This Document Contains Chapters 11 to 12 Chapter Eleven – Traditional Leadership Approaches Chapter Overview Recall that our underlying question in this book is what makes managers and organizations effective and how effectiveness is influenced by performance behaviors, commitment and engagement, citizenship behaviors, and dysfunctional behaviors. In Part 3 we examined the impact of various forms of social behaviors on these questions. We discussed groups and teams in Chapter 7. Chapter 8 focused on decision making and problem solving. We looked at communication in Chapter 9. And in Chapter 10 we discussed conflict and negotiation in organizations. In Part 4 we ask a different but related question: why does leadership matter? Chapter 11 looks at traditional leadership approaches, while modern leadership approaches are covered in detail in Chapter 12. Chapter 13 concludes Part 4 by examining power, influence, and politics in organizations. At the end of the part you should have a strong understanding of how leadership affects employee performance behaviors, employee commitment and engagement, citizenship behaviors, and dysfunctional behaviors. The mystique of leadership makes it one of the most widely debated, studied, and sought-after properties of organizational life. While leadership is among the most widely studied concepts in the entire field of management, many unanswered questions remain. Why, then, should we continue to study leadership? First, leadership is of great practical importance to organizations. Second, in spite of many remaining mysteries, researchers have isolated and verified some key variables that influence leadership effectiveness. This chapter, the first of two devoted to leadership, introduces the fundamental traditional models that are commonly used as a basis for understanding leadership. We start with a discussion of the meaning of leadership, including its definition and the distinctions between leadership and management. Then we turn to historical views of leadership, focusing on the trait and behavioral approaches. Next, we examine three contemporary leadership theories that have formed the basis for most leadership research: the LPC theory developed by Fiedler, the path-goal theory, and Vroom’s decision tree approach to leadership. In our next chapter, we explore several contemporary and emerging views of leadership. Learning Outcomes After studying this chapter, students should be able to: 1. Characterize the nature of leadership. 2. Trace the early approaches to leadership. 3. Discuss the emergence of situational theories and models of leadership including the LPC and path-goal theories. 4. Describe Vroom’s decision tree approach to leadership. Real World Challenge: Leadership Pinball Summary: A few of corporate America’s veteran leaders have some tips for those who still want to follow in their increasingly treacherous footsteps. If you think you’re being overworked, odds are you’re right. Most top corporate leaders work 80 to 100 hours a week, and a lot of them have found that regimens that allow them to refuel and refresh make it possible for them to keep up the pace. Real World Challenge: Suppose someone you know is taking a leadership role in a large organization and asks your advice on how to deal with the increase in workload. After reading this chapter you should have some useful information to share. Real World Response: Many leaders report that playing racquetball, running marathons, practicing yoga, or just getting regular exercise helps them to recover from overwork. Effective leaders also take control of information flow—which means managing it, not reducing the flow until it’s as close to a trickle as they can get it. Many use assistants to filter the incoming information. Chapter Outline I. THE NATURE OF LEADERSHIP Like several other key organizational behavior terms such as “personality” and “motivation,” “leadership” is used in a variety of ways. A. The Meaning of Leadership We will define leadership in terms of both process and property. As a process, leadership is the use of noncoercive influence to direct and coordinate the activities of group members to meet a goal. As a property, leadership is the set of characteristics attributed to those who are perceived to use such influence successfully. Influence, a common element of both perspectives, is the ability to affect the perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, motivation, and/or behaviors of others. From an organizational viewpoint, leadership is vital because it has such a powerful influence on individual and group behavior. Leadership involves neither force nor coercion. A manager or supervisor may or may not also be a leader. It is also important to note that on one hand, a leader may actually possess the characteristics attributed to him or her; on the other, the leader may merely be perceived as possessing them. B. Leadership versus Management From these definitions, it should be clear that leadership and management are related, but they are not the same. A person can be a manager, a leader, both, or neither. Some of the basic distinctions between the two are summarized in Table 11.1. A leadership position can also be formal, as when someone appointed to head a group has leadership qualities, or informal, as when a leader emerges from the ranks of the group according to a consensus of the members. Organizations need both management and leadership if they are to be effective. Management in conjunction with leadership can help achieve planned orderly change, and leadership in conjunction with management can keep the organization properly aligned with its environment. In addition, managers and leaders also play a major role in establishing the moral