1. Chapter 4
Leadership Theories

2. Leadership & Leadership Theories
Children in our culture grow up learning about leadership.
Hollywood: Harry Potter, Jack Bauer, Captain James T. Kirk, Jack Ryan, Superman, and Iron Man
U.S. History: Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Mohandas Gandhi, Winston Churchill, Mikhail Gorbachev, Sandra Day O’Conner, and Hillary Clinton
Children in our culture grow up learning about leadership. Hollywood has characterized leaders for movies and television – Harry Potter, Jack Bauer, Captain James T. Kirk, Jack Ryan, Superman, and Iron Man. Perhaps we idolized specific persons who changed history – Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Mohandas Gandhi, Winston Churchill, Mikhail Gorbachev, Sandra Day O’Conner, and Hillary Clinton, to name a few. Many find their first interest in leadership from reading Greek and Roman mythology or the biographies of great military leaders – the tales of Odysseus, Napoleon, George Washington, and other heroes sparked interest. What qualities made these figures noteworthy leaders? Did their intellect, fluency with words, or another trait make them so effective?
If you were to enter the term “leadership studies” in Google Scholar, you would find more than 2 million academic citations. Enter the word “leadership” in Google, and you find more than 136 million hits. Obviously, educators are not the only ones interested in leadership.
What is leadership? Why study leadership models? A model can be defined as a representation of a system, theory, or phenomenon that explains how and why something works the way it does. In this chapter, we will use the terms model and theory interchangeably.

3. Many Definitions
“The ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce obedience, respect, loyalty, & cooperation.”
“The act of guiding or directing the behavior of one or more individuals”
Also: leader traits, concerns for co-workers, focus on accomplishing the task, transforming the organization’s culture.
Leadership has many definitions and components which have evolved over time. An early definition of leadership was “the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927). Twenty years later, leadership was defined as, “the act of guiding or directing the behavior of one or more individuals” (Jenkins, 1947, p. 54). Within two decades, the concept of leadership changed from authoritarian to one of influence through social interaction.
Since then, definitions of leadership have grown to include characteristics or traits of the leader and leader behaviors – the leader’s charisma, the leaders’ concerns for co-workers, for accomplishing the task, and for transforming the organization’s culture. Different leadership models appear to explain how the leader effectively impacts the organization climate and productivity.
When school leaders can explain how and why leadership works in various situations or what leadership model apply in a given circumstance, they increase the probability of successful outcomes. A theory is a result of a tested hypothesis over time producing consistent results. A model or theory of leadership can frame our understanding of how situations can be understood and engaged for successful outcomes.
Moore, B.V. (1927). The May conference on leadership. Personnel Journal 6, The quote is from General Stewart, Superintendent of West Point Military Academy, at the joint conference on Leadership of the Taylor Society and the Personnel Research Foundation.
Jenkins, W. (1947). A review of leadership studies with particular reference to military problems. Psychological Bulletin, 44 (1),

4. Leadership Theory
When school leaders can explain how and why leadership works in various situations or what leadership model applies in a given circumstance, they increase the probability of successful outcomes.
Theory – a result of a tested hypothesis over time, producing consistent results.

5. Leadership Models: Explain, Predict, Manipulate
As our understanding of leadership models is refined over time by observing actions play out in real time school administration, we can use a model to understand, explain and predict what is likely to happen in given situations. When we can understand, explain and predict, then we can manipulate certain variables to increase the likelihood of certain outcomes occurring (See Figure 1). Over time, the Explaining, Predicting, and Manipulating (EPM) Model improves leadership outcomes.
As we use models to explain, predict, and manipulate variables to increase the likelihood of circumstances turning out favorably, we continually refine our thinking to make more accurate predictions and select increasingly appropriate, fine-scaled manipulations.
As the old saying goes if the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When leaders learn to conceptualize, explain, predict, and intervene in the variety of challenging situations which occur in organizations, they increase their abilities to successfully solve problems. Understanding leadership models provides a framework for thinking about the issues requiring thoughtful attention and suggests various ways to address them.

6. Modern Leadership Theories
Ancient leadership:
Modern leadership:
Alfred Binet’s studies of children’s intelligence
Mental Age
Chronological Age
In many ways, modern leadership differs greatly from the ways it has been historically practiced and viewed. As Chapter 1 describes, the leader in ancient times was the tribe’s strongest or the village’s best hunter. Physical strength, skills, and deeds earned him (and it usually was a he) the right to lead. As civilizations developed leadership extended into societal roles. Kings were assumed to rule by divine right. Generals were renowned for their strategic and tactical fighting abilities. Religious leaders were determined by both charisma and metaphysical means. This chapter examines modern leadership and its evolution.
The modern leadership studies began in the early 1900’s with Alfred Binet, a French psychologist. Around that time, the French government enacted laws requiring all children to attend schools. The French government asked Binet to help identify students who would need special educational assistance under these new compulsory attendance laws. He and his research partner, Theodore Simon, developed the concept of “mental age” by determining the average abilities and knowledge of children of various age groups and testing what an individual child knew or could do in comparison with the “averages” he had determined. The test became known as the Binet – Simon test. It quickly came to the attention of Stanford researcher, Lewis Terman, who standardized it for an American population where it became known as the Stanford – Binet Intelligence Scale. Eventually, the mental age and chronological age were used to compute an IQ score by dividing the mental age by the chronological age and multiplying by 100.
For example, the IQ of a ten year old with a mental age of 12 would be computed as 12/10 X100 = 120.
= I.Q.

7. I.Q., World Wars I & II Task of screening large numbers
of recruits to determine military
positions for which best suited.
Robert Yerkes – in charge of administering intelligence tests to recruits.
Higher IQ – leadership jobs
Lower IQ – infantry, menial jobs
William Jenkins – leadership concept lacked workable definition to guide research.
The concept of IQ caught the attention of the U.S. military. With the advent of World War I, the U.S. government had the huge task of screening millions of new recruits to determine the military support or leadership positions for which they would be best suited. Robert Yerkes, then the American Psychological Association (APA) President, received commission as an Army Major (in the Psychological Service) and placed in charge administering intelligence tests to recruits for classification and placement. During the war, almost 2 million recruits were tested for military placement. Those with higher tested IQs were placed in higher level executive and leadership jobs. Those with lower tested IQs were placed in custodial, menial jobs.
While the older officers did not trust the intelligence testing, the younger officers saw its merit. Intelligence testing and leadership study made a comeback with World War II and provided the genesis for some of the major leadership studies of the time. As a means of “providing a summary of techniques and results that would be of value to psychologists dealing with the problems of selecting leaders, particularly in the military field”, William Jenkins (1947, p. 54) reviewed leadership research findings in five areas: industry and government, scientists and professionals, children, education, and the military. He concluded that, “it is reasonably clear that above a certain desirable minimum, intelligence has little relevance to combat performance” (p. 72). Dismissing the trait research that had dominated thinking for some time, Jenkins found little to support a systematic theory of leadership since the concept lacked a workable definition to guide research in isolating leadership traits, and few of leadership hypotheses were able to be empirically tested. The study of leadership in the military would continue, however.
Kevles, D. (1968). Testing the army’s intelligence: Psychologists and the military in World War 1, Journal of American History, 55 (3), This article provides an excellent overview of IQ testing and how it was used in World War I.
Jenkins, W. (1947). A review of leadership studies with particular reference to military problems. Psychological Bulletin, 44 (1),

8. Trait Theories of Leadership
Scholars in the early 20th century studied traits of great leaders: strong, intelligent, persuasive, driven, ethical
Sometimes called “great man” theories, these investigations examined leaders’ innate personality characteristics.
At first, researchers assumed that leaders were born with these qualities. Later, it was believed that these traits could be learned to some extent.
Most of the individuals – fictional or real – who sparked our interest in leadership were strong, ethical, driven, persuasive, intelligent, responsible, and eloquent. Scholars in the early 20th century studied traits of great leaders. Sometimes called “great man” theories, these investigations examined leaders’ innate personality characteristics. At first, researchers assumed that leaders were born with these qualities. Later, it was believed that these traits could be learned to some extent.

