1. Leadership

2. Introduction
Leadership is at the heart of management. It is basically involved with initiating action.
Leadership is the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of goals.
The source of this influence may be formal, such as that provided by the possession of managerial rank in the organization.

3. Because management positions come with some degree of formally designated authority, an individual may assume a leadership role as a result of the position he or she holds in the organization.
But not all leaders are managers, nor, for that matter, are all managers leaders.
Just because an organization provides its managers with certain rights is no assurance they will be able to lead effectively.

4. Nonsanctioned leadership, that is the ability to influence that arises outside of the formal structure of the organization, is as important as or more important than formal influence.
In other words, leaders can emerge from within a group as well as being formally appointed.
The leadership literature is voluminous, and as much of it is confusing and contradictory.

5. Definition of Leadership
Keith Davis (1967)-- “Leadership is the ability to persuade others to seek defined objectives enthusiastically.”
Robert Kreitner (2000)– “Leadership is a social influence process in which the leader seeks the voluntary participation of subordinates in an effort to reach organizational objectives.”
Terry and Franklin (2003)– “Leadership is the relationship in which one person (the leader) influences others to work together

6. willingly on related tasks to attain organizational goals.”
Managers vs. Leaders
Leadership is just one component of management. It deals with people and their behavior. Management, on the other hand, includes leadership functions to achieve the organizational goals.
A person can be an effective leader but may

7. not be a good manager. A good manager has to have leadership skills.
An organization needs both management and leadership if it is to be effective.
Leadership is necessary to create and direct changes, develop vision, project ideas, motivate people, and develop a long-term view of the organization

8. The leader must have the ability to see ahead and the willingness to try new things to remain competitive.
Management, on the other hand, can help achieve planned and orderly change, keep the organization within existing patterns, enforce uniformity, control processes, and develop realistic view of the organization.

9. Management is a bottom line focus. How can I accomplish certain things?
Leadership deals with the top line. What things I want to accomplish?
In the words of Peter Druker: “Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”

10. Thus, both management and leadership have similarities
Thus, both management and leadership have similarities. Yet there are differences between the two.
But these differences between the two are, in no way, mutually exclusive. They are rather mutually supporting.

11. Functions of Leadership
To get the work done through others is the heart of leadership.
A person who insists upon doing everything himself or herself never makes a satisfactory leader.
The purpose of leadership function is to achieve organization’s goals.
At the same time, leadership also has to build an organizational climate that is conducive to better performance.

12. The leadership functions, thus, include:
Directing
Developing
Motivating
Communicating
Maintaining, and
Mediating

13. Directing
Leadership inspires and influences others to give their maximum effort and cooperation for the attainment of group objectives.
Directing function includes sharing organizational mission and goals, defining and setting performance standards, explaining plans and decisions, developing and training members, organizing group activities, solving problems, and exploring the full potential of group members.

14. Developing (supervising & coaching)
This function is concerned with the training, coaching, and development of the group members.
It includes the checkups required to assure the prompt and proper execution of orders, and thus, it is also a part of the controlling function.
Supervising is performed by every member of a management team, from chief executive to first-line supervisors.

15. Coaching relates to helping employees improve their performance to reach their potential.
Leadership can aid them over the long term through day-to-day training, sharing of information, and feedback.

16. Motivating
Creating a good work climate is a natural by-product of good leadership. But it also contributes to employee motivation.
Most people respond to challenging job. They take pride in their accomplishment.
Therefore, real motivation depends upon the pride in one’s job, in the organization’s product or service, upon a personal sense of belonging to the team. Leadership function creates this motivational climate in workplace

17. Communicating
Communicating with employees is a necessary part of the leadership function.
Communication occurs not only through established channels for communicating—up and down the chain of command—but also through the informal channels.
Group functioning is effected if there is poor communication. Good communication helps to reduce conflicts originating from differences of opinions.

18. Maintaining
The maintenance function is related to retaining the members of the group. This is a challenging function of a leader.
The function is concerned with providing safe working conditions and good work environment in the work place.
Thus, if the leadership provides these healthy work conditions, group members will be committed to contribute to group or organizational goals.

