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 non-coercive 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 initiating-structure 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 Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum – 1958 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 Time-Driven 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 Subordinate 1 Subordinate 2 Subordinate 3 Subordinate 4 Subordinate 5 Out-group In-group