1. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-1 Chapter 4 Participative Leadership, Delegation, and Empowerment

2. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-2 Learning Objectives Understand what research methods have been used to study participative leadership Understand the major findings in research on consequences of participative leadership Understand the situations in which participative leadership is most likely to be effective Understand the major findings in research on the normative theory of leader decision making

3. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-3 Learning Objectives Understand procedures for the effective use of consultation Understand the potential benefits and risks of delegation Understand when and how to use delegation effectively Understand why follower perceptions of empowerment are important

4. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-4 Varieties of Participation Autocratic Decision Consultation Joint Decision Delegation

5. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-5 Consequences of Participative Leadership

6. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-6 Consequences of Participative Leadership Potential Benefits of Participation Decision quality Decision acceptance Satisfaction with the decision process Development of participant skills Objectives of Different Participants

7. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-7 Research on Effects of Participative Leadership Example of Research on Participation – Bragg & Andrews (1973) Effects of Participation Limitations of Participation Research Measurement problems with survey field research Combining interventions Short-term programs Difficulty comparing results across studies

8. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-8 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model Decision Procedures AI – Leader makes decision without any additional information AII – Leader seeks information and makes decision alone CI – Leader shares problem with others individually and makes decision alone CII – Leader shares problem with others collectively and makes decision alone GII – Group discusses problem collectively and the group makes the decision

9. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-9 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model

10. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-10 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model Situational Variables 1. The amount of relevant information possessed by leader and subordinates 2. The likelihood that subordinates will accept an autocratic decision 3. The likelihood that subordinates will cooperate if allowed to participate 4. The amount of disagreement among subordinates with respect to preferred alternatives 5. The extent to which the decision unstructured and requires creative problem solving

11. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-11 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model Decision Acceptance – Degree of commitment to implement a decision effectively Decision Quality – Objective aspects of the decision that affect group performance aside from any effects mediated by decision acceptance

12. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-12 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model

13. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-13 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Jago Model Incorporates additional aspects of the situation Severe time constraints Amount of subordinate information Geographical dispersion of subordinates Incorporates additional outcome criteria Concern for subordinate development Concern for decision time Managers given more choices in setting priorities for the criteria in the model Allows managers to differentiate among five choices in describing the situation

14. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-14 Normative Decision Model Simplified Version

15. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-15 Normative Decision Model Vroom and Yetton Model Research on the Model Some support but more research needed Extended model needs to be tested Conceptual Weaknesses Decision processes are treated as single, discrete episodes The model is too complicated Leaders are assumed to have necessary skills to use the various decision procedures

16. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-16 Guidelines for Participative Leadership Diagnosing Decision Situations Evaluate how important the decision is Identify people with relevant knowledge or expertise Evaluate likely cooperation by participants Evaluate likely acceptance without participation Evaluate whether it is feasible to hold a meeting

17. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-17 Guidelines for Participative Leadership Encourage Participation Encourage people to express their concerns Describe a proposal as tentative Record ideas and suggestions Look for ways to build on ideas and suggestions Be tactful in expressing concerns about a suggestion Listen to dissenting views without getting defensive Try to utilize suggestions and deal with concerns Show appreciation for suggestions

18. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-18 Delegation Varieties of Delegation Potential Advantages of Delegation Improvement in decision quality Greater subordinate commitment Making subordinates’ jobs more interesting, challenging, and meaningful Improved time management Important form of management development

19. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-19 Potential Advantages of Delegation

20. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-20 Delegation Reasons for Lack of Delegation Aspects of the leader’s personality Fear of subordinate making a mistake High need for personal achievement Characteristics of the subordinate Nature of the work

21. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-21 Reasons for Lack of Delegation

22. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-22 Guidelines for Delegating What to Delegate Tasks that can be done better by a subordinate Tasks that are urgent but not high priority Tasks relevant to a subordinate’s career Tasks of appropriate difficulty Both pleasant and unpleasant tasks Tasks not central to the manager’s role

23. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-23 Guidelines for Delegation How to Delegate Specify responsibilities clearly Provide adequate authority and specify limits of discretion Specify reporting requirements Ensure subordinate acceptance of responsibilities

24. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-24 Delegation How to Manage Delegation Inform others who need to know Monitor progress in appropriate ways Arrange for the subordinate to receive necessary information Provide support and assistance, but avoid reverse delegation Make mistakes a learning experience

25. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-25 Perceived Empowerment Nature of Psychological Empowerment Consequences of Empowerment Benefits Consequences Facilitating Conditions for Empowerment Job design Organizational structure Organizational culture Leader selection and assessment Procedures for influencing decisions Shared leadership

26. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-26 Conditions Facilitating Psychological Empowerment

27. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-27 Guidelines for Empowerment Clarify objectives and explain how the work supports them Involve people in making decisions that affect them Delegate responsibility and authority for important activities Take into account individual differences in motivation and skills Provide access to relevant information Provide resources needed to carry out new responsibilities Change management systems to be consistent with empowerment

28. © 2006 Prentice Hall Leadership in Organizations 4-28 Guidelines for Empowerment Remove bureaucratic constraints and unnecessary controls Express confidence and trust in people Provide coaching and advice when requested Encourage and support initiative and problem solving Recognize important contributions and achievements Ensure that rewards are commensurate with new responsibilities Ensure accountability for the ethical use of power