Research Developments Popularizing this Approach: 1. Lewin, Lipitt, & White Study 2. The U of M Studies 3. The Ohio State Studies 4. The Managerial Grid Building a Pyramid Exercise! Leadership: A Behavioral Approach The Lewin, Lippitt, &White Study Groups of 10- and 11-year- old boys to meet after school to work on various hobbies. Each group included a man who adopted one of three leadership styles The authoritarian, or autocratic, leader The democratic leader The laissez-faire leader The Lewin, Lippitt, &White Study The authoritarian, or autocratic, leader The democratic leader Took no input from the members in making decisions about group activities, did not discuss the long-range goals of the group, emphasized his authority, dictated who would work on specific projects Made certain that all activities were first discussed by the entire group. He allowed the group members to make their own decisions about work projects or partners and encouraged the development of an egalitarian atmosphere. The laissez-faire leader Rarely intervened in the group activities. Groups with this type of atmosphere made all decisions on their own without any supervision, and their so-called leader functioned primarily as a source of technical information. Results Autocratic Increasingly more submissive & demanded the leader's attention and approval. Productivity was same as democratic, but required leader's presence Democratic Showed less tension and hostility More cohesion and cooperation. About as productive as autocratic, but also in leader's absence. Laissez-faire Overall, lower productivity, satisfaction, and cohesiveness The University of Michigan Studies Likert viewed leadership as having 2 primary dimensions : "production- centered" "employee- centered." Production Centered Behavior When a leader pays close attention to the work of subordinates, explains work procedures, and is keenly interested in performance Employee Centered Behavior When the leader is interested in developing a cohesive work group and in ensuring employees are satisfied with their jobs. A Single Continuum These two styles of leader behavior were believed to lie at the ends of a single continuum Ohio State Studies Developed 2 measures to assess preferred leadership behaviors: The LBDQ (Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire) Measures subordinates perceptions of the leader behaviors The LOQ (Leader Opinion Questionnaire) Measures leaders perception of own style. Items Adapted from LBDQ Consideration Items: 1. Is easy to get along with 2. Puts ideas generated by the group into operation 3. Treats everyone the same 4. Let's followers know of upcoming changes 5. Explains actions to all group members Initiating Structure: 1. Tells group members what is expected 2. Promotes the use of standardized procedures 3. Makes decisions about work methods 4. Clarifies role relationship among group members 5. Sets specific goals and monitors performance closely Ohio State Studies Surveyed 1000's of workers about their perceptions of their supervisor (LBDQ) Found results which suggested two basic leader behaviors or styles: Initiating structure behavior Consideration behavior Initiating Structure Behavior When the leader clearly defines the leadersubordinate, establishes formal lines of communication, and determines how tasks are to be performed. CHARACTERISTICS: Leaders of high producing groups; leaders rated highly by superiors; low morale, high grievance rates, high turnover Consideration Behavior The leader shows concern for subordinates and attempts to establish a warm, friendly, and supportive climate. CHARACTERISTICS: Leaders of groups with high morale; leaders of groups with lower productivity Two Variables These two behaviors were not viewed as opposite ends of a continuum, but as independent variables. Initiating Structure Consideration Consideration Four Leadership Styles Derived from the Ohio State Studies High Low Low Structure, High Consideration High Structure, High Consideration Low Structure, Low Consideration High Structure, Low Consideration Low High Initiating Structure The Leadership Grid The results of behavioral studies were incorporated into a grid The Leadership Grid utilizes the Concern for People versus Concern for Production dichotomy The Leadership Grid High 1.9 Country club management Concern for People 9 8 9.9 Team management 7 5.5 Middle-of-theroad-management 6 5 4 3 2 1 Low 9.1 Authoritycompliance 1.1 Impoverished management Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 Concern for Production 7 8 9 High Let’s Build a Pyramid! You are about to engage in a timed exercise. Using only the paper and tape given to you, the group to build the tallest free-standing structure at the end of 10 minutes wins. Good luck! Survey (keep your response private) 1 Not at all Satisfied 5 Extremely Satisfied Using the scale above, rate your overall satisfaction with your group process. Strengths of the Behavioral Style Approach - Marked a big shift in the focus of leadership work - A wide range of studies validates and gives credibility to this approach - Underscores the importance of the 2 core dimensions of leadership behavior: task and relationship. Weaknesses of the Approach - No adequate relationship between behavior and performance outcomes (morale, satisfaction, productivity) has been documented. - Failed to find universal leader behaviors that could be effective in almost every situation. - This approach implies that the most effective leadership style is high-high- but this actually may not be the case in all situations.