1998), who explain ‘how to
lead when you are not in charge’.
The third meta-capability concerns inter-organizational representation and the
ambassadorial role. While this is a vital capability for a chief executive in a private
sector company it is one which has reached special prominence in the public sector as a
result of the increasing requirement for inter-agency working. Indeed, the cluster of
capabilities required to ‘lead’ in a network context is one of the key current themes in
the leadership debate.
Skills such as coalition building, understanding others’ perspectives, persuasion and
assessing client needs in a holistic rather than a single agency manner become the
premium requirements.
Leadership development methods
As will be very evident from the review above, much of the literature on leadership is
about the nature, the types, the qualities and the need for leadership. However, a
certain segment of the literature also attends to the methods for developing leaders.
This agenda, the expressed desire to improve and expand leadership development, lies
behind the kind of campaign exemplified recently by the Council for Excellence in
Page | 47
Learner Guide
Management & Leadership (CEML). The general case is as expressed by Robert Fulmer:
‘Leaders who keep learning may be the ultimate source of sustainable competitive
advantage’ (Fulmer et al. 2000:49).
But, as the periodic worries and campaigns suggest, there is a concern that there is an
insufficient supply of high-quality development opportunities. From time to time, this
concern becomes wrapped up in the even wider agenda, held by some, that the
business schools are not fully delivering what businesses ‘need’.
This criticism is variously expressed: university business schools are ‘too academic’; they
do not make enough efforts to tailor their products to the needs of their clients; and/or
they pay too little attention to the ‘real-world’ skills of managers. There is often a
hidden agenda to such critique and, not infrequently, also an anti-academic stance.
The truth is that outside the business schools there is already huge provision for
‘training for leadership’. The important question here, therefore, is not so much the
alleged ‘neglect’ of leadership, but rather how to evaluate the quality and relevance of
the overall provision already available.
Most of the training and development interventions which are available both in-house
and as offered by external providers can be classified in terms of four main types:
1. Learning ‘about leadership’ and understanding organizations. This includes study
of the work of Maslow (1954), McGregor (1960), Hersey and Blanchard (1984),
and Kouzes and Posner (1997). This kind of traditional education is made
available to a wide range of audiences. It comprises the basic fare for many
leadership workshops.
2. Self-analysis, team analysis and exploration of different leadership styles. These
interventions are usually based on psychometric questionnaires and instruments.
These ‘getting to know yourself’ sessions usually also involve feedback, coaching
and sensitivity training.
3. Experiential learning and simulation. This mode of provision is very popular. It
usually takes place in mountainous locales or in close proximity to the sea and
small boats. Courses of this type operate on the basis of action learning or
learning by doing. The work of John Adair (1983) often provides the basic
underlying framework.
The residential courses offering this approach are built around a series of
outdoor tasks and challenges. The trainers act as facilitators and feedback
information about behaviour patterns; from these, participants embark on a
journey of self-discovery.
Page | 48
Learner Guide
4. Top level strategy courses. For the highest level managers, it is more commonly
the practice to send them either individually or in groups to prestige business
schools for short ‘executive courses’. These are invariably very expensive,
exclusive and much valued by the participants.
In addition to the above four types of courses, there is a whole array of leadership
development activities within companies. These include executive coaching, 360 degree
feedback, accelerated development programmes, special project assignments, seminars
and career planning for so-called ‘high potentials’ (or Hi-Pos), courses to align with
critical transition moments (such as first and subsequent leadership tier promotions),
secondments, and special conferences for leaders (London 2002; Vicere 2000; Avolio
and Bass 2002; Dotlich and Noel 1998; McCauley et al. 1998; Conger and Benjamin
1999; Hollenbeck and McCall 1999; Giber et al. 2000).
There is a fundamental dilemma that haunts many leadership development events.
Because leadership is perceived as fundamentally about ‘doing’ rather than ‘knowing’,
there is an inherent bias towards activity-focused and indeed briskly paced encounters.
The hours are long, and the programme is normally packed. Participants, clients and
providers often collude in fulfilling the prior expectation that events must be exciting
and fast moving. In consequence, there is little time for reflection or strategic thinking.
These characteristics of leadership development events are self-evidently in tension
with the kind of clear thinking supposedly required of top leaders.
3.5
Charismatic and Transformational leadership
The terms ‘charismatic’ and ‘transformational’ are used more or less interchangeably in
much of the literature. However, it is of course possible to make a distinction between
the two. Distilling here a large literature on the ‘charismatic leader’ (Bass 1985a, 1985b,
1990; Bryman 1992; Conger and Kanungo 1998, 1987; Sankowsky 1995), the notion can
be broadly captured by reference to six elements:
•
a heroic figure (usually with attributed past success stories);
•
a mystic in touch with higher truths;
•
a value-driven individual rather than one who is apparently purely self-serving;
•
someone who is perceived to ‘know the way’;
•
an individual who has a vision of a more desirable and achievable future;
•
and finally, someone thought to be capable of caring for and developing
followers.