climate of the organization and in determining the role of ethics in its culture. II. EARLY APPROACHES TO LEADERSHIP Early studies focused on the traits, or personal characteristics, of leaders. Later research shifted to examine actual leader behaviors. A. Trait Approaches to Leadership Early researchers believed that leaders had some unique set of qualities or traits that distinguished them from their peers. Moreover, these traits were presumed to be relatively stable and enduring. Following this trait approach, these researchers focused on identifying leadership traits, developing methods for measuring them, and using the methods to select leaders. The list of leadership traits quickly became so long that it lost any semblance of practical value. In addition, the results of many studies were inconsistent. The trait approach also had a significant theoretical problem in that it could neither specify nor prove how presumed leadership traits are connected to leadership per se. For these and other reasons, the trait approach was all but abandoned several decades ago. In recent years, however, the trait approach has received renewed interest. For example, some researchers have sought to reintroduce a limited set of traits into the leadership literature. These traits include emotional intelligence, drive, motivation, honesty and integrity, self-confidence, cognitive ability, knowledge of the business, and charisma. And unfortunately, traits may even play a role in people not having opportunities to engage in leadership activities. Regardless of the reasons (including prejudice, stereotypes, or other factors), women, African Americans, and Hispanics are still significantly underrepresented among top management teams and boards of directors in the largest American businesses. B. Behavioral Approaches to Leadership In the late 1940s, most researchers began to shift away from the trait approach and started to look at leadership as an observable process or activity. The goal of the so-called behavioral approach was to determine what behaviors are associated with effective leadership. The researchers assumed that the behaviors of effective leaders differed somehow from the behaviors of less effective leaders and that the behaviors of effective leaders would be the same across all situations. The behavioral approach to the study of leadership included the Michigan studies, the Ohio State studies, and the leadership grid. CASE STUDY: Getting on Board with Diversity Summary: According to Marc H. Morial, CEO of the National Urban League, which promotes economic empowerment for African Americans, a minority presence on corporate boards is necessary to protect the interests of minority consumers and other stakeholders. “African American voices and perspectives are needed on corporate boards to ensure that business decisions affecting Black America are both responsible and sensitive to the needs of our communities.” Citing a recent study by the Executive Leadership Council, Morial points out that the number of blacks on Fortune 500 boards has actually declined in recent years: Even though blacks comprise 13 percent of the U.S. population, representation on corporate boards stands at “a meager 7 percent.” The same trend was confirmed for minority and women representation. Women comprise 18 percent of all board members and just under 20 percent of executive team members though comprising 50 percent of the population. Minorities comprise 14.5 percent of all directors and an even smaller percentage of executive team members and comprise 35 percent of the population. African Americans boast the highest minority representation on boards at 8.8 percent and represent 4.2 percent of executive teams. Hispanics fared worse than any other minority. Although they represent 15 percent of the population, they comprise only 3.3 percent of board members and 3 percent of executive team members. 1. The Michigan Studies The Michigan leadership studies were a program of research conducted at the University of Michigan. The goal of this work was to determine the pattern of leadership behaviors that result in effective group performance. The researchers collected and analyzed descriptions of supervisory behavior to determine how effective supervisors differed from ineffective ones. Two basic forms of leader behavior were identified—job-centered and employee-centered—as shown in the top portion of Figure 11.1. The leader who exhibits job-centered leader behavior pays close attention to the work of subordinates, explains work procedures, and is mainly interested in performance. The leader’s primary concern is efficient completion of the task. The leader who engages in employee-centered leader behavior attempts to build effective work groups with high performance goals. The leader’s main concern is with high performance, but that is to be achieved by paying attention to the human aspects of the group. These two styles of leader behavior were presumed to be at opposite ends of a single dimension. The Michigan researchers suggested that a leader could exhibit either behavior but not both at the same time. They also suggested that employee-centered leader behavior was more likely to result in effective group performance. 