The Nature of Leadership
Leadership is a ‘process’ [focusing on what
leaders actually do] and a ‘property’.
As a process, leadership is the use of noncoercive influence to shape the group’s or
organization’s goals, to motivate behavior toward
the achievement of those goals, and to help define
group or organizational culture.
As a property, leadership is the set of
characteristics attributed to individuals who are
perceived to be leaders.
The Nature of Leadership
Leaders are people who can
influence the behaviors of others
without having to rely on force or
people whom others accept as
leaders.
Leadership and Management
Leadership and management are
related, but they are not the same.
Organizations need both leadership
and management if they are to be
effective.
Leadership is necessary to create
change; management is necessary to
achieve orderly results.
See Table 17.1, page 551.
Leadership and Power
Power is the ability to affect the behavior of
others.
One can have power without having to use it.
[football players working hard to keep their jobs]
In organizations, there are generally five [5]
kinds of power:
Legitimate power
Reward power
Coercive power
Referent power
Expert power
Legitimate Power
Legitimate power is granted
through the organizational hierarchy.
All people occupying the same
position possess the same legitimate
power.
Legitimate power is authority. Some
managers exercise authority but not
leadership.
[refusal of employees to do tasks not in job description]
Reward Power
Reward power is the ability to give or withhold
rewards. [salary increases, bonuses, promotion recommendations, praise, recognition and
interesting job assignments]
In general, the greater the number of rewards a
manager controls and the more important the rewards
are to subordinates, the greater is the manager’s
reward power.
If the subordinate is interested only in the formal
organization rewards, the manager is not considered a
leader.
However, if the subordinate is interested in receiving
the manager’s praise, gratitude and recognition, the
manager is exercising leadership.
Coercive Power
Coercive power is used to force compliance by
means of psychological, emotional or physical
threat.
Usually limited to verbal or written reprimands,
disciplinary layoffs, fines, demotion and/or
termination.
However, the more ‘punitive’ the elements under a
manager’s control and the more important they are
to subordinates, the more coercive power the
manager possesses.
The more a manager uses coercive power, the
more likely resentment and hostility will occur and
the less likely he will be seen as a leader.
Referent Power
Referent power is personal power that comes to a
person based on identification, imitation, loyalty or
charisma. [famous athletes, movie stars, etc]
Power that is abstract, not concrete.
Employees give this person power over them
because he/she is like them in personality,
background or attitudes.
Employees can copy this person by wearing the
same clothes, working the same hours, or
believing in the same management philosophy.
Referent power is more likely to be associated with
leadership.
Expert Power
Expert power is the personal power that
comes to someone based on the
information
or
expertise
he/she
possesses.
The more important the information and
the fewer people who have access to it,
the greater is the degree of expert power
possessed by an individual.
Both leaders and managers tend to have a
lot of expert power.
Using Power
How does a manager or leader use
power?
Legitimate request
Instrumental compliance
Coercion
Rational persuasion
Personal identification
Inspirational appeal
Information distortion
Using Power
Legitimate
request
–
the
subordinate recognizes that the
organization has given the manager
the right to make the request.
[most day-to-day
requests]
Instrumental compliance – the
subordinate complies to get the
reward the manager controls.
[agreeing to
work overtime gets praise or a bonus]
Using Power
Coercion – subordinate is told if
something is not done, punishment,
firing or a reprimand may result.
Rational persuasion occurs when
the manager can convince the
subordinate that compliance is in
his/her best interest.
[transfer may be good for his/her
career]
Using Power
Personal
identification
–
a
manager recognizes that he has
‘referent’ power over a subordinate
and shapes the behavior by
becoming
a
model
for
the
subordinate to imitate.
Inspirational appeal – depends in
part of the persuasive powers, and
referent power, of the manager.
[a plea for
loyalty to the organization]
Using Power
Information distortion – a manager
distorts or withholds information from
a subordinate to influence behavior.
[manager withholds info about several candidates for a certain position to secure his
‘favorite’ choice is selected]
This use of power may be unethical.
If subordinates find out, they may lose
confidence and trust in that manager’s
leadership.
Generic Approaches to Leadership
Generic
approaches
to
leadership assume that there is
one set of answers to the
leadership puzzle.
One approach focuses on
leadership ‘traits’ and the other
looks at leadership ‘behavior’.
Leadership Traits Approach
Leadership Traits Approach analyzed the
personal, psychological and physical traits of
strong leaders.
This approach assumed that some basic trait
or set of traits existed that differentiated
leaders from non-leaders.