It is evident from all six points that they reflect attributes of personality and behaviour.
Page | 49
Learner Guide
The construct of the ‘transformational leader’, on the other hand, although closely
related in many ways, is distinct in that it refers to an approach to leading which aspires
to significant organizational change through engaged and committed followers. It was
John McGregor Burns (1978) who emphasized the meaning and significance of
transformational leadership by contrasting it with transactional leadership. This theme
was picked up and elaborated by Bass (1985a, 1985b, 1990).
According to Bass, transformational leadership has four components:
•
individualized consideration (the leader is alert to the needs of followers and also
takes care to develop them);
•
intellectual stimulation (the leader encourages followers to think in creative ways
and to propose innovative ideas);
•
inspirational motivation (energizing followers to achieve extraordinary things);
•
idealized influence (offers followers a role model).
The component which most centrally captures the idea of transformational leadership
is that of ‘inspirational motivation’. This notion is decidedly change-focused. It holds
forth the idea of ordinary people achieving extraordinary things through the influence
of the leader. This kind of leader reduces complexity, doubt, cynicism and ambiguity by
cutting through to the ‘essential’ elements, and these are expressed in simple, readily
understandable language. Moreover, these simple truths are expressed with conviction.
The goal – or better still the vision – is rendered clear and it is made to seem both
desirable and achievable. Organizational members are asked to forsake mediocrity and
routine and aspire instead to reach a future state of such high achievement that it
deserves the willing expenditure of extra discretionary effort and commitment (Bass
1985a, 1985b, 1990).
Thus, there are evident overlaps between the notions of the charismatic leaders and
the transformational leader.
In brief, transformational leaders usually require many of the attributes of charisma;
but, conversely, charisma alone is not enough to enable transformational leadership.
Page | 50
Learner Guide
3.6
Servant Leadership
Servant leadership was developed by Robert K. Greenleaf in 1970.
“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to
serve, to serve first.” -Robert K. Greenleaf
Servant leadership is a philosophy and set of practices that enriches the lives of
individuals, builds better organizations and ultimately creates a more just and caring
world. It means putting your team first, and yourself second.
A servant-leader focuses primarily on the growth and well-being of people and the
communities to which they belong. While traditional leadership generally involves the
accumulation and exercise of power by one at the “top of the pyramid,” servant
leadership is different. The servant-leader shares power, puts the needs of others first
and helps people develop and perform as highly as possible.
The essential idea is that the leader serves the people he/she leads which implies that
they are an end in themselves rather than a means to an organizational purpose or
bottom line.
Robert Greenleaf recognized that organizations as well as individuals could be servantleaders. Indeed, he had great faith that servant-leader organizations could change the
world. In his second major essay, The Institution as Servant, Greenleaf articulated what
is often called the “credo.” There he said:
“This is my thesis: caring for persons, the more able and the less able serving each other,
is the rock upon which a good society is built. Whereas, until recently, caring was largely
person to person, now most of it is mediated through institutions – often large, complex,
powerful, impersonal; not always competent; sometimes corrupt. If a better society is to
be built, one that is more just and more loving, one that provides greater creative
opportunity for its people, then the most open course is to raise both the capacity to
serve and the very performance as servant of existing major institutions by new
regenerative forces operating within them.”
Servant leadership is not a leadership style or technique as such. Rather it's a way of
behaving that you adopt over the longer term. It complements democratic leadership
styles, and it has similarities with Transformational Leadership – which is often the most
effective style to use in business situations – and Level 5 Leadership – which is where
leaders demonstrate humility in the way they work.
Transformational leadership can inspire workers to embrace change by fostering a
company culture of accountability, ownership and workplace autonomy.
Page | 51
Learner Guide
Transformational leadership is a leadership style in which leaders encourage, inspire
and motivate employees to innovate and create change that will help grow and shape
the future success of the company. This is accomplished by setting an example at the
executive level through a strong sense of corporate culture, employee ownership and
independence in the workplace.
The concept of Level 5 Leadership was created by business consultant, Jim Collins. He
wrote about it in a well-respected 2001 Harvard Business Review article, and published
his research in his popular book, "Good to Great."
Collins found that Level 5 leaders have humility, and they don't seek success for their
own glory; rather, success is necessary so that the team and organization can thrive.
They share credit for success, and they're the first to accept blame for mistakes. Collins
also says that they're often shy, but fearless when it comes to making decisions,
especially ones that most other people consider risky.
What do servant leaders do?
•
devote themselves to serving the needs of organization members.
•
focus on meeting the needs of those they lead.
•
develop employees to bring out the best in them.
•
coach others and encourage their self-expression.