19. Mediating
Conflicts are inevitable in groups and organizations. Some disagreements occur among people, which lead to problems of conflict.
If not handle properly, these conflicts could prove to be very harmful to group’s performance.
Therefore, the crucial function of leadership is to mediate between the conflicting members and groups, and solve the problem.

20. Leadership Styles
Leadership styles vary widely among leaders and among organizations. Much depends on the philosophy, attitude, personality, and experience of individual leader as well as on the organizational climate and features.
There are four main leadership styles: Authoritarian, Paternalistic, Participative, and Laissez-Faire

21. Authoritarian Style (Leader-Centered)
This leadership style is also called dictatorial or autocratic style.
Leaders with this style get others to do. They may use fear, threat, authority, and prestige inherent in their organizational position, or the strength of their personality to get things done.
They do not bother about the ideas and feelings of others and get things done in their own way.

22. They often take credit for accomplishments but put the blame for failure on their subordinates.
The autocratic leaders rule with unlimited authority. They are naturally inclined to keep the bulk of power and influence in the decision-making process to themselves.
There is little, if any, feedback for subordinates. Thus, misunderstandings may often occur and result in costly mistakes and wasteful practices.

23. Subordinates are humiliated under such leadership
Subordinates are humiliated under such leadership. This style virtually kills subordinate’s initiatives.
Paternalistic (Leader-Centered)
This leadership style is also called benevolent autocratic style. The leader works as a father figure, acting like a family head. The leader guides, protects, and treats subordinates like children.

24. The leaders make decisions but deal more kindly with subordinates and allow them some flexibility.
The level of trust between the leader and subordinates remains low, limiting upward communication.
Subordinates are likely to do exactly as they are told, but will seldom be creative.

25. Participative Style (group-centered)
This style is also called democratic or consultative style.
The leaders practicing this style operate in much different way. they seek to lead mainly by persuasion and examples rather than by force, fear, status, or power.
They consider the opinions and feelings of their subordinates, make them feel important, and encourage participative decision-making.

26. Subordinates’ ideas and opinions are sought before setting goals and making decisions.
Subordinates feel encouraged to, get an opportunity to demonstrate and develop their abilities, and cooperate wholeheartedly.
They tend to support the decisions and strive harder to implement the decision.
The leaders share information freely and encourage discussions. They rely on rewards than on punishments.

27. A relationship of trust develops, encouraging two-way communication.
Subordinates have a lot of control over their work and trust between subordinates and leaders at all level of management.
On the whole, democratic leadership help people to grow, to become responsible for their own work, and to take initiatives.

28. The leaders following this style benefit by obtaining the best information, ideas, and experiences from their subordinates.
As a result, better subordinate attitudes are generated and productivity tends to increase. The subordinates have a feeling of personal satisfaction and accomplishment.
The risk with this style is that at times it is time-consuming. Too much discussion and lack of consensus may result in a complete breakdown of management control.

29. Laissez-Faire Style (individual-centered)
This style is also called free rein. Here the subordinates have complete freedom of choice and can do, a they like.
Laissez-Faire leaders do not get involved at all. They let the group run by itself. These leaders allow the subordinates to decide. They do not intervene.
The subordinates are left to themselves to establish their own goals. Free rein leaders encourage to operate freely with no direction

30. unless the subordinates ask for help.
While the group itself may be in the short-term think this approach is wonderful. It will probably leave the group no real direction toward achievements.
This style creates more anxiety and tension among subordinates.
This style can be disastrous for the leader if the subordinates are not qualified or willing to accept the responsibilities and authorities that are delegated to them.

31. Approaches to Leadership
Leadership has been a subject of great interest to sociologists, organizational theorists, management scientists, and others from the very early days of human organization.
Various studies have been conducted to analyze the different dimensions of leadership.
What makes a good leader? There are several answers. The first answer is the trait approach to leadership.

32. The idea in trait approach is that good leaders are people who have particular personality traits, like intelligence, wisdom, knowledge, skills, etc.
The second answer says leadership is about behavior rather than traits.
The third answer is more conditional. It suggests that good leadership is contingent on people and the situation.

33. We can, thus, identify three different approaches to leadership
We can, thus, identify three different approaches to leadership. These approaches are: (1) the trait approach, (2) the behavior approach, and (3) the situational approach.