2. The Ohio State Studies The Ohio State leadership studies were conducted at about the same time as the Michigan studies, in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Ohio State University developed a questionnaire, which they administered in both military and industrial settings, to assess subordinates’ perceptions of their leaders’ behavior. The Ohio State studies identified several forms of leader behavior but tended to focus on the two most common ones: consideration and initiating-structure. When engaging in consideration behavior, the leader is concerned with the subordinates’ feelings and respects subordinates’ ideas. The leader-subordinate relationship is characterized by mutual trust, respect, and two-way communication. When using initiating-structure behavior, on the other hand, the leader clearly defines the leader-subordinate roles so that subordinates know what is expected of them. The leader also establishes channels of communication and determines the methods for accomplishing the group’s task. Unlike the employee-centered and job-centered leader behaviors, consideration and initiating structure were not thought to be on the same continuum. Instead, as shown in the bottom portion of Figure 11.1, they were seen as independent dimensions of the leader’s behavioral repertoire. As a result, a leader could exhibit various degrees of each behavior simultaneously. The Ohio State researchers also investigated the stability of leader behaviors over time. They found that a given individual’s leadership pattern appeared to change little as long as the situation remained fairly constant. 3. Leadership Grid Yet another behavioral approach to leadership is the Leadership Grid (originally called the Managerial Grid). The Leadership Grid provides a means for evaluating leadership styles and then training managers to move toward an ideal style of behavior. The most current version of the Leadership Grid is shown in Figure 11.2. The horizontal axis represents concern for production and the vertical axis represents concern for people. Note the five extremes of leadership behavior: the 1,1 manager (impoverished management), who exhibits minimal concern for both production and people; the 9,1 manager (authority-compliance), who is highly concerned about production but exhibits little concern for people; the 1,9 manager (country club management), who has the exact opposite concerns from the 9,1 manager; the 5,5 manager (middle of the road management), who maintains adequate concern for both people and production; and the 9,9 manager (team management), who exhibits maximum concern for both people and production. According to this approach, the ideal style of leadership is 9,9. The developers of this model thus created a multiphase training and development program to assist managers in achieving this style of behavior. However, there is little published scientific evidence regarding its true effectiveness and the extent to which it applies to all managers or to all settings. III. THE EMERGENCE OF SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP MODELS The leader-behavior theories urge us not to be so preoccupied with what properties may be possessed by leaders (the trait approach), but to instead concentrate on what leaders actually do (their behaviors). The behavior theorists tried to identify consistent relationships between leader behaviors and employee responses in the 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 next step in the evolution of leadership theory was the creation of situational models. Situational models assume that appropriate leader behavior varies from one situation to another. The goal of a situational theory, then, is to identify key situational factors and to specify how they interact to determine appropriate leader behavior. An important early model must be discussed as it laid the foundation for later situational models. In a seminal article about the decision-making process, Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. Schmidt proposed a continuum of leadership behavior. Their model is much like the original Michigan framework. Besides purely job-centered and employee-centered behavior, they identified several intermediate behaviors that a manager might consider. Shown in Figure 11.3. This continuum of behavior ranges from the one extreme of having the manager make the decision alone to the other extreme of having the employees make the decision with minimal guidance from the leader. Each point on the continuum is influenced by characteristics of the manager, subordinates, and the situation. The leadership continuum acknowledged for the first time that leader behaviors represent a continuum rather than discrete extremes, and that various characteristics and elements of any given situation would affect the success of any given leadership style. It was, however, only speculative. In the following sections, we describe three of the most important and widely accepted situational theories of leadership: the LPC theory, the path-goal theory, and Vroom’s decision tree approach. IV. THE LPC THEORY OF LEADERSHIP Fred Fiedler developed the LPC theory of leadership. The LPC theory attempts to explain and reconcile both the leader’s personality and the complexities of the situation. This theory was originally called the “contingency theory of leadership.” The LPC theory contends that a leader’s effectiveness depends on the situation and, as a result, some leaders may be effective in one situation or organization but not in another. The theory also explains why this discrepancy may occur and identifies leader-situation matches that should result in effective performance. A. Task versus Relationship Motivation Fiedler devised special terms to describe a leader’s basic personality traits in relation to leadership: “task motivation” versus “relationship motivation.” He also conceptualized the situational context in terms of its favorableness for the leader, ranging from highly favorable to highly unfavorable. In some respects, the ideas of task and relationship motivation resemble the basic concepts identified in the behavioral approaches. A major difference, however, is that Fiedler viewed task versus relationship motivation as being grounded