•
facilitate personal growth in all who work with them.
•
listen and build a sense of community.
Servant leaders are felt to be effective because the needs of followers are so looked
after that they reach their full potential, hence perform at their best.
A Critique of Servant Leadership
Servant leadership is flawed, because organizations are a means of serving the ends of
shareholders, hence employees are a means to an end. Therefore, no leader can serve
the needs of employees if their needs get in the way of the organization’s mission. The
idea of servant leadership is confused because it plays on the idea that an effective
leader or manager needs to CONSIDER the needs of employees, but considering their
needs is a far cry from being a servant or slave to them.
Shifting metaphors from leaders-as-autocrats to leaders-as-servants is going from one
extreme to the other. Neither end of the spectrum is very revealing about how
organizations function.
Page | 52
Learner Guide
Chapter 4
Applying the different roles and qualities of
leadership in a work context
4.1
Case Study 1
The KZN Electronics Company is located in a suburb of Durban. Management forecasts
indicated that the company would enjoy moderate growth during the next 10 years.
This growth rate would require the promotion of a number of individuals to newly
created positions of general manager, which would, in turn, require them to spend
most of their time working with departmental managers and less time on production,
output, and cost issues.
A majority of the candidates for the three new general manager positions had been
with the company for at least 15 years. They were all skilled in the production aspects
of operations. Dan Mazibuko, the vice president, felt, however, that none of the
candidates had the training or overall insight into company problems to move smoothly
into the general manager positions. The board of directors had decided that the three
new general managers would be recruited from within the company despite these
anticipated problems.
KZN Electronics, in attempting to find the best candidates for the new position, hired a
consulting firm, Kwapele Consulting (KC), to perform an internal search for qualified
individuals. Through interviews, testing, and a review of company records, the
consulting firm generated a list of six candidates.
One of the candidates found by KC was Jabu Mahapa. The analysis used to assess Jabu
involved the study of environmental variables and his current style of leadership.
Exhibit 1 presents a profile of Jabu’s leadership style and various environmental factors
that have some impact on this style.
Jabu’s present leadership style, which is high in task orientation and low in relationship
orientation, is similar to the leadership styles of the other five general manager
candidates. The expectations of the company, the potential subordinates of the general
manager, and the new position of general manager are not consistent with Jabu’s or
any of the other candidates’ present leadership styles.
The shaded, intersecting area indicates where the expectations of the company, the
new position, and the subordinates would be consistent. This is assumed by KC to be
the ideal leadership style for candidates to use once they have been promoted to the
general manager position.
Page | 53
Learner Guide
If Jabu or any of the other candidates accepted the general manager jobs, they would
have to significantly increase their relationships orientation. If they did not change their
orientation, there would be, according to the consulting firm, a high probability of
failure.
Dan Mazibuko was adamant about not going outside KZN Electronics to find three
potentially successful new general managers. He and the entire board of directors
wanted to utilize a recruitment-from-within policy to secure the three best general
managers.
It was Dan’s belief that a leader could modify the style of leadership that he or she had
used to meet new situational demands. This belief, and the internal recruitment plan,
led Dan to call a meeting to discuss a program to improve the compatibility between
the three general managers finally selected –Jabu Mahapa, Sipho Mhlongo, and Gregg
Shumacher – and the environmental factors: the company, the subordinates, and the
requirements of the new position.
Jabu Mahapa Profile of Leadership
Relationship orientation
H
i
g
General manager
position
Company
expectations
Subordinates’
expectations for
the behaviour of
general manager
h
Jabu’s present
style
L
o
L
w
o
w
Questions for Consideration
1.
Task orientation
H
i
g
h
Do you believe that the diagnosis and resulting profile prepared by the Kwapele
Consulting was a necessary step in the process of finding a potentially successful
group of general managers? Explain.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Page | 54
Learner Guide
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
2.
What alternatives are available to modify the potential effectiveness of Jabu
Mahapa in the new general manager position?
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
3.
Why will it be difficult for Jabu Mahapa to modify his style of leadership?
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
4.2
Case Study 2
Setting: Corporate Headquarters
Your Position: Marketing Director
As marketing director, you frequently receive non-routine requests from customers.
One such request, from a relatively new customer, is for extended terms on a large
purchase (R2.5 million) involving several of your product lines. The request is for
extremely favourable terms that you would not consider except for the high inventory
level of most product lines at the present time due to the unanticipated slack period
that the company has experienced over the last six months.
You realize that the request is probably a starting point for negotiations, and you have
proved your abilities to negotiate the most favourable arrangements in the past. As
preparation for these negotiations, you have familiarized yourself with the financial
situation of the customer, using various investment reports that you receive regularly.