9. The Ohio State Leadership Studies
Studied leadership traits and situational & behavioral-based approaches
Provided a model of construct validation led to leadership research instruments.
Ralph Stogdill – Leadership might be situational, an interaction of variables in constant flux & change
John Hemphill – importance of interpersonal and social factors in leadership
After World War II, the United States Congress enacted the G.I. Bill, partly to defer millions of returning soldiers from entering the workforce at one time. Economists were uncertain if the post-war economy could safely absorb so many returning workers without creating an economic calamity like the Great Depression. Carroll Shartle was among those studying or teaching G.I’s in college classrooms. Shartle had worked at the U.S. Department of Labor and the War Manpower Commission where General George Marshall, former Army Chief of Staff and later U.S. Secretary of State sparked his interest in leadership. At The Ohio State University, Shartle received support for an interdisciplinary study of leadership, and he later brought Ralph Stogdill to work with him, supported by the Office of Naval Research.
The Ohio State Leadership studies were the first to examine leadership from a multidisciplinary approach that included psychology, sociology, economics, and education. Equally important, they were the first studies to shift leadership study from a trait approach to a situational and behavioral-based approach or style. The studies Overcoming the methodological criticisms leveled earlier by Jenkins, the Ohio State Leadership studies provided a model of construct validation and investigation that led to leadership research instruments.
For an excellent, name dropping, and insightful historical account of WWII to the Ohio State Leadership studies see: Shartle, C. (1979). Early years of the Ohio State leadership studies. Journal of Management, 5 (2),

10. Stogdill’s Contributions to Trait Theory
Examined 28 traits identified with leadership and concluded:
The average person who occupies a leadership position exceeds the average group member in intelligence, scholarship, dependability in exercising responsibilities, activity and social participation, socioeconomic status
The qualities, characteristics, & skills required in a leader are determined largely by the demands of the situation in which the leader is to function
In 1948, Ralph Stogdill summarized trait leadership theory to that date. He examined 28 traits identified in the literature as associated with leadership and concluded that:
a. The average person who occupies a leadership position exceeds the average member of his group in: (1) intelligence; (2) scholarship; (3) dependability in exercising responsibilities; (4) activity and social participation; and (5) socioeconomic status.
b. The qualities, characteristics, and skills required in a leader are determined to a large extent by the demands of the situation in which he is to function as a leader.”
After Stogdill’s study, publications about trait theories of leadership decreased in number. In the late 20th century, interest in transformational and charismatic leadership began to gain momentum. In 1985, Bernard Bass’ book, Leadership Beyond Expectations, integrated trait study with transformational leadership by including charisma as a quality of transformational leadership, sparking a revived interest in traits. Impetus for additional trait study came from industrial psychologists who were applying knowledge of leadership traits to improve managers’ selection and effectiveness. Accordingly, the research at this time shifted to focus on examining leader traits and leader effectiveness instead of comparing traits of those in leadership and those not in leadership positions.
Stogdill, R. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology 25,
Ibid, (1948). p. 63.
Lord, R.G., DeVader, C.L., & Alliger, G.M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology 71 (3),
Bass, B. (1985). Leadership beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

11. Trait Theory in Practice
Many trait theory ideas based on survey research and anecdotal comments.
Expect first-rate educational leaders to have traits including: honesty, integrity, intelligence, knowledge of curriculum & instruction, advocacy for social justice.
Goleman: “Emotional Intelligence”
No one person can have all the traits studied.
Many trait theory ideas are based on survey research and anecdotal comments. While the methodology used in this approach is simplistic and less rigorous than a mixed-methods design, the concept of trait theory has useful benefits. We expect good educational leaders to have traits including honesty, integrity, intelligence, knowledge of curriculum and instructional matters, and advocacy of social justice. Daniel Goleman’s work in emotional intelligence – E.Q (as compared with I.Q). – is one example of a “trait” that effective leaders have or develop. In this way, trait theory will always have new components for researchers and practitioners to study and implement.
No one person can have all the traits studied (See Figure 4.1). Nevertheless, these traits provide benchmarks or goals of what we want to see in our leaders – and if we choose to become leaders, in ourselves.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam; Goleman, D. (2002). Primal Leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

12. Traits Studied: Stogdill, 1948
Intelligence; Scholarship; Knowledge; Judgment and Decision; Insight; Originality; Adaptability; Introversion/extroversion; Dominance; Initiative, Persistence, Ambition; Responsibility; Integrity & Conviction; Self-confidence; Mood Control, Mood Optimism; Emotional Control; Social & Economic Status; Social Activity & Mobility; Biosocial Activity; Social Skills; Popularity & Prestige; Cooperation; Transferabiltiy & Persistence of Leadership.

13. Traits Studied:
Mann, 1959: Intelligence, Masculinity; Adjustment; Dominance; Extroversion; Conservatism.
Stogdill revisited, 1974: Achievement; Persistence; Insight; Initiative; Self-confidence; Responsibility; Cooperativeness; Tolerance; Influence; Sociability.
Lord, DeVader & Alliger, 1986: Intelligence; Masculinity; Dominance.

14. Traits Studied:
Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991: Drive; Motivation; Integrity; Confidence; Cognitive Ability; Task Knowledge.
Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004: Cognitive abilities; Extroversion; Conscientiousness; Emotional stability; Openness; Agreeableness; Motivation; Social Intelligence; Self-monitoring; Emotional intelligence; Problem solving.

15. Your Leadership Traits
Achievement
Emotional stability
Motivation
Adaptability
Initiative
Openness
Cognitive ability/Intelligence
Influence
Persistence
Confidence
Insight
Problem solving
Dependability
Integrity
Responsibility
Cooperation
Extraversion
Social & economic status
Dominance/
Assertiveness
Judgment/
Decision making
Social intelligence/skills
Emotional intelligence
Knowledge
Others:
Early leadership studies focused on identifying traits necessary for successful leadership. Today, we know that leadership also includes situational factors of people and environment as well as the leader’s personality.
Which of these leadership traits are in your repertoire and to what extent do others observe them in your behaviors? Using the list of leadership traits listed below, identify which characteristics you believe are readily observable in your current behaviors and which are less noticeable. Also survey other faculty and staff in your school to get anonymous feedback about the extent to which they observe these behaviors. Compare your self-assessment with the survey findings. What do you think they mean? What do these differences or similarities suggest regarding your professional development?