in personality in a way that is basically constant for any given leader. The degree of task or relationship motivation in a given leader is measured by the least-preferred coworker (LPC) scale. The LPC instructions ask leaders to select their least-preferred coworker and describe this coworker by marking a series of sixteen scales anchored at each end by a positive or negative quality or attribute. Fiedler assumed that the descriptions in the LPC scale actually say more about the leader than about the least-preferred coworker. Fiedler contended that high-LPC leaders are basically more concerned with interpersonal relations whereas low-LPC leaders are more concerned with task-relevant problems. Not surprisingly, controversy has always surrounded the LPC scale. Researchers have offered several interpretations of the LPC score and the LPC measure and its interpretation have long been among the most debated aspects of this theory. B. Situational Favorableness Fiedler also identified three factors that determine the favorableness of the situation. In order of importance (from most to least important), these factors are leader-member relations, task structure, and leader position power. Leader-member relations refer to the personal relationship that exists between subordinates and their leader. Task structure is the second most important determinant of situational favorableness. A structured task is routine, simple, easily understood, and unambiguous. Finally, leader position power is the power inherent in the leader’s role itself. 1. Leader Motivation and Situational Favorableness Table 11.2 summarizes the results of Fiedler’s studies on relationships among leader motivation, situational favorableness, and group performance. To begin interpreting the results, let’s first examine the situational favorableness dimensions shown in the table. The various combinations of these three dimensions result in eight different situations, as arrayed across the first three lines of the table. These situations in turn define a continuum ranging from very favorable to very unfavorable situations from the leader’s perspective. Favorableness is noted in the fourth line of the table. The table also identifies the leadership approach that is supposed to achieve high group performance in each of the eight situations. These linkages are shown in the bottom line of the table. 2. Leader-Situation Match What happens if a person-oriented leader faces a very favorable or very unfavorable situation? Fiedler considers this leader-situation combination a “mismatch.” Fiedler contends that when a leader’s style and the situation do not match, the only available course of action is to change the situation through “job engineering.” Fiedler and his associates have also developed a widely used training program for supervisors on how to assess situational favorableness and to change the situation, if necessary, to achieve a better match. C. Evaluation and Implications The validity of Fiedler’s LPC theory has been heatedly debated because of the inconsistency of the research results. Apparent shortcomings of the theory are that the LPC measure lacks validity, the theory is not always supported by research, and Fiedler’s assumptions about the inflexibility of leader behavior are unrealistic. The theory itself, however, does represent an important contribution because it returned the field to a study of the situation and explicitly considered the organizational context and its role in effective leadership. V. THE PATH-GOAL THEORY OF LEADERSHIP Developed jointly by Martin Evans and Robert House, the path-goal theory focuses on the situation and leader behaviors rather than on fixed traits of the leader. In contrast to the LPC theory, the path-goal theory suggests that leaders can readily adapt to different situations. A. Basic Premises The path-goal theory has roots in the expectancy theory of motivation discussed in Chapter 5. The path-goal theory of leadership argues that subordinates are motivated by their leader to the extent that the behaviors of that leader influence their expectancies. Path-goal theory also suggests that a leader may behave in different ways in different situations. Global Issues: The Role of Leaders Across Cultures Summary: “It is important for a manager to have at hand precise answers to most of the questions that subordinates may raise about their work.” The percentage of workers from six different countries that strongly agreed with this statement are shown in a pie chart in the text. The percentages are: Japan with 78%, Italy at 66%, Germany at 46%, Great Britain at 27%, the U.S. at 18%, and Sweden at 10%. Clearly, leaders in Italy and Japan are expected to know all of the answers their subordinates may ask, while leaders in Sweden and the U.S. may more comfortably indicate that they don’t know the answer or that they need to check before answering. 1. Leader Behaviors As Figure 11.4 shows, path-goal theory identifies four kinds of leader behavior: directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented. Directive leaders let subordinates know what is expected of them, give specific task guidance, schedule work to be done, and maintain definitive standards of performance for subordinates. A leader exhibiting supportive leadership is friendly and shows concern for subordinates’ status, well-being, and needs. With participative leadership, the leader consults with subordinates about issues and takes their suggestions into account before making a decision. Finally, achievement-oriented leadership involves setting challenging goals, expecting subordinates to perform at their highest level, and showing strong confidence that subordinates will put forth effort and accomplish the goals. Path-goal theory assumes that leaders can change their behavior and exhibit any or all of these leadership styles. The theory also predicts that the appropriate combination of leadership styles depends on situational factors. 