Page | 55
Learner Guide
Reporting to you are four sales managers, each of whom has responsibility for a single
product line. They know of the order, and like you, they believe that it is important to
negotiate terms with minimum risk and maximum returns to the company. They are
likely to differ on what constitutes an acceptable level of risk. The two younger
managers have developed a reputation of being “risk takers,” whereas the two more
senior managers are substantially more conservative.
Questions for Consideration
1.
After reading the case study, select and explain the proper decision style, using the
Vroom-Yetton model.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
2.
Join a group and discuss the answer with the objective to reach consensus.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
3.
Reconvene as a large group and explain your group’s rationale to the other groups.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
4.4
Understanding the leader’s role
All members of a person’s role-set depend on that person’s performance in some
fashion; they are rewarded by it, judged in terms of it, or require it to perform their
own tasks. Because they have a stake in that person’s performance, they develop
beliefs and attitudes about what he or she should not do as part of the role. Such
prescriptions and proscriptions held by members of a role-set are designated role
expectations; in the aggregate they define the role, the behaviours expected of the
person who holds it.
The dynamic process of creating expectations can be observed as a to-and-fro game
between the emergent leader and the followers.
Page | 56
Learner Guide
The same logic applies to other possible treatments of leaders, for example how they
should be assessed in terms of their current performance (e.g. appraisal) or future
potential (e.g. decisions about promotion, transfer, secondment or succession
planning). It also applies to how they should be trained to enhance their abilities to
perform their roles.
So, in order to understand any leader’s role we need to understand both the
organizational context in which it exists and what the leader is expected to achieve in
terms of outcomes.
There are several qualities which are associated with Leadership and which need to be
developed when people assume leadership roles.
•
A Sense of Mission: successful leaders have a VISION or DREAM which they are
determined to see fulfilled.
•
An Ability to put their Mission into Action: leaders make things happen and put
their vision into effect. They act to make their dream a reality.
•
An Emotional Maturity: this is an ability to separate oneself from a situation and
make a dispassionate decision. It is also an ability to act under adversity or
pressure.
•
Independence: leaders can separate themselves from the group, are innovative
and act decisively. They can continue to follow a vision when outside support is
lacking or reward is not immediate.
•
Willpower: a commitment and intense interest to see an action to its completion
is a trait associated with leadership.
•
Courage: leadership entails a willingness to take risks if the return is significant
and achievable. Leaders do not always play it safe.
•
Ambition: drive and energy toward a goal are characteristics associated with
leadership.
•
Empathy: leaders understand the needs, wants and desires of a group. They are
able to formulate a plan which addresses these needs.
•
Resilience: endurance and the ability to bounce back after failure or
disappointment is a characteristic of a good leader.
•
Management of Attention: leaders manage and direct the attention of others
through a compelling vision. They communicate a sense of mission to others and
involve others in that mission.
Page | 57
Learner Guide
4.5
Role-model and its effect on the work context
True role models are those who possess the qualities that we would like to have and
those who have affected us in a way that makes us want to be better people. To
advocate for ourselves and our goals and take leadership on the issues that we believe
in. We often don’t recognize our true role models until we have noticed our own
personal growth and progress.
In a good mentoring relationship, you, as the leader or senior partner, can be a role
model through both your words and your actions. By who you are, you provide a
personal window for the subordinate or team member on a possible future. Your
ethical, scientific, and professional behaviour all leave a strong impression on
subordinates or team members, as does your attitude toward your work.
Communicate your feelings about your professional career. Share your frustrations as
well as your enthusiasms. When something excites you, tell your subordinates or team
members why. Communicate the importance of mentoring and your hope that
subordinates or team members will someday be mentors themselves.
You would probably think that a role model in the workplace would be a manager or Clevel executive. However, someone can be a role model or a leader without having any
official leadership position title.
For instance, let's say that you have a colleague who is always calm under pressure,
trustworthy, and gets things done. That is pretty good role-model behaviour that others
can look up to and try to emulate in order to succeed. That colleague is just like any
other staff member, but during times of need, this employee may be the one consulted
as opposed to an official leader, like a manager.
Others might be inspired by that role model to work harder and/or better if they see
that this colleague's attitude and ethics lead him to success. So, role models can be
thought of as unofficial leaders in an organization by virtue of setting positive examples
which others can follow.
Becoming a positive role model rarely happens naturally. In fact, a good dose of selfawareness is often necessary to become a good example for others. Self-awareness
refers to the ability of someone to assess one's own strengths, weaknesses, and
personality and to do that in order to better oneself and understand how those things
affect people around you. By becoming self-aware of your own leadership style, you can
better pinpoint how your qualities are either making you a good role model or a poor
role model in your organization.
Page | 58
Learner Guide
For example, if you become aware that others perceive your yelling not as assertive but
rather as highly obnoxious, you will then be able to come to the realization that your
yelling might be forcing good employees to seek a better work environment, such as
moving to another company or causing people to lose their desire to work hard.