16. Leadership Style Theories
Hemphill & Coons: Found that leadership behavior centered around:
Initiating Structure: leader behavior that deals with the tasks (concern for getting the job done, organizing & scheduling work, procedures, maintaining communications)
Consideration: leader behavior that deals with relationships in the work setting (building respect, trust, friendship, concern)
As mentioned, the Ohio State studies in the late 1940s examined leadership traits and later leadership behaviors – or leadership styles. John Hemphill and Alvin Coons, two Ohio State University professors, studied leader behavior by having subordinates complete questionnaires about their leaders’ behaviors and how many times leaders exhibited those behaviors. From an original list of almost 2,000 behaviors, Hemphill and Coons developed the 150-item Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ). They found that the LBDQ centered around two basic leader behaviors – initiating structure and consideration.
Initiating structure is defined as leader behavior that deals with the task side of operations – concern for getting the job done, organizing and scheduling the work, maintaining lines of communication, and following procedures with subordinates. Consideration, on the other hand, is defined as the relationship side of work – building respect, trust, friendship, and concern for coworkers. These two behaviors can be described as the two essential dimensions of a leader’s behavior – structuring the work and the caring about the relationship side of work.
Hemphill, J. & Coons, A. (1950). Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire. Columbus: Personnel Research Board, Ohio State University.

17. Major Findings from LBDQ Studies:
1. Initiating structure and consideration are essence of leadership behaviors.
2. The most effective leaders exhibit high initiating structure & high consideration.
3. Workers and leaders tend to evaluate the leader’s effectiveness differently.
4. Little correlation appears between how leaders say they should behave & how subordinates describe leader behavior.
The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire was widely studied in business, military, and education settings. In 1966, Andrew Halpin, professor of education at Montana State University, described the four major findings from the LBDQ studies. First, initiating structure and consideration are the essence of leader behaviors. Leaders provide the structure and the inter-personal relationships in the workplace. Second, the most effective leaders exhibit high initiating structure and high consideration. Third, workers and leaders tend to evaluate the leader’s effectiveness differently. Leaders see initiating structure as more valuable. Workers tend to value consideration more in assessing leader effectiveness. Fourth, little correlation appears between how leaders say they should behave and how subordinates describe leader behavior.
Halpin, A. (1966). Theory and Research in Administration. New York: MacMilllan.

18. Blake & Mouton’s Leadership Grid
A well-known business model for understanding manager’s behavior.
A dual axis for examining concern for production and concern for people
A well-known business model for understanding manager’s behavior was developed in the 1960s by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton, two University of Texas management scholars. Similar to the LBDQ, the Blake and Mouton model uses concern for production and concern for people. The similarity between concern for production and initiating structure is as obvious as the similarity between concern for people and consideration. Blake and Mouton’s model adds to our understanding of leadership behavior by providing a dual axis for examining these two factors. Consider the x axis as Concern for Production and the y axis as Concern for People, both with a range of 1 through 9 (see Figure 4.2). The model can be seen as having a plot of 9, 1 – high concern for production and low concern for people.
Blake, R. & Mouton, J. (1964). The managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.

19. Leadership Contingency Theories
Contingency Theory – tries to match the appropriate leadership style to the characteristics of a particular situation.
Fred Fiedler – Least Preferred Coworker Scale (LPCS) measured leadership orientation.
Fiedler: No One Ideal Leadership Style
It is logical to ask whether one “best” style works well all the time or whether certain styles work better in given situations. Matching a style to a situation is highly complex.
Contingency theory expands on leadership style by trying to match the appropriate leadership style with the characteristics of the particular situation. It is called contingency theory because it suggests that the leader’s effectiveness is contingent – depends – upon how well the leader’s style fits the characteristics of the particular situation. Fred Fiedler’s contingency theory is the most widely known.
In studying leadership styles, Fred Fiedler, University of Illinois and University of Washington sociology research professor developed the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale. To Fiedler, leadership style was fixed, and the LPC measured one’s leadership orientation. The LPC asks the respondent to think of all the people with whom they have worked and then describe the person with whom they have worked the least well. The scale ranks items on an ordinal scale of 1 to 8 for 18 adjectives (e.g., unfriendly to friendly; uncooperative to cooperative). A high LPC score indicates a relationship-motivated person. A low score indicates a task-motivated person.
Fiedler suggests that there is no ideal leader type. Leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the particular situational characteristics. Fiedler’s model predicts the characteristics of the appropriate situations in order for the leader to be effective. According to the model, three factors characterize situations – leader-member relations, task structure, and position power.
Fiedler, F. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 1, pp ). New York: Academic Press.

20. Contingency Theory: 3 Factors Characterize Situations
Leader-member relations: Good or Poor. Refers to level of mutual trust, respect, & confidence the group has for its leader
Task structure: High or Low. Refers to extent to which task requirements are clear & communicated effectively.
Position power: Strong or Weak. Refers to amount of legitimate power/authority in leader’s position to give rewards or punishments to groups or individuals.
Fiedler suggests that there is no ideal leader type. Leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the particular situational characteristics. Fiedler’s model predicts the characteristics of the appropriate situations in order for the leader to be effective. According to the model, three factors characterize situations – leader-member relations, task structure, and position power.
Leader-member relations refers to the level of mutual trust, respect, and confidence that the group has for its leader. If the group atmosphere is favorable, the leader is trusted, respected, and holds the group’s confidence, the leader-member relations are good. If not, they are defined as poor.
Task structure refers to the extent to which the task requirements are clear and communicated effectively. When tasks are clear, leader control increases. When tasks are vague and not clearly communicated, leader control decreases. The task structure can be either high or low.
Position power refers to the amount of legitimate power or authority inherent in the leader’s position to provide rewards or punishments to the group or individuals within the group. Position power is seen as high if the leader has the authority to hire or fire, promote or demote, or provide pay increases, bonuses, or pay cuts to individuals. Position power is considered weak if the leader has little or no power to implement these actions. The position power is considered strong if the leader has this authority.
All three factors determine the favorableness of organizational situations. When leader-member relations are good, task structure is clear, and position power is strong the situation is defined as favorable. In contrast, situations are least favorable when leader-member relations are poor, task structure is low, and position power is weak. Situations that are rated in the middle areas are known as moderately favorable.

21. All 3 Factors Determine Favorableness of Situations
When leader-member relations are good, task structure is clear, and position power is strong the situation is defined as favorable.
When leader-member relations are poor, task structure is low, and position power is weak situations are least favorable
When factors are rated in the middle areas situations are moderately favorable.

22. Contingency Theory Model

23. Contingency Theory Research: Certain Styles More Effective
Task motivated leaders (Low LPC scores) will be more effective when situations are very favorable or very unfavorable.
Relationship-motivated leaders (High LPC scores) will be effective in moderately favorable conditions.
Contingency theory research suggests that certain styles are more effective in different situations. The two major findings conclude:
Task-motivated leaders (low LPC scores) will be effective when situations are very favorable and very unfavorable; and
Relationship-motivated leaders (high LPC scores) will be effective in moderately favorable conditions.
Figure 4.3 shows graphically how this works. The x axis represents the situation’s favorableness from high to low. The y axis represents the leader’s effectiveness. The red dotted line represents the task-oriented leader doing well in highly favorable and unfavorable situations while the solid yellow line represents the relationship-oriented leader doing well in moderately favorable situations. Low LPC score leaders (task oriented) will be effective in categories (roman numerals on chart)1, 2, 3, and 8. High LPC score leaders (relationship oriented) will be effective in categories 4, 5, 6, and 7.