2. Situational Factors The path-goal theory proposes two types of situational factors that influence how leader behavior relates to subordinate satisfaction: the personal characteristics of the subordinates and the characteristics of the environment (see Figure 11.4). Two important personal characteristics of subordinates are locus of control and perceived ability. Research indicates that individuals who attribute outcomes to their own behavior may be more satisfied with a participative leader whereas individuals who attribute outcomes to external causes may respond more favorably to a directive leader. Perceived ability pertains to how people view their own ability with respect to the task. Employees who rate their own ability relatively highly are less likely to feel a need for directive leadership whereas those who perceive their own ability to be relatively low may prefer directive leadership. Important environmental characteristics are task structure, the formal authority system, and the primary work group. The extent to which leader behavior matches the people and environment in the situation is presumed to influence subordinates’ motivation to perform. B. Evaluation and Implications The intention of the path-goal theorists was to stimulate research on the theory’s major propositions, not to offer definitive answers. Further work actually has supported the theory’s major predictions, but it has not validated the entire model. VI. VROOM’S DECISION TREE APPROACH TO LEADERSHIP The third major contemporary approach to leadership is Vroom’s decision tree approach. Proposed by Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton, later revised and expanded by Vroom and Arthur Jago, and still later, Vroom developed yet another refinement of the original model. Like the path-goal theory, this approach attempts to prescribe a leadership style appropriate to a given situation. It also assumes that the same leader may display different leadership styles. But Vroom’s approach concerns itself with only a single aspect of leader behavior: subordinate participation in decision making. A. Basic Premises Vroom’s decision tree approach assumes that the degree to which subordinates should be encouraged to participate in decision making depends on the characteristics of the situation. In other words, no one decision-making process is best for all situations. After evaluating a variety of problem attributes the leader determines an appropriate decision style that specifies the amount of subordinate participation. Vroom’s current formulation suggests that managers should use one of two different decision trees. To do so, the manager first assesses whether the given factor is “high” or “low” for the decision that is to be made. This assessment guides the manager through the paths of the decision tree to a recommended course of action. One decision tree is to be used when the manager is primarily interested in making the fastest possible decision; the other is to be used when time is less critical and the manager wishes to help subordinates improve and develop their own decision-making skills. The two decision trees are shown in Figures 11.5 and 11.6. The various decision styles reflected at the ends of the tree branches represent different levels of subordinate participation that the manager should attempt to adopt in a given situation. The five styles are defined as follows: • Decide: The manager makes the decision alone and then announces or “sells” it to the group. • Delegate: The manager allows the group to define for itself the exact nature and parameters of the problem and then develop a solution. • Consult (Individually): The manager presents the program to group members individually, obtains their suggestions, and then makes the decision. • Consult (Group): The manager presents the problems to group members at a meeting, gets their suggestions, and then makes the decision. • Facilitate: The manager presents the problems to the group at a meeting, defines the problem and its boundaries, and then facilitates group member discussion as members make the decision. Vroom’s decision tree approach represents a very focused but quite complex perspective on leadership. To compensate for this difficulty, Vroom has developed elaborate expert system software to help managers assess a situation accurately and quickly and then make an appropriate decision regarding employee participation. B. Evaluation and Implications Because Vroom’s current approach is relatively new, it has not been fully scientifically tested. The original model and its subsequent refinement, however, attracted a great deal of attention and were generally supported by research. Summary and Applications Leadership is both a process and a property. Leadership and management are related but distinct phenomena. Early leadership research primarily attempted to identify important traits and behaviors of leaders. Newer situational theories of leadership attempt to identify appropriate leadership styles on the basis of the situation. Fiedler’s LPC theory states that leadership effectiveness depends on a match between the leader’s style (viewed as a trait of the leader) and the favorableness of the situation. The path-goal theory focuses on appropriate leader behavior for various situations. Vroom’s decision tree approach suggests appropriate decision-making styles based on situation characteristics. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. How would you define “leadership”? Compare and contrast your definition with the one given in this chapter. The text defines leadership as both a process and a property. A simple definition is that leadership is the process of getting others to behave in ways that enable the organization to achieve its goals. Students should be able to identify aspects of this definition with which they disagree (its assumptions, elements it includes or omits) and to propose a number of alternative definitions. Because there is no consensus regarding the meaning of leadership, various definitions probably are acceptable. 2. Cite examples of managers who are not leaders and of leaders who are not managers. What makes them one and not the other? Also, cite examples of both formal and informal leaders. As discussed in the textbook, management and leadership are not the same. Management relies on formal position power to influence people, whereas leadership stems from a social influence process. Hence, a manager who influences subordinate behaviors through threats or reprimands is not leading. A person who does not rely on position power to influence others, however, is leading. For example, Jesse Jackson influences others’ behaviors without using his formal authority; thus, he is a leader rather than a manager. (Note: It is easy to argue that management is the more encompassing concept and that leadership is just part of management if one defines management as the process of coordinating all available resources to accomplish a goal. That is, leadership would then fit as the process of influencing the human resource toward goal accomplishment. It is an interesting argument.) A formal leader is one appointed to head a group, such as a supervisor or an elected officer of a club. An informal leader emerges from the ranks of the group according to a consensus of the members. For example, one employee in a work group may be supported by the other employees and thus be an informal leader of the group. 3. What traits do you think characterize successful leaders? Do you think the trait approach has validity? Students likely will suggest a wide variety of traits, such as charisma, intelligence, self-confidence, task-relevant knowledge, and dominance. Successful leaders often exhibit several key traits, including: 1. Emotional Intelligence: The ability to understand and manage their own emotions, as well as empathize with others, is crucial for building strong relationships and fostering teamwork. 2. Decisiveness: Effective leaders are able to make informed decisions promptly, even in challenging situations, which instills confidence in their teams. 3. Vision: A clear vision for the future helps leaders inspire and motivate their teams, providing a sense of direction and purpose. 4. Integrity: Trustworthiness and ethical behavior are fundamental, as they build credibility and loyalty among team members. 5. Adaptability: Successful leaders can adjust their strategies and approaches in response to changing circumstances, demonstrating resilience and flexibility. Regarding the validity of the trait approach, it has merit as it identifies specific qualities that can contribute to effective leadership. However, it should not be viewed in isolation. Leadership effectiveness also depends on situational factors, context, and the dynamics of the team. Therefore, while the trait approach provides valuable insights, it should be integrated with other leadership theories to offer a more comprehensive understanding of what makes a leader successful. 4. Recent evidence suggests that successful managers (defined by organizational rank and salary) may indeed have some of the same traits originally ascribed to effective leaders (such as an attractive appearance and relative height). How might this finding be explained? Simple. Such individuals are hired and promoted partly on the basis of their positive appearance and turn up in leadership positions because they were the material that was there to work with. The halo effect is alive and well! 5. What other forms of leader behavior besides those cited in the chapter can you identify? The two basic forms of leader behavior identified in the chapter are consideration, or employee-centered, and initiating-structure, or job-centered, leader behaviors. Another variable of leader behavior is the extent to which the leader allows subordinate participation in decision making. 6. Critique Fiedler’s LPC theory. Are other elements of the situation important? Do you think Fiedler’s assertion about the inflexibility of leader behavior makes sense? Why or why not? Fiedler identifies three important elements of the situation: leader-member relations, task structure, and leader position power. Other elements that may be important include subordinates’ skills and abilities, subordinates’ personalities, and the effectiveness of the work group. Failure to consider these situational factors could weaken the theory. Fiedler viewed task versus relationship motivation as a trait that is constant for any given person. This inflexibility appears unrealistic, because research indicates that a leader may act differently toward different subordinates. 7. Do you agree or disagree with Fiedler’s assertion that leadership motivation is basically a personality trait? Why? Whether task or relationship motivation is a personality trait is a highly controversial question. Task or relationship motivation is assessed by the LPC score, which researchers argue may be an index of behavior, personality, or some other unknown factor. Leadership motivation may be a personality trait that manifests itself only at certain times. When things are going well, a manager may use his or her own style or leadership motivation type. At other times, however, the situation may influence the manager’s leadership style. 