By being self-aware about this flaw in your leadership style, you'll realize that it's a
weakness and understand how it affects others and the company. This can provide
good cause for self-correction and thus the development of qualities often associated
with good role models, be they official or unofficial leaders.
Be a Better Role Model
Managers are on stage every day. Employees, customers, suppliers, and many others
are watching your every move and learning from your behaviour. To be an effective role
model, you must exemplify these characteristics every day:
•
Hard work. Effective role models work hard and pitch in when their staff needs
help, always demonstrating a commitment to company goals. No task is below
you as a leader. If the floor needs to be mopped and there is no one available to
do it, do it yourself, and do it well. Not only does that ensure critical tasks are
completed, it also shows employees that the “it’s-not-my-job” mentality isn’t
allowed.
•
Trust. Trust isn’t given, it’s earned. Show your team that you can be trusted by
always being fair, honest, and consistent. Don’t engage in gossip, and don’t
tolerate it within your staff. Employees need to know you have their backs, and
you should take every opportunity you can to prove it.
•
Accountability. Role models take responsibility for their actions and inspire
others to do the same. If you make a mistake, admit it and let the team know
how you plan to correct the situation. Never blame others or make excuses.
•
Respect. Always show respect for all individuals; customers, employees and
vendors. Respect is paramount in every situation, and is especially important
during situations when you have to correct behaviour. Never criticize an
employee in public, and keep your feedback focused on the task at hand.
•
Positivity. Business is nothing if not unpredictable. As a leader, you need to be
prepared to deal with high stress situations. Your team will be watching closely as
you handle challenges. If you overreact or get easily overwhelmed, your staff will
be inclined to do the same. Model the positive behaviour you expect from your
staff.
Page | 59
Learner Guide
•
Persistence. Steady persistence in the face of obstacles or difficulties means your
team can count on you in tough times. Don’t abandon tasks when times are
tough, approach them with a sense of urgency and resolve.
•
Integrity. You must follow every rule you expect your staff to follow. Some
leaders think their position allows them to bend the rules here and there. Not so.
Being on time, staying productive, and following all company policies is critical to
be an effective role model.
4.6
Selecting and applying a leadership theory in own work context
Let us look at five leadership theories:
•
Transformational Leadership
•
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
•
Adaptive Leadership
•
Strengths-Based Leadership
•
Servant Leadership
Before we unpack contemporary theories of leadership, we need to define the term
itself. Leadership theory scholar Dr. Peter Northouse defines leadership as “a process
whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.” This
definition makes clear that leadership is not a trait or behaviour, and it is not a position.
You are not made a leader by your job title; you are made a leader by your influence.
Finally, contemporary theories of leadership wrestle with the motivations of leaders:
can you be a leader if your goal is selfish or even malicious? The classic question is,
“Was Adolf Hitler a leader?” Theories of leadership must wrestle with the moral
implications of a leader’s motivations.
As you’ll see in several of the theories below, many theories would answer the question
of Hitler with a firm no: Hitler was a dictator, but not a leader. He had positional
authority, but did not show true leadership.
To begin our exploration of leadership theories, let’s start with one of the most
researched and referenced today, transformational leadership.
Transformational Leadership
The concepts of transformational leadership were brought to prominence by political
sociologist James MacGregor Burns, in the late 1970s. Burns identified two types of
leadership,
Page | 60
Learner Guide
Transactional: where a leader influences others by what they offer in exchange, the
transaction;
Transformational: where a leader connects with followers in such a way that it raises
the level of motivation and morality.
Those two words – motivation and morality – are important, as it demands that
transformational leaders be committed to a collective good. This may be a societal
good, such as starting a community centre or improving air quality, or a more
personalized good, such as helping direct reports reach their own potential.
Activating transformational leadership:
Idealized influence, or charisma: Transformational leaders have an uncanny ability to
make you want to follow the vision they establish.
Inspirational motivation: Communication is a vehicle of inspiration for transformational
leaders; they use words to encourage others and inspire action.
Intellectual stimulation: Transformational leaders stretch others to think more deeply,
challenge assumptions, and innovate.
Individualized concern: Finally, while focused on the common good, transformational
leaders show care and concern for individuals.
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
The concept of individualized concern has some carry-over to our second theory,
Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX). To understand this theory, you only need to
think back to your high school days: almost every student could be divided into two
categories, popular or unpopular.
LMX theory explains that in any group or organization, there are in-group members and
out-group members. In-group members work well with the leader, have a personality
that fits with the leader’s, and are often willing to take on extra tasks or responsibilities.
Out-group members are less compatible with the leader; they may hold dissenting
opinions, have clashing personalities, or be less willing to take on extra assignments.
Not surprisingly, in-group members are more likely to earn promotions; out-group
members are more likely to leave.