24. Contingency Theory in Practice
A major evolution in leadership theory
Not widely used, diminished interest
Better leadership models became available
Problems with validity of LPC scale
Cannot “engineer” situations to make them more favorable to leader.
Contingency theory represents a major evolution in leadership theory and deserves consideration from that point alone. Contingency theory is not used widely in education settings and interest in contingency theory has diminished over the years for several reasons. First, situational leadership models surfaced with more explanatory power allowing for leaders to adapt their leadership style to fit the situation. Second, there were validity problems with what the LPC scale actually measures and how it is measured. Third, contingency theory requires that when a mismatch between the leader and the situation either the leader is changed or the situation is engineered to fit the leader. This situational engineering is problematic to say the least. Nevertheless, contingency theory deserves mention as it provided an evolutionary bridge to situational leadership theory.

25. Situational Leadership Theory
Another evolutionary step in leadership thinking.
Leadership style is not fixed but can and should adjust to the situation.
Leadership is situational.
Paul Hersey & Ken Blanchard’s model
Situational leadership theory takes another evolutionary step forward in thinking. In this model, the task and relationship orientations are still present from the Ohio State studies, the leadership style model, and the contingency model. With situational leadership, however, the leadership style is not fixed. Leadership styles can and should change with the situation. The leadership style is situational.
Situational leadership is most closely associated with Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, two management experts. Situational leadership is frequently used in training education and business executives. In fact, Ken Blanchard’s SL II model training has been used in 318 of the current Fortune 500 companies.
The situational leadership model, as illustrated in Figure 4.4 uses the dual axis format with the x axis depicting task orientation, called directive behavior. The y axis shows the relationship orientation, called supportive behavior. The model allows for four quadrants. The first quadrant, S1, depicts a leadership style that is high directive and low supportive. The second quadrant, S2, depicts a leadership style that is high directive and high supportive. The third quadrant, S3, shows a leadership style that is low directive and high supportive. The last quadrant, S4, represents a leadership style characterized by low directive and low supportive behaviors. It is important to note that low level does not equate to no level of a particular behavior. Each of these styles should be used with a particular situation. The situations are determined by the individual or group’s maturity or development level.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23, Also see Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1969). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hersey and Blanchard base their model of Bill Reddin’s 3-D theory. See: Reddin, W. (1967, April). The 3-D management style theory. Training and Development Journal, pp
Personal communication with Nick Peterson, Director of Marketing for the Ken Blanchard Companies, May, 1, Companies included in the Fortune 500 listing change from time to time. The total number of Fortune 500 companies having used SL II training is above the 400 range.

26. Development Level of the Individual
High Competence
***
High Commitment
Moderate to High Competence
***
Variable Commitment
Low to Some Competence
***
Low Commitment
Low Competence
***
High Commitment
Developed Developing

27. Situational Leadership Model: Leadership Styles
S1 Directing behavior: Emphasize how the job is to be accomplished, importance of achieving organizational goals; little praise
S2 Coaching behavior: Emphasize goals while also encouraging & supporting progress, team collegiality
S3 Supporting behavior: Emphasize listening, encouraging, teamwork, seeking input
S4 Delegating behavior: Much of control for task delegated to group, individual.
The first style, S1, directing behavior, is characterized by high directive leadership behaviors and lower levels of supportive leadership behaviors. Behaviors in this style emphasize how the job is to be accomplished, the importance of achieving the organizational goals, and frequently monitoring progress. Few leader behaviors are directed towards supportive actions of listening to worker needs, praising, or social interacting.
The second style, S2, called a coaching behavior, is characterized by high directive and high supportive leadership behaviors. Behaviors in this style emphasize organizational goals while also encouraging and supporting progress towards the organizational goals and supporting team collegiality.
The third style, S3, has been called supporting behavior. Its characteristics are low directive leadership behaviors and high supportive leadership behaviors. Again, this style does not mean there is no directive behavior – only that the behavior occurs at a low level. This style behaviors emphasize listening, supporting, encouraging teamwork, seeking input, providing recognition, and allowing more group decision making.
The last style, S4, called delegating behavior,t is characterized by low directive and low supportive leadership behaviors. This style’s behaviors provide little task direction and little social support feedback. Much of the control for the task is delegated to the group or individual. The S4 leadership style works with the group to set direction and then allows the group to carry out the tasks as they see fit.
Deciding under what situations to use each of these leadership styles involves assessing the individual or group’s developmental level. Developmental level is defined as the degree to which an individual or group has the competence and commitment to accomplish the task. Conveniently, four developmental levels, D1 through D4, match the four leadership styles, S1 through S4, of this model.

28. Using Employee Developmental Levels to Decide Leadership Style
D1: Low competence, high commitment
(new teacher fresh from college)
D2: Somewhat competent, low commitment (experienced teacher who lacks enthusiasm for job)
D3: Moderate-high competence; low commitment (veteran teacher needs active support to invest effort into teaching well)
D4: High competence & commitment (Master teacher inspires, mentors “newbies”
Deciding under what situations to use each of these leadership styles involves assessing the individual or group’s developmental level. Developmental level is defined as the degree to which an individual or group has the competence and commitment to accomplish the task. Conveniently, four developmental levels, D1 through D4, match the four leadership styles, S1 through S4, of this model.
Developmental level 1 (D1): D1 individuals are low in competence and high in commitment. This might be a new teacher fresh out of college with only 8 weeks of student teaching experience to their credit. Although committed to education and teaching, they may not know all they need to know about the school policies and procedures, or what organizing the year for instruction with their own students entails.
Developmental level 2 (D2): D2, individuals are somewhat competent, but low in commitment. They might be a teacher who has a degree of job mastery but some of the initial excitement and motivation to excel has worn off – perhaps due to a violation of the psychological contract (see Chapter 6).
Developmental level 3 (D3): D3, individuals are those with moderately-high to high levels of competence, but may be lower on the commitment level. These folks might be seen as having the skills to do the job, but like some veteran educators nearing retirement, require active and on-going support to boost their willingness to continually invest the effort and time necessary to perform at their best.
Developmental level 4 (D4): D4, individuals are those at the apex of the developmental scale. They have confidence in their competence to complete the task, and they exhibit a high level of commitment to the task. A D4 individual might be the Master Teacher who continues to inspire younger teachers with their classroom expertise and enthusiastic talk about education’s many benefits to society.

29. Effective Leader’s Job is to…
Match leadership style with individual/group’s developmental level
Examples:
The effective leader’s job is to match the leadership style with the individual or group’s developmental level. Situational leadership theory’s challenge is to correctly identify this developmental level. Once accomplished, the leader matches the leadership style number with the developmental level number. For example, if a teacher is identified as D1 (low competence, high commitment) the most effective leadership style is S1. The new teacher with little experience (competence) and high enthusiasm (commitment) for the job would fit the D1 level. According to the situational leadership model, the correct leadership style to use is S1 – highly directive behavior and low on supportive behavior.