34. The Trait Approach
This approach is also known as the great-man theory of leadership. This is the oldest leadership perspective.
The first organized approach to studying leadership analyzed the personal, psychological, and physical traits of strong leaders.
The trait approach assumed that some basic trait or set of traits existed that differentiated leaders from non leaders. If those traits could

35. be defined, potential leaders could be identified.
Researchers thought that leadership traits might include intelligence, self-confidence, assertiveness, above average height, good vocabulary attractiveness, and similar attributes.
During the first several decades of this century, researchers conducted hundreds of studies in an attempt to identify important leadership traits.

36. For the most part, the results of the studies were disappointing.
For every set of leaders who possessed a common trait, researchers also found a long list of exceptions, and the list of suggested traits soon grew so long that it had little practical value.
Alternative explanations usually existed even for relations between traits and leadership that initially appeared valid.

37. For example, researchers observed that many leaders have good communication skills and are assertive. Rather than those traits being the cause of leadership, however, successful leaders may begin to display those traits after they have achieved leadership positions.
Although most researchers gave up trying to identify traits as predictors of leadership ability, many people still explicitly or implicitly adopt a trait orientation.

38. The Behavioral Approach
Spurred on by their lack of success in identifying useful leadership traits, researchers soon began to investigate other variables, specially the behaviors or actions of leaders.
The new hypothesis was that effective leaders somehow behaved differently than less-effective leaders. Thus, the goal was to develop a fuller understanding of leadership behaviors.

39. Michigan Studies
Researchers at the university of Michigan, led by Rensis Likert, began studying leadership in the late 1940s.
Based on the extensive interviews with both leaders (managers) and followers (subordinates), this research identified two basic forms of leader behavior: job centered and employee centered.

40. Managers using job-centered leader behavior pay close attention to subordinates’ work, explain work procedures, and are keenly interested in performance.
Managers using employee-centered leader behavior are interested in developing a cohesive work group and ensuring that employees are satisfied with their jobs. Their primary concern is the welfare of subordinates.

41. The two styles of leader behavior were presumed to be at the ends of a single continuum.
Although this suggests that leaders may be extremely job-centered, extremely employee-centered, or somewhere in between, Likert studied only the two extremes for contrast.
He argued that employee-centered leader behavior tended to be more effective.

42. Job-centered leader behavior is more consistent with rigid and bureaucratic organizations, whereas employee-centered leader behavior is consistent with organic and flexible organizations.

43. Ohio State Studies
At about the same time that Likert was beginning his leadership studies at the university of Michigan, a group of researchers at Ohio State University also began studying leadership.
The extensive questionnaire surveys conducted during the Ohio state studies also suggested that there are two basic leader behaviors or styles: initiating-structure behavior and consideration behavior.

44. When using initiating-structure behavior, the leader clearly defines the leader-subordinate role so that everyone knows what is expected, establishes formal line of communication, and determines how tasks will be performed.
Leaders using consideration behavior show concerns for subordinates and attempt to establish a friendly and supportive climate.

45. Although behaviors identified at Ohio State are similar to those described at the University of Michigan, they differ in important ways.
One major difference is that the Ohio State researchers did not interpret leader behavior as being one-dimensional: each behavior was assumed to be independent of other.
Presumably, then, a leader could exhibit varying levels of initiating structure and at the same time varying levels of considerations.

46. At first, the Ohio State researchers thought that leaders who exhibit high levels of both behaviors would tend to be more effective than other leaders.
A study at International Harvester Co. ( now Navistar International Corp.), however suggested a more complicated pattern.
The researchers found that employees of supervisors who ranked high on initiating structure were high performers but expressed low levels of satisfaction and had a higher

47. absence rate.
Conversely, employees of supervisors who ranked high on consideration had low performance ratings but high levels of satisfaction and few absences from work.
Later research isolated other variables that make consistent prediction difficult and determined that situational influence also occurred.

48. Leadership Grid
Yet another behavioral approach to leadership is the leadership grid.
The Leadership Grid provides a means for evaluating leadership styles and then training managers to move toward an ideal style of behavior.
The horizontal axis of the grid represents concern for production and the vertical axis represents concern for people.