Activating LMX theory:
For followers, applying the concepts of LMX theory is easy: align yourself with the
leader, take on extra tasks, and expect positive results. For leaders, LMX offers a greater
challenge, because making your team as productive as possible will mean finding ways
Page | 61
Learner Guide
to turn out-group members into in-group members. Individualized concern, the final
factor of transformational leadership, may offer one path to converting out-group
members.
Additionally, LMX theory has important implications for improving diversity and
inclusion. If minorities, women, or people with disabilities routinely identify as outgroup members, the leader should ask the question, “What is required to be an ingroup member here, and are we creating unintentional barriers for others?”
Adaptive Leadership
Adaptive leadership, one of the most recent leadership theories to emerge, says a
leader is someone who mobilizes people to take on tough challenges, like inclusiveness.
Adaptive challenges are challenges where solutions aren’t readily apparent.
Adaptive leadership makes a distinction between leadership and authority. Authority is
positional and requires power; leadership, in contrast, requires influence and the ability
to mobilize. In the adaptive leadership model, the leaders are individuals who earn
results through their influence.
Activating adaptive leadership:
Individuals can show adaptive leadership through practicing six behaviours, identified
by scholar Ronald Heifetz:
1)
Get on the balcony: step out of the fray to gain a new perspective.
2)
Identify adaptive challenges: adaptive challenges usually stir emotions;
recognizing the nature of these challenges and their complexities helps clarify the
path forward.
3)
Regulate distress: create a safe emotional space for addressing the tension of
adaptive challenges.
4)
Maintain disciplined attention: encourage focus.
5)
Give the work back to the people: seek collaborative approaches.
6)
Project leadership voices from below: listen especially to out-group members,
the marginalized, and the external community.
Strengths-Based Leadership
Running as an undercurrent through many of these theories is the idea of strengths: an
attribute or quality that makes an individual or group successful. In-group members are
often valued by the leader for their specific strengths. When an adaptive leader “gives
Page | 62
Learner Guide
the work back to the people,” the leader is signalling trust in the people’s strengths and
competency.
Strengths-Based Leadership is the concept of identifying and leveraging your own
strengths, and the strengths of others, to achieve results. The concept draws from the
field of positive psychology, and from the work of the Gallup Organization and their
popular StrengthsFinder 2.0 assessment.
Much of the research and discussion regarding strengths-based leadership centres
around self-assessments of specific characteristics. Gallup proposes that strengths fall
into four talent theme categories: executing, influencing, relationship building, and
strategic thinking. Understanding your set of strengths, and those of your colleagues,
can help you improve team cohesion and productivity because when we work in the
area of our strengths, we often feel more engaged and energized.
Activating strengths-based leadership:
Strengths-based leadership is more of a mindset than a formal theory. To better
understand the concepts, leaders should take the StrengthsFinder 2.0 or another
assessment tool. Additionally, leaders should recognize and affirm the strengths of
others, and find opportunities for people to work in their area of strength.
Servant Leadership
Our final theory to explore is servant leadership, which originated in the writings of
Robert Greenleaf. Servant leadership requires leaders to place the needs of others over
their own self-interests. Greenleaf believed leaders have a social responsibility to care
for the disenfranchised and to serve first; he proposes shifting power to those who are
being led.
Activating servant leadership:
Northouse, referencing Spears (2002), identifies 10 characteristics of a servant leader.
Each implies behaviours a servant leader must pursue to activate this style of
leadership.
1)
Listening: servant leaders must listen first.
2)
Empathy: servant leaders must “stand in the shoes” of another person.
3)
Healing: servant leaders care about the well-being of their followers.
4)
Awareness: servant leaders are attuned to the contexts of others.
5)
Persuasion: servant leaders offer clear and persistent communication to advance
change.
Page | 63
Learner Guide
6)
Conceptualization: servant leaders are visionary and provide a clear sense of
goals and direction.
7)
Foresight: servant leaders anticipate the future.
8)
Stewardship: servant leaders take responsibility for their role as a leader.
9)
Commitment to the growth of people: servant leaders are committed to help
others develop.
10) Building community: servant leaders pursue unity and relatedness with others.
You may have noticed while reading that many of the theories are related, and that the
practice of one does not preclude the practice of another. It’s possible, for example, to
be a transformational and adaptive leader who identifies the strengths of out-group
members to bring them into the in-group, through servant leadership.
Trying to do all that, however, sounds exhausting. Better, perhaps, to pick one theory to
use as a lens through which to explore your own leadership. Find what is useful, test
drive new applications, and adapt to fit the needs of your professional circumstances.
4.7
Analysing leadership roles, qualities and abilities in order to formulate
own leadership development strategy
Think of your leadership development as an acquisition of knowledge and skills which
will improve your ability to achieve results with others.
These four fundamentals will help to set the stage for your personal development.