30. Situational Theory in Practice
Situational leadership theory has been researched for more than 40 years.
It is popular in practice due to its sensible application.
A convenient tool for educational leaders and a useful frame of reference for dealing with leadership issues
The Situational Model has an intuitiveness and logic. Let’s consider the new teacher (D1) and what leadership style the principal might use. It makes sense for the principal to take a more directive and less socially supportive role. The new teacher needs direction on how to increase her competence; that should be the principal’s primary goal. As the teacher matures in the job (D2) – increased competence but waning enthusiasm – the principal can still exhibit directive behavior, but increase the supportive behavior to bolster the teacher’s commitment level. As the teacher matures and shows high to moderately-high competence (D3), the principal can reduce the directive behaviors and continue the supportive behavior to maintain the commitment level. Once the teacher has become a “Master Teacher” with high levels of both competence and commitment (D4), the principal needs lower levels of directive and supportive behaviors. This teacher may have more competence in teaching than the principal. Directive behaviors from the principal would not be helpful. Moreover, the Master Teacher may perceive the principal’s high levels of supportive behavior as a waste of time or the principal’s lack of respect for the teacher’s competence and autonomy.
Situational leadership theory has been researched for more than 40 years, albeit mostly in doctoral dissertations. It is popular in practice due to its sensible application. Using this situational leadership model provides a convenient tool for educational leaders and a useful frame of reference for dealing with leadership issues A Google Scholar search of “situational leadership” turned up nearly 80,000 results.

31. Leader “Bridge” Behaviors
Defines goals
Clarifies path
Provides support
Removes obstacles
Outcome
Obstacles
Figure 4.5 shows a visual representation of the “bridge” that allows workers to continue on the path towards the goal. Using expectancy theory, the leader exhibits “bridge behaviors” that help workers avoid the obstacles and move toward goal attainment. Leadership behaviors include two task initiating structures – defining the goals and clarifying the path – and two support or relationship behaviors – removing obstacles and providing support.

32. Path-Goal Theory
Path goal theory states that leaders can increase subordinate satisfaction and performance by clarifying and clearing the paths to goals and by increasing the number and kinds of rewards available for goal attainment.
Robert House, professor of organizational studies and management at Wharton, University of Pennsylvania, developed the path-goal theory of leadership in the early 1970s. Path goal theory states that leaders can increase subordinate satisfaction and performance by clarifying and clearing the paths to goals and by increasing the number and kinds of rewards available for goal attainment.
While House refined his path-goal theory in 1996, we will discuss his original leader behaviors.
People constantly hold certain expectations for their future, both personally and professionally. Expectancy theory, discussed fully in Chapter 6, is basically a presumption of what motivates individuals’ behavior. Expectancy theory holds that motivation is a combination of three factors:
Valence: What is the value of the expected outcome? What do I get out of it?
Instrumentality: The belief that if certain actions are completed the outcome will be achieved. Is there a clear path for me to achieve the goal?
Expectancy: The belief that one has the ability to complete the actions. Am I capable of achieving the goal?
See House, R. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, pp ; also, House, R. & Mitchell, R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business, 3, pp
Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice, 5th ed. Los Angeles: Sage, p
House, R. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 3 (2),

33. Path Goal Theory & Expectancy Theory
Expectancy theory - a presumption of what motivates individuals’ behavior:
Valence: What is the value of the expected outcome? What do I get out of it?
Instrumentality: The belief that if certain actions are completed the outcome will be achieved. Is there a clear path for me to achieve the goal?
Expectancy: The belief that one has the ability to complete the actions. Am I capable of achieving the goal?
People constantly hold certain expectations for their future, both personally and professionally. Expectancy theory, discussed fully in Chapter 6, is basically a presumption of what motivates individuals’ behavior. Expectancy theory holds that motivation is a combination of three factors:
Valence: What is the value of the expected outcome? What do I get out of it?
Instrumentality: The belief that if certain actions are completed the outcome will be achieved. Is there a clear path for me to achieve the goal?
Expectancy: The belief that one has the ability to complete the actions. Am I capable of achieving the goal?

34. Leader’s Behavior Depends On:
Leadership
Styles
Subordinate
& Task/
Environment
Contingencies
Outcomes
In path-goal theory, the leader uses a leadership style that matches the workers’ motivational needs in a particular situation. The leader behaviors depend on two situational factors – the subordinate conditions and the task characteristics. House and University of Washington business professor Terrance R. Mitchell examines four leader behaviors that meet these needs: Directive, Supportive, Participative, and Achievement-oriented. Using these behaviors helps workers move along the path towards the goal (path-goal), avoiding obstacles that might obstruct them. Figure 4.5 shows a visual representation of the “bridge” that allows workers to continue on the path towards the goal. Using expectancy theory, the leader exhibits “bridge behaviors” that help workers avoid the obstacles and move toward goal attainment. Leadership behaviors include two task initiating structures – defining the goals and clarifying the path – and two support or relationship behaviors – removing obstacles and providing support.
House, R. & Mitchell, R. (1974). Op cit.

35. The Path-Goal Framework
Subordinates’ personal characteristics:
Perceived ability
Locus of control
Leader behaviors:
Directive
Supportive
Participative
Achievement-
oriented
Environmental characteristics:
Task structure
*Work group
Subordinates’ Motivation to Perform

36. Path-Goal Theory When to Use Leadership Styles

37. Leadership Style Subordinate Environment
Directive
Want authority leadership
External locus of control
Low ability
Complex or ambiguous task
Strong formal authority
Good work group
Supportive
Do not want authority leadership
Internal locus of control
High ability
Simple or structured task
Weak formal authority
No good work group
Participative
Want to be involved
Strong or weak formal authority
Good/ no good work gr’p
Achievement-Oriented
Directive leadership is used in situations when the followers prefer authoritarian leadership and where the task is complex, ambiguous, and the rules and regulations are unclear about how to complete the task. A directive behavior tends to clarify the path to the reward for the followers.
Supportive leadership resembles the relationship orientation in situational leadership theory. The leader behavior is seen as respectful, caring, and approachable. Here the leader takes a genuine interest in the workers’ well being and their working conditions. The workers have internal locus of control, are highly competent to successfully complete the task, and do not want authority leadership.
Achievement-oriented leadership is used in situations when the followers have high expectations, a need for task accomplishment, and a situation where the task is complex, ambiguous, challenging (or it may have a lack of challenge). Achievement-oriented leadership tends to help workers set high goals and high expectations for their performance.
Participative leadership is used in situations when the followers have a high level of competence and cooperation along with a need to excel, the task may be unclear or unstructured, and the reward may not be appropriate to the goal. A participative leadership style tends to clarify workers’ goals and correctly articulate and align reward structures by securing worker input in the decision-making process.
Additionally, workers with a high level of internal locus of control (those who believed their outcomes were a result of their own hard work and good decisions) tend to be more satisfied working with leaders who use participative leadership styles. On the other hand, workers with a high level of external locus of control (see outcomes as a result of external factors or luck) tend to be more satisfied working with leaders using directive leadership styles. Here, educational leaders need to work with educators to build capacity if they are to increase employees’ internal locus of control (see Chapter 7 discussion of attribution theory and building capacity).
Path-goal theory can be practical and complex at the same time. Educational leaders should be able to apply path-goal theory by assessing the needs of workers in the school and the particular situation and then apply the correct leadership style. By using path-goal theory and correctly assessing the situation, school leaders not only increase the probability of increased worker effort, performance, and job satisfaction; they also build staff capacity to confront and solve new tasks.