8. Compare and contrast the LPC and path-goal theories of leadership. What are the strengths and weaknesses of each? The LPC and path-goal theories are similar in that both maintain a contingency approach to the study of leadership. Both emphasize matching the leadership style (in terms of either traits or behaviors) to the situation. Further, both theories identify important situational characteristics. But the theories differ sharply on a number of dimensions. First, the contingency theory emphasizes the importance of inflexible leader traits, whereas the path-goal theory stresses the importance of flexible leader behaviors. Second, the path-goal theory considers subordinates’ personal characteristics important factors in the situation; the contingency theory does not. Third, the contingency theory suggests changing the situation to achieve a match between the situation and the leader, whereas the path-goal theory suggests that a leader may change his or her behavior to fit the situation. 9. Of the three major leadership theories – the LPC theory, the path-goal theory, and Vroom’s decision tree approach – which is the most comprehensive? Which is the narrowest? Which has the most practical value? The most comprehensive leadership theory probably is the path-goal theory. It is a general framework for understanding how leader behavior and situational factors influence subordinates’ attitudes and behaviors. The narrowest theory probably is the Vroom-Yetton-Jago model, because it focuses on only one dimension of leadership: the degree of subordinate participation in decision making. The Vroom approach may have the most practical value, although it is rather complex for managers to use. 10. How realistic do you think it is for managers to attempt to use Vroom’s decision tree approach as prescribed? Explain. It is realistic for managers to use Vroom’s decision tree approach as prescribed as long as they use it as a guideline when deciding on the degree of subordinate participation. Other factors, such as the culture of the organization, may not be included in the model, and such omissions could restrict managers’ ability to use the model as prescribed. GROUP EXERCISE – Managers and Leaders Learning Objective: This exercise offers students an opportunity to compare their assumptions and perspectives on managers and leaders with the assumptions and perspectives of others in their class. Summary: Students will identify contemporary examples of successful and unsuccessful leaders and then describe how these leaders differ. Task: 1. Working alone, each student should list ten characteristics of successful managers and a list of ten different characteristics of successful leaders. 2. Next, students should share their lists in small groups and discuss the following: a. Which manager characteristics, if any, appear on different students’ lists? b. Which leaders characteristics, if any, appear on different students’ lists? c. Which characteristics, if any, do students put on both their manager list and their leader list? 3. Have each group compile one list of ten characteristics of managers and one list of ten characteristics of leaders. 4. Share all group lists with the entire class, and see if the class can agree on a final list for managers and a final list for leaders. What, if anything, do the final two lists have in common? Do any characteristics appear on both the manager list and the leader list? VIDEO EXERCISE City of Greensburg, Kansas: Leadership Summary: The morning after the powerful EF-5 tornado whipped through the area, everyone knew Greensburg was gone—perhaps forever. But in a subsequent press conference, Mayor Lonnie McCollum announced that the town would rebuild as a model green community, and named Steve Hewitt as a full-time administrator to make the changes. While Mayor McCollum offered a vision for rebuilding Greensburg, it is Hewitt who stepped up to ensure that the vision became a reality. Hewitt quickly went to work on a plan for rebuilding. City workers give Hewitt high marks for his handling of the crisis. Like most good leaders, Hewitt hasn’t been afraid to ruffle feathers as needed. 1. Where does Hewitt’s leadership fall on the Managerial Grid discussed in the chapter? Explain. City Administrator Steve Hewitt has high concern for production (results) but is also willing to delegate authority and moral support to subordinates. As a result, many students will put his leadership into the 9,9 “Sound” category of the Management Grid. However, some students may feel that Hewitt is overly self-confident or dismissive of others, such as when he comments that he's "dumb enough not to care what people say." Such remarks may cause some students to put Hewitt in the 9,1 “Controlling” category. While Hewitt has self-confidence, he clearly understands the importance of results and concern for people: “You gotta not just be that team leader, you gotta be that counselor, that friend, and you also gotta be the boss.” His leadership style has earned loyal support. Co-worker Kim Alderfer attests that Hewitt doesn’t micromanage her and gives her the authority she needs to do her job. 2. What deficiencies or shortcomings would you identify in Hewitt’s leadership? Hewitt seems to be doing everything right. He is delegating authority, working with others to achieve goals, clearly stating those goals, and providing open and honest communication with co-workers and city residents. He is a strong individual with a vision plus the temperament to work well with others. 