Fundamental 1
Principles of Leadership Development
•
You must assume responsibility for your development.
•
You must develop mirrors in your organization to provide feedback on your
current skill level.
•
You must prepare a personal development plan to initiate development activities.
Fundamental 2
•
Personal Awareness
For development to be successful, you must recognize that acquiring knowledge
and skill is necessary to achieve results in your organization.
Page | 64
Learner Guide
Fundamental 3
•
Ownership
You must understand that no one can do it to you or for you. You must commit to
undertaking the educational activities necessary to grow and develop. This may
mean some personal sacrifice and time commitment to ensure success.
Fundamental 4
•
Learn by Doing
The amount of formal classroom time available for your development will be
limited. You must be willing to try out your knowledge and skill acquisition on the
job. This will mean making a conscious effort to try new ideas while you are
performing your job.
The Stages of Development
•
Recognition The individual must recognize that making a change in behaviour or
developing new skills will be beneficial or is necessary.
•
Choice The individual must make a free-will decision to do something about the
opportunity to improve or to develop new skills that he has recognized.
•
Plan/Act The individual must think through what is needed to make the change
and develop a specific, systematic approach.
•
Support The understanding and assistance of others is usually helpful and often
necessary, in order to carry out the plan and overcome obstacles.
Development Partnerships
The success of any development process is very dependent on how well the individuals,
team leaders and business leaders are willing to provide support and direction.
Employee
Team Leader
Business Leader
Establishes interests/ goals Creates a positive climate
trust
Provides principles/ strategies for
development
Seeks feedback/ advice
Gives candid feedback
Provides an investment
Provides motivation/
effort
Is a coach, not a boss
Training and development
opportunities
Is realistic
Is a role model
Career-path information
Takes ownership
Is an advocate
Is proactive
Page | 65
Learner Guide
Leadership Focus Increases as Business Leaders Develop
The transition from individual leader to team leader and eventually to business leader
requires a shift in focus. The individual leader will spend most of the time applying his
core knowledge and skill obtained during his technical-education process.
An example would be a company specialist who would work primarily on design or
problem-solving. This individual would be responsible for his own work but would often
work with a team of peers.
The team leader is responsible for the output of a group of individuals, either reporting
directly or indirectly. The team leader is focused on guiding that team to the required
actions but often must use interpersonal skills, influence skills and collaboration to
motivate the team to achieve results. The focus of the team leader is a balance of
technical and relational abilities.
The business leader is most likely responsible for a business unit or department. This
individual may have several team leaders who report indirectly. The focus of the
business leader is much more on business strategy and people than on technical depth
of knowledge and skill.
Developing Your Leadership Ability
To acquire the knowledge and skill you will need to grow in leadership ability, the
following are essential:
1.
A set of core leadership knowledge and skills or competencies.
2.
A process for assessing your current skill level.
3.
A guide to personal development.
4.
A method to test your assessment.
Core Leadership Competencies Inventory
The list of skills that leaders are expected to develop can be very extensive. The goal of
the core leadership competencies inventory is to provide a focus for your development
as a leader. The ten core skills will help you to establish a basic foundation and
implement your Leadership ability.
•
Communication
•
Personal impact/influence
•
Drive for results
•
Problem-solving/decision-making
Page | 66
Learner Guide
•
Team leadership
•
Flexibility / Respond to change
•
Breakthrough thinking
•
Empowerment
•
Values orientation
•
Technical expertise
Progression of Knowledge and Skill for Leaders
Knowledge/Skill
Communication
Individual Leader
Team Leader
Business Leader
AS
S FD
FD
Personal Impact/Influence
A
S
FD
Drive for Results
A
S FD
FD
Problem-Solving/Decision-Making
A
S
FD
Team Leadership
A
S
FD
AS
S
FD
Breakthrough Thinking
A
S
FD
Empowerment
A
AS
FD
Values Orientation
A
AS
FD
Technical Expertise
AS
FD
S
Flexibility
KEY:
A
Awareness Possess the basic skills and knowledge to do the job.
S
Skilful Is able to demonstrate most aspects of the skill
FD Fully Developed Is able to demonstrate all aspects of the skill on a regular basis
Page | 67
Learner Guide
References
Adair, J. (1983) Effective Leadership, London: Pan.
Avolio, B. and B. Bass (1988) ‘Transformational leadership, charisma and beyond’, in J. Hunt, H.
Baliga and C. Dachler (eds) Emerging Leadership Vistas, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Bass, B. (1985a) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bendix, R. (1956) Work and Authority in Industry, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Bennis, W. (1994) On Becoming a Leader, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bennis, W.G. and R.J. Thomas (2002) Geeks and Geezers; How Era, Values, and Defining Moments
Shape Leaders, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brodbeck, F.C. (2000) ‘Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries’,
Journal of Occupational amd Organizational Psychology 73(1): 1-29.