38. Transformational Leadership Theory
Transformational leadership theory sits on opposite end of continuum from laissez faire leadership.
Laissez-faire Democratic Transformational
Leadership Leadership Leadership
Use of Authority
Currently, transformational leadership seems to be the current “hot topic” in leadership research. In 1978, James MacGregor Burns, an historian and political scientist, developed the concept of “transformational leadership”. As a leadership theory, transformational leadership sits on the opposite end of the continuum from laissez fair. While Kurt Lewin and colleagues had earlier (1939) identified laissez faire as a leadership style, Burns brings this to a more elegant construct. Figure 4.6 shows an early model of authoritarian leadership use Bass, B. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, Military, and Educational Impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lewin, K., LIippit, R. & White, R.K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10,

39. Background Information
Early leadership theory identified 3 distinct leadership styles based on leader’s use of authority.
Laissez-faire leadership: leader’s minimal use of authority; assumed capable & committed workers; little need for initiating structure & supportive behavior
Democratic leadership: worker involvement in decision-making process. Effectiveness depends on workers’ capacities and commitment.
Autocratic leadership: low levels of worker involvement in decision-making process.
Earlier leadership theory development saw laissez-faire, democratic, and autocratic as three distinct leadership styles based on the leader’s use of authority. Laissez-faire leadership is on the low use of authority end; democratic leadership is in the middle; and autocratic leadership is on the high use of authority end.
Figure 4.6 – Use of Authority Continuum in Leadership Styles
Laissez-faire leadership – from the French, “let it be” – is characterized by the leader’s minimal use of authority. This type of leadership was considered optimal for capable and committed workers who needed little oversight – similar to S4 and D4 in the SL II situational leadership model – where there is little need for initiating structure and supportive behavior.
Democratic leadership style is characterized by worker involvement in the decision-making process. The level of worker involvement depends on how far to the left or right one moves on the authority dimension. As in the situational leadership model, using a democratic leadership style may be problematic if a wide range of viewpoints exists on how the goal is to be accomplished or if a wide range in workers’ capacity and/or commitment to accomplish the goal is present. Lewin, however, found democratic leadership to be the most effective style.
Autocratic leadership style is characterized by low levels of worker involvement in the decision-making process. It is akin to S1 in the situational leadership model where the leadership style is characterized by high task and low relationship behaviors. While this may be an appropriate leadership style for workers at the lowest developmental stages, Lewin’s research found that the autocratic leadership style was associated with the highest levels of worker discontent Lewin, Lippit & White (1939). Ibid.

40. Transformational Leadership Concept
Transactional leadership – quid pro quo; autocratic; leader uses power of punishment & rewards to achieve a goal.
Transformational leadership –
Leader as a moral exemplar
Leader articulates a vision & builds awareness of this vision while also meeting followers’ needs, concerns, motives
Leader helps followers by building team’s capacity – morally & technically.
Burns’ concept of transformational leadership is defined as a process where “leaders and followers help each other to advance to a higher level of morale and motivation.” To more fully understand transformational leadership, however, we must examine another concept Burns discusses – transactional leadership.
Figure 4.6 shows a continuum of leadership styles based on the use of authority. Transactional and transformational leadership may also be conceived as a continuum. In 1985, Bass expanded on Burns’ work and developed a continuum that ranged from transformational to transactional to laissez-faire leadership. For clarity, however, we will compare and contrast transactional and transformational leadership as if they were opposite ends of one continuum.
On the one end, stands transactional leadership – a type of quid pro quo (Latin meaning “this for that”) style of leading people – a style frequently associated with autocratic leadership. Here the leader gives something to get something or withholds something to get something. Transactional leadership involves the use of power – of punishments and rewards – to achieve a goal. Principals use transactional leadership when they give teachers exceptionally high evaluations for volunteering to serve on committees or take on additional duties. Teachers use transactional leadership when they assign high grades for student work or classroom participation. Transactional leadership covers a broad array of everyday life. Psychologically, we do something or do not do something based on a reward or lack of reward. We work hard for our paychecks. We obtain food and housing by spending money we earn through our hard work. Most of life is built around transactional relationships.
Transformational leadership, in contrast, is a much different concept. Instead of a power-based “give and take” process, transformational leadership encompasses three concepts. First, the leader is a moral exemplar of the organization’s mission, serving as an example of the organization’s goals and vision. By visibly symbolizing the organization’s mission, leaders make the workers aware of the attractive potential and specific details of the organizational change. Second, the leader articulates a vision and builds awareness of this vision while also attending to the followers’ needs, concerns, and motives. Third, the leader helps followers by building the team’s capacity – both morally and technically. Understanding transformational leadership’s three components helps clarify the differences between a transactional and a transformational leader. Transformational leadership is gauged by the influence on the followers above and beyond a transactional (exchange) level.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York. Harper & Row, p. 18.
Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B., and Aviolo, B. (1990). The implications of transactional and transformational leadership for individual, team, and organizational development. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 4,