49. According to this approach, the ideal style of managerial behavior is 9,9, and there is a six-phase program to assist managers in achieving this style of behavior.
The leader-behavior theories have played an important role in the development of contemporary thinking about leadership.
In particular, they urge us not to be preoccupied with what leaders are (the trait approach) but to concentrate on what leaders do 9their behavior).

50. Unfortunately, these theories also make universal prescriptions about what constitutes effective leadership.
When we are dealing with complex social systems composed of complex individuals, few if any relationships are consistently predictable, and certainly no formulas for success are infallible.
Yet the behavior theorists tried to identify consistent relationships between leader behaviors and employee responses in the

51. hope of finding a dependable prescription for effective leadership.
As we might expect, they often failed. Other approaches to understanding leadership were therefore needed.
The catalysts for these new approaches was the realization that , although interpersonal and task-oriented dimensions might be useful to describe the behavior of leaders, they were not useful for predicting or prescribing it.

52. The next step in the evolution of leadership theory was the creation of Situational Models.

53. Situational Approaches to Leadership
Situational models assume that appropriate leader behavior varies from one situation to another.
The goal of situational a situational theory, then, is to identify important situational factors and to specify how they interact to determine appropriate leader behavior.
Before discussing the three major situational theories, we should first discuss an important early model that laid the foundation for subsequent developments.

54. In a 1958 study of the decision-making process, Robert Tannenbaun and Warren H. Schmidt proposed a continuum of leadership behavior. Their model is much like the original Michigan framework.
Besides purely job-centered behavior (or “boss-centered” behavior, as they termed it) and employee-centered (“subordinate-centered”) behavior, however, they identified several intermediate behaviors that a manager might consider.

55. These can be shown on the leadership continuum
These can be shown on the leadership continuum. This continuum of behavior moves from the one extreme of having the manager make the decision alone to the other extreme of having the employees make decision with minimal guidance.
Each point on the continuum is influenced by characteristics of the manager, subordinates, and the situation.

56. Managerial characteristics include the manager’s value system, confidence in subordinates, personal inclinations, and feelings of security.
Subordinates characteristics include the subordinates’ need for independence , readiness to assume responsibility, tolerance for ambiguity, interest in the problem, understanding of goals, knowledge, experience, and expectations.

57. Situational characteristics that affect decision making include the type of organization, group effectiveness, the problem itself, and time pressures.
Although this framework pointed out the importance of situational factors, it was only speculative.
It remained for others to develop more comprehensive and integrated theories.

58. The three most important and most widely accepted situational theories of leadership are :
LPC Theory (the Fiedler Model),
The Path-Goal Theory, and
The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model (Leader-Participation Model)

59. The Fiedler Model
The first comprehensive contingency model for leadership was developed by Fred Fiedler.
The Fiedler Leadership Model proposes that effective group performance depends on the proper match between the leader’s style of interacting with his or her subordinates and the degree to which the situation gives control and influence to the leader.
Fiedler believed that an individual’s basic leadership is a key factor in leadership

60. success.
So, he began by trying to find out what that basic style was.
Fiedler created an instrument, which he called the least-preferred co-worker (LPC) questionnaire, for this purpose.
It contains 16 contrasting adjectives (such as pleasant/unpleasant, efficient/inefficient, open/guarded, and supportive/hostile) and purports to measure whether a person is task-oriented or relationship-oriented.

61. The questionnaire asks the respondent to think of all the coworkers he or she has ever had and to describe the one person he or she least enjoyed working with by rating that person on a scale 0f 1 to 8 for each of the 16 sets of contrasting adjectives.
Fiedler believed that what respondents said about others tells more about the respondents than it tells about the persons they are describing.

62. If the least-preferred coworker was described in relatively positive terms (a high LPC score), then the respondent was primarily interested in good personal relations with coworkers.
That is, if you essentially describe the person you are least able to work with in favorable terms, Fiedler would label you relationship-oriented.
In contrast, if the least-preferred coworker is seen in relatively unfavorable terms (a low LPC score), the respondent is primarily

63. interested in productivity and thus would be labeled task-oriented.
Notice that Fiedler assumed that an individual’s leadership style is fixed, that is, either relationship-oriented or task-oriented.
This assumption is important because it means that if a situation requires a task oriented leader and the person in that leadership position is relationship-oriented, either the situation has to be modified or the leader replaced if optimal effectiveness

64. is to be achieved.
After an individual’s basic leadership style has been assessed through the LPC, it is necessary to match the leader with the situation.
The three situational factors or contingency dimensions identified by Fiedler are defined as follows:
Leader-member relations: the degree of confidence, trust, and respect subordinates have in or for their leader.