Brodbeck, F.C., M. Frese and M. Javidan (2002) ‘Leadership made in Germany: low on
compassion, high on performance’, Academy of Management Executive 16(1): 16-29.
Bryman, A. (1992) Charisma and Leadership in Organisations, London: Sage.
Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership, New York: Harper & Row.
Child, J. (1969) British Management Thought, London: Allen & Unwin.
Conger, J. (1993) ‘The brave new world of leadership training’, Organizational Dynamics 21(3):
46-58.
Conger, J.A. and B. Benjamin (1999) Building Leaders: How Successful Companies Develop the
Next Generation, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Conger, J. and R. Kanungo (1987) ‘Towards a behavioural theory of charismatic leadership in
organizational settings’, Academy of Management Review 12:635-47
DiMaggio, P.W. and W. Powell (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and
collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review 48: 147-60.
Dotlich, D. and J. Noel (1998) Action Learning: How the World’s Top Companies Are Recreating
their Leaders and Themselves, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Fiedler, F. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fullan, M. (200la) Leading in a Culture of Change, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Page | 68
Learner Guide
Fulmer, R.M., P.A. Gibbs and M. Goldsmith (2000) ‘Developing leaders: how winning companies
keep on winning’, Sloan Management Review 42(1): 49-59.
Giber, D., L. Carter and M. Goldsmith (2000) Leadership Development Handbook: Case Studies.
Instruments and Training, Lexington, MA: Linkage Press.
Goleman, D., R. Boyatzis and A. McKee (2002) Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of
Emotional Intelligence, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Graen, G.B. and M. Uhl-Bien (1995) ‘Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of
leader-exchange theory’, Leadership Quarterly6:219-47.
Graen, J. B. Orris, and K. M. Alvares, “Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness: Some
Experimental Results,” Journal of Applied Psychology, June 1971, pp. 196-201.
Hersey P. and K. Blanchard (1984) The Management of Organizational Behavior EnglewoodCliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hollenbeck, G. and M. McCall (1999) ‘Leadership development’, inA. KrautandA. Korman (eds)
Evolving Practices in Human Resource Management, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Humphrey, R.H. (2002) ‘The many faces of emotional leadership’, Leadership Quarterly 13(5):
493-504.
Arthur G. Jago and Victor H. Vroom. “Perceptions of Leadership Style: Superior and Subordinate
Descriptions of Decision-Making Behaviour,” in Leadership Frontiers, ed. J. G. Hunt and L. L.
Larson (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1975), pp. 103-20.
Kotter, J. (1988) The Leadership Factor, New York: Free Press.
Kouzes, J.M. and B.Z. Posner (1997) The Leadership Challenge: How to Get Extraordinary Things
Done in Organizations, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Likert, R. (1961) New Patterns of Management, New York: McGraw-Hill.
McCauley, C.D., R. Moxley and E.V. Velsor (eds) (1998) The Center for Creative Leadership
Handbook of Leadership Development, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
McGregor, D. (1960) The Human Side of Enterprise, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Maslow, A. (1954) Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper & Row.
Mellahl, K. (2000) ‘The teaching of leadership in UK MBA programmes’, Journal of Management
Development 19(3/4): 297-309.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publishers, Inc.
Page | 69
Learner Guide
Pawar, B.S. and K.K. Eastman (1997) ‘The nature and implications of contextual influences on
transformational leadership’, Academy of Management Review 22(1): 80-110.
Sankowsky, D. (1995) ‘The charismatic leader as narcissist: understanding the abuse of power’,
Organizational Dynamics 23(4): 57-71.
Stogdill, R. (1974) Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research. New York: Free
Press.
Vicere, A.A. (2000) ‘Ten observations on e-learning and leadership development’, Human
Resource Planning 23(4): 34-47.
Vitello-Cicciu, J.M. (2002) ‘Exploring emotional intelligence: implications for nursing leaders’,
Journal of Nursing Administration 32(4): 203-10.
Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation, New York: John Wiley.
Vroom, V.H. and P.W. Yetton (1973) Leadership and Decision Making,Pittsburgh: University of
Pittsburgh Press.
Victor H. Vroom and Philip Yetton, Leadership and Decision Making (Pittsburgh: University of
Pittsburgh Press, 1973), @ 1973 by the University of Pittsburgh Press.
Waldman, D.A. (1999) ‘CEO charismatic leadership: levels of management and levels of analysis
effects’, Academy of Management Review 24(2): 266-86.
Wolff, S.B., A.T. Pescosolido and V.U. Druskat (2002) ‘Emotional intelligence as the basis of
leadership emergence in self-managing teams’, Leadership Quarterly 13(5): 505-22.
Zaleznik, A. (1992) ‘Managers and leaders: are they different?’, Harvard Business Review, MarchApril: 126-35.
Page | 70