41. Transformational Leadership:
Idealized influence: “charisma”; leader’s ability to use personal power impact followers’ loyalty to leader & organization.
Inspirational motivation: leader is able to communi-cate a vision which motivates workers to increasingly higher levels of accomplishment through shared expectations & actual achievements.
Intellectual stimulation: the degree to which leaders challenge organizational assumptions & have followers confront own beliefs & behaviors to permit creative problem solving
Individualized concern: the degree to which leaders attend to followers’ individual needs through coaching or mentoring
Other researchers, Bass and Riggio (2006) and Bass and Bass (2008) identify four common factors associated with transformational leadership – idealized influence; inspirational motivation; intellectual stimulation; and individualized consideration. Cited frequently in the literature, these four factors are commonly referred to as the “Four I’s” of transformational leadership.
Idealized influence. Idealized influence is also known as charisma (from the Greek meaning gift). Idealized influence describes the leader’s ability to impact followers’ loyalty to the leader and to the organization by the power of their person. These leaders have a deep conviction about the direction the organization needs to take and serve as a moral example for the organization’s “cause.” As such, they share their vision and mission, engendering loyalty in the process, making attempts to change the organization.
Interestingly, Bass observes that the extent to which followers are ready to view their leaders as having this idealized influence depends on the followers’ personality. Followers who have previously experienced psychological distress may perceive an effective leader’s idealized influence. In other words, the charismatic leader (who has this idealized influence) is “in the right place at the right time” when the old way of doing things have failed and a new order is required. Carrying this to school contexts, leaders who come into a failing school and who garner sufficient staff buy-in to successfully turn it around may be seen to have charisma. After all, a persistently failing school that now has become successful gives followers an experience of ”mission accomplished” . Having fulfilled a challenging and important goal, followers share a camaraderie of success which builds pride, respect, and trust for their leader.
Weber points out that charisma remains unstable, dependent on the situation. For charisma to endure, it must be “routinized” by establishing policies and protocols. Using Lewin’s terms, when the school is “turned around”, the organization must develop policies and procedures to stabilize (refreeze) the new culture and behaviors after the prior culture has been unfrozen and moved to the now well-functioning place.
Inspirational motivation. Inspirational motivation, describes the leader who is able to communicate a vision which motivates workers to increasingly higher levels of accomplishment by increasing shared expectations. This is closely related to Vroom’s Expectancy Theory (See Chapter 5) that says if someone believes their increased job effort will result in the desired performance, it likely will lead to that end. By increasing what can be accomplished, workers gain confidence in their capacities to successfully solve other concerns as well. In this process, workers are energized to create better and more productive work environments where team spirit, optimism, creativity, and vision are enhanced. As in the prior example of the persistently failing school that experienced a successful turn-around, the staff now sees that they can create a better climate for learning. This realization strengthens their belief that they have the capacity to make even greater changes to the school.
With transformational leadership, leaders encourage grade level or subject area teams to increase their expectations for students’ achievement in class and on local or state tests. Teachers then provide students with effective instruction, appropriate and personalized assistance, and on-going encouragement. As a consequence, higher percentages of students pass these assessments. Inspirational motivation carries over from staff to students. The process enhances the culture for motivation for everyone in the school community.
Intellectual stimulation. Intellectual stimulation involves the degree to which leaders challenge traditional organizational assumptions and have followers confront their own beliefs and behaviors. Intellectual stimulation also involves the leader encouraging workers to be creative problem solvers who can reframe issues in ways that can be more easily understood and engaged. Intellectual stimulation values employee learning and resourcefulness as means to professional and organizational growth. As leaders encourage employee development, open consideration of issues, and creative problem solving, leaders elicit and take guidance from followers’ informed input.
In transformational leadership, followers are encouraged to think of new ways to think about the organization and to use fresh insights to solve problems. Leaders educate teachers about the organization and the issues, help them deconstruct familiar assumptions which may block problem solving, solicit teachers’ ideas, and act on them. By helping the staff to mature their capabilities and collaboration skills, the leader enhances and makes full use the organizational human capital.
Individualized consideration. Individualized consideration is the degree to which leaders attend to the followers’ individual needs through coaching or mentoring. This factor is most closely associated with S3 – high relationship, low task behavior. Bass observes that there are really two separate factors associated with consideration. Consideration is displayed in group settings – consulting with groups, participative decision making with groups, and treating group members alike. Individualized consideration also occurs where each individual is treated differently according to their needs and capabilities. This may take many forms – congratulating an individual on having done a good job, constructively pointing out weaknesses, and assigning projects to boost the individual’s confidence and capability. Bass, B., & Riggio, R. (2006). Transformational Leadership, 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; Bass, B., and Bass, R. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, 4th ed. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. (1985). Op cit., p. 36.
Galanter, M. (1982). Charismatic religious sects and psychiatry: An overview. American Journal of Psychiatry, 139,
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations (T. Parsons, trans.). New York: Free Press.
Avolio, B. (1999). Full leadership development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bass, B. (1985). Op cit, p

42. Transformational Leadership
The leader creates a supportive & nurturing climate for mentoring where concern for both individuals and task is high.
Not all transformational leaders display individualized consideration, however. They may depend on their charisma or intellectual stimulation to compensate for a lack of individual consideration.
Downplays importance of situational variables.
Bass notes that Andrew Carnegie, a 19th century American industrialist and philanthropist, exemplified individualized consideration when he gave responsibility to employees at all levels of management to avail himself of whatever talents the individuals had – and this was done at a time when autocratic leadership was the rule. Given his own experiences as a child laborer, Carnegie was sensitive to the needs of the blue collar as well as the white collar workers.
In transformational leadership, the leader creates a supportive and nurturing climate for mentoring where concern for both individuals and task is high. Not all transformational leaders display individualized consideration, however. They may depend on their charisma or intellectual stimulation to compensate for a lack of individual consideration.
Situational theory and transformational leadership have certain commonalities. Bass claims that transformational leadership theory downplays the importance of situational variables. More recently, Bass stated that situational factors may influence leadership effectiveness and that there may no best leadership style in all circumstances Bass, B. (1985). Op cit., p. 81.
Ibid, p. 83.
Bass, B. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52,

43. Transformational Leadership Theory in Practice
Takes time & experience to build
Ideas for transformational school leaders:
Develop a challenging vision with followers
Link the vision with a strategy for achievement
Develop a specific vision & translate it into actions
Express confidence & optimism about the vision & its implementation
Accomplish the vision through small, planned successes moving toward full implementation
Leaders seeking to “transform” a school or a school district would fare well to think of transformational leadership as a goal and not necessarily as a leadership style. While the four factors of idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration comprise the theory’s essence, these distinct factors build over time in dealing with people and issues. They cannot be worn all at once like a newly tailored suit.
Gary Yukl, professor of management at the State University of New York at Albany, offers ideas concerning transformational leadership that may be helpful to school leaders:
Develop a challenging vision with followers;
Link the vision with a strategy for achievement;
Develop a specific vision and translate it into actions;
Express confidence and optimism about the vision and its implementation; and
Accomplish the vision through small, planned successes moving towards its
full implementation.
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10 (2),

44. Authentic Leadership Theory
Concerns congruence between what leaders say and do
“To thine own self be true”
People want leaders to be good people:
Desire to serve
Integrity & ethical behavior
A strong moral compass & core values
Pursuit of worthy objectives
Desire to empower workers for good of the organization
Authentic leadership theory is a relatively new theory and is still under construction. As the name suggests, authentic leadership concerns congruence between what leaders say and what they do.
Authenticity is not a new concept. Probably the best known reference is from Shakespeare’s Hamlet when Polonius advises Laertes, his son, - To thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man. The phrase was not original to Shakespeare, however. It comes from an ancient Greek saying - Να είσαι αυτός που είσαι – literally, be the one that you are. Another translation: Be true to your better self.
Background Information
Basically, people want their leaders to be good people. We want the confidence of knowing our leaders are being true to their better selves. No one appreciated Enron’s leader encouraging his employees to buy more company stock when he knew the organization’s dire financial predicament. Several U.S. investment bankers put the world into the Great Recession of 2008 by selling sub-prime mortgage-backed securities (MBS) based on inflated home assessments that would soon be under water (worth less than the mortgage). The public was shocked to learn after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico that BP had a history of taking short-cuts to save money while compromising safety. To their mind, paying fines for malpractice cost the company less than the money lost by taking time to operate prudently.
Education is not immune to scandal. Hundreds of examples each year show school leaders embroiled in high-stakes testing cheating, financial improprieties, and inappropriate relationships. A recent Google search of “school principal scandals” retrieved approximately 250,000 hits.
Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 111.

45. Authentic Leadership Concept
Authentic leaders achieve genuineness through self-awareness, self-acceptance dependable actions and relationships
Relationships characterized by:
Transparency, openness, trust
Guidance toward worthy objectives
Emphasis on follower development
Authentic leaders achieve genuineness through self-awareness, self-acceptance, and dependable actions and relationships. As those authentic relationships develop they are characterized by:
Transparency, openness, and trust;
Guidance towards worthy objectives; and
An emphasis on follower development.
Authentic leadership fosters their followers’ development into authentic leadership roles. Authentic leadership centers around relationships built on honesty, trust, and the pursuit of a moral purpose.
Garner, W., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., May, D., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. Leadership Quarterly, 16 (3), p. 345.
Ibid.