Researchers thought that leadership traits
might include: intelligence, assertiveness,
above-average height, good vocabulary,
attractiveness, self-confidence and similar
attributes.
Leadership Traits Approach
During the early 1900’s hundreds of
studies were conducted in an
attempt
to
identify
important
leadership traits.
Although researchers gave up trying
to identify traits as predictors of
leadership ability, many people still
believe they have an impact.
Leadership Behaviors Approach
Researchers then turned to the
investigation of other variables,
especially the behaviors or actions
of leaders.
Three major approaches were
developed:
Michigan Studies
Ohio State Studies
Managerial Grid
Leadership Behaviors Approach
Michigan Studies – late 1940’s
Rensis Likert, University of Michigan, interviewed
leaders (managers) and followers (subordinates) and
identified two basic forms of leader behavior:
Job-centered leader behavior – managers pay close
attention to subordinates’ work, explain work
procedures and are keenly interested in performance.
Employee-centered leader behavior – managers are
interested in developing a cohesive work group and
ensuring that employees are satisfied with their jobs.
Likert argued employee-centered leader behavior was
more effective.
Leadership Behaviors Approach
Ohio State Studies – late 1940’s
Researchers at Ohio State University also suggested
that there are two basic leader behaviors or styles:
Initiating-structure behavior – the behavior of leaders
who define the leader-subordinate role so that everyone
knows what is expected, establish formal lines of
communication, and determine how tasks will be
performed.
Consideration behavior – the behavior of leaders who
show concern for subordinates and attempt to establish a
warm, friendly and supportive climate.
Ohio State researchers differed from Michigan
researchers in that they argued that a leader could exhibit
varying levels of initiating structure behavior and at the
same time varying levels of consideration behavior.
Leadership Behaviors Approach
Managerial Grid
Provides a means for evaluating leadership styles
and then trains managers to move toward an ideal
style of behavior.
The horizontal axis represents ‘concern for
production’ [similar to job-centered and initiatingstructure behaviors].
The vertical axis represents ‘concern for people’
[similar to employee-centered and consideration
behaviors].
See Figure 17.1, page 558.
Figure 17.1
Leadership
Grid
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Situational
approaches
to
understanding leadership came
about because researchers realized
that, although interpersonal and
task-oriented dimensions might be
useful to describe the behavior of
leaders, they were not useful to
predict or prescribe it.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Tannenbaum and
Continuum – 1958
Schmidt’s
Leadership
This approach laid the foundation for subsequent approaches to
identify key situational factors and how they interact to determine
appropriate leader behavior.
Besides purely job-centered behavior and employee-centered
behavior, they identified several intermediate behaviors that a
manager might consider.
At one extreme, the manager makes the decision; at the other,
the employees make the decision with minimal guidance.
Each point on the continuum is influenced by characteristics of
the manager, the subordinates and the situation being dealt with.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum
Managerial characteristics might include: the
manager’s value system, confidence in subordinates,
personal inclinations and feelings of security.
Subordinate characteristics might include:
the
subordinates’ need for independence, readiness to
assume responsibility, tolerance for ambiguity,
interest in the problem, understanding of goals,
knowledge, experience and expectations.
Situational characteristics that affect decision making
include: the type of organization, group effectiveness,
the problem itself, and time pressures.
See Figure 17.2, page 559.
Figure 17.2: Tannenbaum and
Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Some of the most important and widely
accepted situational theories of leadership
include:
Least-Preferred Coworker [LPC] Theory
The Path-Goal Theory
Vroom’s Decision Tree Approach
Leader-Member Exchange [LMX] Model
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Least-Preferred Coworker [LPC] Theory
suggests that the appropriate style of
leadership varies with situational
favorableness.
LPC Measure is the measuring scale
that asks leaders to describe the
person with whom he or she is able to
work least well.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Least-Preferred Coworker [LPC] Theory
Developed by Fred Fiedler
First truly situational theory of leadership.
Using a trait and behavioral approach, Fiedler identified two
styles of leadership – task oriented and relationship
oriented.
Uses a questionnaire to measure a manager’s answers to 16
scales which contain a positive and negative adjective
describing the person with whom the manager would be
least likely to want to work.
The leader’s LPC score is then calculated by adding up the
numbers.
High score = relationship-oriented
Low score = task-related
Situational Approaches to Leadership
EXAMPLE OF LPC CATEGORIES:
Frustrating
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Helpful
Tense
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Relaxed
Boring
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Interesting
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Favorableness of the Situation:
The underlying assumption of situational models
of leadership is that appropriate leader behavior
varies from one situation to another.