65. Task-structure: The degree to which the job assignments of subordinates are structured or unstructured.
Position power: The degree of influence a leader has over power variables such as hiring, firing discipline, promotions, and salary.
The next step in the Fiedler model is to evaluate the situation in terms of these three contingency variables.

66. Fiedler stated that the better the leader –member relations, the more highly structured the job, and the stronger the position power, the more control or influence the leader had.
With knowledge of an individual’s LPC and an assessment of the three contingency variables, the Fiedler model proposes matching them up to achieve maximum leadership effectiveness.

67. Based on his research, Fiedler concluded that task-oriented leaders tend to perform better in situations that were very favorable to them and in situations that were very unfavorable.
So Fiedler would predict that when faced with a category I, II, III, VII or VIII situation, task-oriented leaders perform better.
Relationship-oriented leaders, however perform better in moderately favorably situations—categories IV through VI.

68. In recent years, Fiedler has condensed these eight situations down to three.
He now says that task-oriented leaders perform best in situations with high or low control, while relationship-oriented leaders perform best in moderate control situations.
As a whole, reviews of the major studies that tested the overall validity of the Fiedler model lead to a generally positive conclusion.

69. But there are problems with the LPC and the practical use of the model that need to be addressed.
For instance, the logic underlying the LPC is not well understood, and studies have shown that respondents’ LPC score are not stable.
Also the contingency variables are complex and difficult for practitioners to assess. It’s often difficult to practice to determine how good the leader-member relations are, how structured the task is, and how much position

70. power the leader has.

71. Path-Goal Theory
Currently, one of the most respected approaches to leadership is the path-goal theory.
Developed by Robert House, path-goal theory is a contingency model of leadership that extracts the key elements from the Ohio State leadership research on initiating structure and consideration and the expectancy theory of motivation.

72. The essence of the theory is that it’s the leader’s job to assist his or her followers in attaining their goals and to provide the direction or support or both needed to ensure that their goals are compatible with the overall objectives of the group or organization.
The term path-goal is derived from the belief that effective leaders clarify the path to help their followers get from where they are to the achievement of their work goals and

73. make the journey along the path easier by reducing road blocks and pitfalls.
According to path-goal theory, a leader’s behavior is acceptable to subordinates to the degree that is viewed by them as an immediate source of satisfaction or as a means of future satisfaction.

74. A leader’s behavior is motivational to the degree that it (1) makes subordinate need satisfaction contingent on effective performance and (2) provides the coaching, guidance, support, and rewards that are necessary for effective performance.
To test these statements, House identified four leadership behaviors: directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented.

75. The directive leader lets subordinates know what is expected of them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific guidance on how to accomplish tasks. This dimension closely parallels the Ohio States’ initiating structures.
The supportive leader is friendly and shows concern for the needs of subordinates. This dimension is essentially synonymous with the Ohio States’ consideration.

76. The participative leader consults with subordinates and uses their suggestions before making a decision.
The achievement-oriented leader sets challenging goals and expects subordinates to perform at their highest level.
In contrast to Fielder’s view of leader’s behavior, House assumes that leaders are flexible. Path-goal theory implies that the same leader can display any or all of these behaviors depending on the situation.

77. Path-goal theory proposes two classes of situational, or contingency, variables that moderate the leader behavior/outcome relationships.
Those in the environment are outside the control of the leader (task structure, formal authority system, and work group).
Factors in the second class are part of the personal characteristics of the subordinate (locus of control, experience, and perceived ability).

78. Essentially, the theory proposes that leaders behaviors should complement these contingency variables.
So a leader will be ineffective when his or her behavior is redundant with sources of environmental structure or incongruent with subordinate characteristics.
Many hypotheses have been evolved out of the path-goal theory.