46. Authentic Leadership Conceptual representation:
Antecedent events: those events that have previously taken place in our lives that shape us into who we are now
Personal history: how we were raised, our role models, our education & work experiences
Trigger events: those significant personal & occupational events that have spurred personal growth & development
Antecedent events are those events that have previously taken place in our lives that shape us into who we are now. The two types of antecedent events come from our personal history and key trigger events. Personal history comes from how we were raised, the role models who influenced us, and our education and work experiences. Trigger events, as the name implies, are those significant and usually crisis-centered personal and occupational events that have spurred personal growth and development in our self-concept. Our upbringing and those life-shaping events are what we “bring to the table” as leaders.

47. Organizational Climate
Antecedents
Personal History
Trigger Events
Authentic Leadership
Self-Awareness
Values
Identity
Emotions
Motives/Goals
Self Regulation
Internalized
Balanced Processing
Rational Transparency
Authentic Behavior
Authentic Followership
Self-Awareness
Values
Identity
Emotions
Motives/Goals
Self-Regulation
*Internalized
*Balanced Processing
Rational Transparency
Authentic Behavior
Conceptual Framework for Authentic Leader and Follower Development
Organizational Climate
Follower Outcome
Follower Performance

48. Authentic Leadership: Two Components
Self-awareness: Self-knowledge; Results from self-reflection, trust in their values, identity, emotions, & goals
Self-regulation: Self-knowledge guides and limits the leaders’ behavior to be in synch with leaders’ values, emotions, & goals; balanced processing of information
Congruence between leaders’ being & acting – authenticity, genuineness.
Authentic leadership is composed of two components – self-awareness and self-regulation. Self-awareness results from self-reflection. It is only as we understand ourselves – our motivations, values, goals – do we become truly self-aware. Kernis (2003) suggests that self-awareness is a vital component of authentic leadership where leaders are self-reflective and trust in their values, identity, emotions, and goals.
As leaders become increasingly self-aware, they internalize and integrate it as part of their being. This on-going self-knowledge allows the leader to become more comfortable with self-regulation. Since the leader is fully aware of his or her identity, values, emotions, and goals, they are always within awareness as the leader thinks and acts. As a consequence, this self-knowledge guides and limits the leaders’ behavior to those in synch with those same values, emotions, and goals. This congruence between the leader’s being and actions leads to a balanced processing of information and situations. In theory, full self-awareness and self-regulation allow the leader to act without bias, prejudice, or maladaptive behaviors associated with inauthentic behaviors resulting from a leader who is not self-aware and self-regulated.
As the leader exhibits this maturity in balanced processing of information, he or she is able to present a coherent and unified self to followers. Through self-disclosure, the leader is open and truthful in interpersonal dealings and in the decision-making process. This truthfulness is seen in dealings with others, but also in being true to the leader’s values, identity, emotions, and goals. This is known as rational transparency. Rational transparency leads to the leader’s authentic behaviors.
Kearnis, M. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 1-26.

49. Balanced Processing of Information
Leader presents a coherent and unified self to followers
Open & truthful in interpersonal dealings and in the decision-making process.
Rational transparency – being true and open about one’s values, identity, emotions, goals – leads to authentic behavior
As the leader exhibits this maturity in balanced processing of information, he or she is able to present a coherent and unified self to followers. Through self-disclosure, the leader is open and truthful in interpersonal dealings and in the decision-making process. This truthfulness is seen in dealings with others, but also in being true to the leader’s values, identity, emotions, and goals. This is known as rational transparency. Rational transparency leads to the leader’s authentic behaviors.
Authentic leadership has a positive impact on followers and the organization. As the leader makes the organizational climate more inclusive, ethical, caring, and strength-based environment, it impacts positively on the follower outcomes. These outcomes include enhanced levels of trust, engagement, and workplace well-being. According to the model, the positive work environment allows follower performance to become sustainable and verifiable. In this way, authentic leadership creates a two-way loop. The follower outcomes and follower performances become part of the antecedents for future behaviors. Followers’ own personal history and trigger events are enhanced by interaction with authentic leadership. Authentic leadership and authentic followership enhance each other in every interaction which has a positive impact on the organizational climate, follower outcomes, and follower performance. This entire process becomes part of the continuous cycle in which antecedents impacts the leadership and followership behaviors.

50. Impact on Followers & Organization
Positive impact on follower outcomes:
Makes organizational climate more inclusive, ethical, caring
Enhanced levels of trust, engagement, well-being
Creates a two-way loop: followers’ outcomes & performances become antecedents for future behaviors
Authentic leadership & followership enhance each other
Authentic leadership has a positive impact on followers and the organization. As the leader makes the organizational climate more inclusive, ethical, caring, and strength-based environment, it impacts positively on the follower outcomes. These outcomes include enhanced levels of trust, engagement, and workplace well-being. According to the model, the positive work environment allows follower performance to become sustainable and verifiable. In this way, authentic leadership creates a two-way loop. The follower outcomes and follower performances become part of the antecedents for future behaviors. Followers’ own personal history and trigger events are enhanced by interaction with authentic leadership. Authentic leadership and authentic followership enhance each other in every interaction which has a positive impact on the organizational climate, follower outcomes, and follower performance. This entire process becomes part of the continuous cycle in which antecedents impacts the leadership and followership behaviors.

51. Authentic Leadership Theory: Flaws
Contains many same qualities as transformational and other leadership models, difficult to practically or empirically separate one theory from others
Requires leader to be consistent over time
Not all leaders are reflective
Leaders may have dysfunctional values, beliefs that do not benefit followers or organization
Authentic leadership theory is not without flaws. Theoretically, it contains many of the same qualities as transformational and other leadership models, making it difficult to practically or empirically separate one theory from the others. Also, authentic leadership requires the leader to be a consistent, authentic leader over time. A lack of authentic leadership engenders a lack of authentic followership negatively impacting the climate, follower outcomes, and follower performance. All too often, leaders are not reflective and therefore cannot become self-aware and self-regulated individuals. Then too, leaders may hold dysfunctional values that do not benefit the organization or its followers. Additionally, many leaders behave defensively, in response to their insecurities and weaknesses rather than from their strengths. Just as the performance cycle builds from each positive experience, it can deteriorate from one negative experience.

52. Authentic Leadership in Practice
A relatively new topic, definitions vary
Difficult to translate into a coherent theory
Practicing authentic leadership means being comfortable “in one’s own skin”, extensive and on-going reflection about values, ethics, goals, philosophy & how these apply to the work setting.
Willingness to lead based on positive role modeling;
Act from conscience not convenience
Authentic leadership is a relatively new and intriguing topic in leadership studies. Definitions of authentic leadership vary from author to author. As such, it is difficult to translate into a coherent theory. Only recently have models been developed which can be quantified and tested. Nevertheless, practicing authentic leadership requires a leader who is “comfortable in his or her skin” and has reflected extensively about values, goals, ethics, and philosophy and how these apply to the work setting. It requires a leader who genuinely values developing positive, professional relationships with followers and a willingness to lead based on his or her positive role modeling for others in the organization.
On the other hand, we know that certain behaviors minimize authentic leadership. Those behaviors include the unethical, manipulative, and the highly transactional. Leaders who have not reflected about what it is they believe and value have few core standards upon which they act consistently and as a result, may act from convenience and not conscience. Their “walk and talk” may be at odds with each other. Acting from conscience and not merely convenience may be the crux of authentic leadership.