Fiedler believes that the key situational factor is
the favorableness of the situation from the
leader’s point of view.
This factor is determined by: [1] leader-member
relations, [2] task structure and [3] position
power.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Favorableness of the Situation:
Leader-member relations – the nature of
the relationship between the leader and
the work group.
Task structure – is the degree to which the
group’s task is well defined.
Position power – is the power given to the
leader’s position.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Favorableness and Leader Style:
Fiedler found that when the situation is
most and least favorable, a task-oriented
leader is most effective.
But when the situation is only moderately
favorable, a relationship-oriented leader is
predicted to be most effective.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Favorableness and Leader Style:
Fiedler argues that, for any given individual,
leader style is essentially fixed and cannot be
changed – leaders cannot change their behavior
to fit a particular situation because it is a part of
their personality.
Therefore, the situation must be changed to fit the
leader’s style.
His theory has been attacked based on the
grounds that it is not always supported by
research, but it has helped many managers to
recognize the importance of situational factors.
The Least-Preferred Coworker
Theory of Leadership
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Path-Goal Theory
[Evans and House]
The Path-Goal Theory of leadership
suggests that the primary functions of a
leader are to make valued or desired
rewards available in the workplace and to
clarify for the subordinate the kinds of
behavior
that
will
lead
to
goal
accomplishment and valued rewards – that
is, the leader should clarify the paths to
goal attainment.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Path-Goal Theory [assumes that leaders can change style]
Four kinds of Leader Behavior include:
Directive leader behavior – let subordinates know what is
expected of them, give guidance and direction and schedule
work.
Supportive leader behavior – being friendly and
approachable, showing concern for subordinate welfare and
treating members as equals.
Participative leader behavior includes consulting with
subordinates,
soliciting
suggestions
and
allowing
participation in decision making.
Achievement-oriented leader behavior means setting
challenging goals, expecting subordinates to perform at high
levels, encouraging subordinates and showing confidence in
subordinates’ abilities.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Situational Factors in Path-Goal Theory:
Theory focuses on the personal characteristics of
subordinates and environmental characteristics of
the workplace.
Important personal characteristics include the
subordinates’ perception of their own ability and
their locus of control.
Managers can do little or nothing to influence the
personal characteristics of subordinates, but they
can shape the environment to take advantage of
these personal characteristics by providing such
things as rewards and/or structuring tasks.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Situational Factors in Path-Goal Theory:
Environmental characteristics include factors
outside the subordinates’ control.
When ‘task structure’ is high, directive leadership is
less effective than when structure is low.
Formal authority system – higher degree of formality,
the less directive is the leader behavior accepted by
subordinates.
Nature of work group – if social satisfaction and support
are not received within the group, subordinates may
look to the leader for this support.
See Figure 17.4, page 565.
The Path-Goal Framework
Subordinates’
Personal
Characteristics
•Perceived ability
•Locus of control
Leader Behavior
•Directive
•Supportive
•Participative
•Achievement
oriented
Environmental
Characteristics
•Task structure
•Work group
Subordinates’ motivation to perform
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Vroom’s Decision Tree Approach – predicts
what kinds of situations call for different
degrees of group participation.
Developed by Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton;
further developed by Vroom and Arthur Jago.
Like Path-Goal, this approach attempts to
prescribe a leadership style appropriate to a given
situation.
It also assumes that the same leader may display
different leadership styles.
However, Vroom’s concerns itself with only a
single aspect of leadership – subordinate
participation in decision making.
Decision Making Styles
• Decide:
Manager
makes
decision.
• Consult
(Individually):
Present problem to group
members individually.
• Consult (Group): Present
problem to group members.
• Facilitate: Present to group
and facilitate group member
discussion.
• Delegate: Allow group to
define
parameters,
then
develop solutions.
Vroom’s
TimeDriven
Decision
Tree
Vroom’s Development-Driven
Decision Tree
Situational Approaches to Leadership
Leader-Member Exchange [LMX] Model – stresses that leaders
have different kinds of relationships with different
subordinates.
Developed by George Graen and Fred Dansereau
Stresses the importance of variable relationships between
supervisors and each of their subordinates.
Each superior-subordinate pair is referred to as a ‘vertical
dyad’.
In-Group is the small number of trusted subordinates.
Out-Group are subordinates who are not part of the trusted
group.
Generally In-Group members have a higher level of
performance and satisfaction.
The Leader-Member Exchange
(LMX) Model
Leader
Subordinate
1
Subordinate
2
Out-group
Subordinate
3
Subordinate
4
Subordinate
5
In-group