79. Research to validate hypotheses such as these is generally encouraging.
The evidence supports the logic underlying the theory. That is, employee performance and satisfaction are likely to be positively influenced when the leader compensates for things lacking in either the employee or the work setting.

80. However, the leader who spends time explaining tasks when those tasks are already clear or when the employee has the ability and experience to handle them without interference is likely to be seen as redundant or even insulting.

81. Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)
Developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard.
Incorporated into leadership Training Programs at more than 400 of the Fortune 500 companies.
More than 1 million managers per year from a wide variety organizations are being taught this model.

82. It focuses on the followers.
Successful leadership is achieved by selecting the right leadership style, contingent on the level of the followers readiness.

83. Why focus on the followers?
It is the followers who accept or reject the leader.
Regardless of what the leader does, effectiveness depends on the actions of the followers.
This dimension has been overlooked or underemphasized in most other leadership theories.

84. What do they mean by the term readiness?
The term readiness, as defined by Hersey and Blenchard, refers to the extent to which people have the ability and willingness to to accomplish a specific task.

85. SLT essentially views the leader-follower relationship as analogous to that between a parent and a child.
Just as a parent needs to relinquish control as a child becomes more mature and responsible, so too should leaders.

86. Hersey and Blenchard identified four specific leader behaviors—from highly directive to highly laissez-faire.
The most effective behavior depends on a follower’s ability and motivation.

87. SLT says that if followers are unable and unwilling to do a task, the leader needs to give clear and specific directions.
If followers are unable and willing, the leader needs to display high task orientation to compensate for the followers’ lack of ability and high relationship orientation to get the followers’ to “buy into” the leader’s desires.

88. If followers are able and unwilling, the leader needs to use a supportive and participative style.
If the employee is both able and willing, the leaders doesn’t need to do much.

89. Contemporary Issues in Leadership
“There is nothing more demoralizing than a leader who can’t clearly articulate why we’re doing what we’re doing.”
---James Kouzes and Barry Posner

90. Inspirational Approaches to Leadership
Charismatic leadership
Transformational leadership

91. Charismatic Leadership
Vision and articulation
Personal risk
Sensitivity to follower needs
Unconventional behavior

92. Are Charismatic Leaders Born or Made?
Are charismatic leaders born with their qualities?
Or can people actually learn how to be charismatic leaders?
The answer to both questions is yes.

93. How Charismatic Leaders Influence Followers
The evidence suggests a four-step process.
It begins by the leader articulating an appealing vision.
Charismatic leaders may use vision statements to “imprint” on followers an overarching goal and purpose.

94. Once a vision and vision statement are established, the leader then communicates high performance expectations and expresses confidence that followers can attain them.

95. Next, the leader conveys, through words and actions, a new set of values and, by his or her behavior, sets an example for followers to imitate.

96. Transformational Leadership
Transactional leader
Transformational leader

97. Transactional leader
Contingent reward: Contracts exchange of rewards for effort, promises rewards for good performance, recognizes accomplishments.
Management by exception (active): Watches and searches for deviations from rules and standards, takes correctaction.

98. Transactional Leader
Management by Exception (passive): Intervenes only if standards are not met.
Laissez-Faire: Abdicates responsibilities, avoids making decisions.

99. Transformational Leadership
Intellectual Stimulation: Promotes intelligence, rationality, and careful problem solving.
Individualized Consideration: Gives personal attention, treats each employee individually, coaches, advises.

100. Transformational Leader
Idealized Influence: Provides vision and sense of mission, instills pride, gains respect and trust.
Inspirational Motivation: Communicates high expectations, uses symbols to focus efforts, expresses important purposes in simple ways.

101. How Transformational Leadership Work
Transformational leaders encourage their followers to be more innovative and creative.
Transformational leaders are more effective because they themselves are more creative, but they are also more effective because they encourage those who follow them to be creative, too.

102. Goals are another key mechanism that explains how transformational leadership works.
Followers of transformational leaders are more likely to pursue ambitious goals, be familiar with and agree on the strategic goals of the organization, and believe that the goals they are pursuing are personally important.

103. It comes down to charting a course—having the ability to articulate for your employees where you’re headed and you’re going to get there.
Even more important is choosing people to work with who have that same level of passion, commitment, fear, and competitiveness to drive toward those same goals.