3. Is Hewitt’s leadership style appropriate for Greensburg’s situation? Explain your answer using insights drawn from Fiedler’s LPC theory. According to Fiedler's leader match contingency theory, leadership effectiveness requires a fit between the leader's style and the favorableness of the situation. Assuming that Hewitt leans towards a task orientation (low LPC), Fiedler's theory says that he will have the best outcome in situations that are either very favorable or very unfavorable—that is, where leader-member relations, task structure, and leader position power are all very high or very low. Hewitt's situation was mostly favorable (strong legitimate power, good leader-member relations, but somewhat unstructured task structure), and so Fiedler's contingency theory sees a good leader-situation fit and predicts effective group performance. Anecdotes from the video support this view. Daniel Wallach, executive director of Greensburg GreenTown, believes Hewitt's task orientation is a perfect fit for the crisis situation facing the townspeople. Wallach describes Hewitt as “the kind of guy you want taking the last shot in a basketball game" and notes that Hewitt's incredible endurance is well-suited to the role of getting the community back on its feet. Now What? Imagine receiving a performance review from your boss about your leadership capabilities that is less favorable than you expected. What do you say or do? Go to this chapter’s “Now What?” video, watch the challenge video, and choose a response. Be sure to also view the outcomes of the two responses you didn’t choose. OB Concepts Applied: career management; openness to feedback; developmental openness Discussion Questions 1. Is Alex an effective manager? Is he an effective leader? Justify your answers for each question. According to Kotter’s Distinctions Between Management and Leadership (Table 11.1), Alex had exhibited more effective management skills rather than effective leadership skills. If Alex chooses the third option as his reaction to his performance appraisal, he will show more leadership skills than if he chooses either of the other two options. Alex scored well on ethics, financial performance and employee turnover, all resulting from his management skills. Alex’s low scores in maintaining company culture and leadership appraisals show he could improve his leadership skills. After attending workshops and working with a mentor, Alex is transforming to an effective leader. 2. Does Amy demonstrate effective leadership in the challenge video? In what way is she an effective or ineffective leader? Amy shows her leadership skills through her careful distribution of the appraisal results. She first lists the positives before bringing up the lower scores for maintaining company culture and leadership. Amy is directly communicating the direction she believes Alex should take while providing time for Alex to contribute. When Alex reacts with defiance in the first scenario, Amy stands her ground and does not sway from the point of the appraisal analysis. When Alex shows interest in bettering his skills, Amy is quick to make recommendations that helped her when she started. She is freely offering advice and helping Alex improve. 3. In addition to the solution you think is best, what would you do as either Amy or Alex to demonstrate more effective leadership when handling this situation? Option three is obviously the best solution. Both Amy and Alex are showing signs of leadership in this scenario. The follow-up review in one year shows that Alex correctly received the information and worked at improving his performance. Chapter Twelve – Contemporary Views of Leadership in Organizations Chapter Overview The three major situational theories of leadership discussed in Chapter 11 altered everyone’s thinking about leadership. No longer did people feel compelled to search for the one best way to lead. Nor did they continue to seek universal leadership prescriptions or relationships. Instead, both researchers and practicing managers turned their attention to a variety of new approaches to leadership. These new approaches, as well as other current emerging leadership issues, are the subject of this chapter. We first describe two relatively new situational theories, as well as recent refinements to the earlier theories. We then examine leadership through the eyes of followers. Recent thinking regarding potential alternatives to traditional leadership are then explored. Next we describe the changing nature of leadership. We conclude this chapter with a discussion of several emerging issues in leadership. Learning Outcomes After studying this chapter, students should be able to: 1. Identify and describe contemporary situational theories of leadership. 2. Discuss leadership through the eyes of followers. 3. Identify and describe alternatives to leadership. 4. Describe the changing nature of leadership and emerging leadership issues. Real World Challenge: Ethical Leadership at Costco Summary: Warehouse retailer Costco has more than $50 billion in sales and more than 120,000 workers. Costco competes by giving customers the best value at the best price. At the core of Sinegal’s leadership philosophy is the idea that great businesses can be sustained with core values. Real World Challenge: How can Costco continue to maintain the company’s code of ethics in a business environment that promotes paying lower wages and increased turnover? Real World Response: Keeping good employees is strategic for Costco’s long-term success, so the CEO of Costco does not distance himself from employees. The culture of the company flows downward from the CEO. He believes the leaders should model what is expected from employees. The CEO gets a compensation package far below most CEOs, and as Costco grows internationally, he intends to continue following his code of ethics. Chapter Outline I. CONTEMPORARY SITUATIONAL THEORIES The LPC theory, the path-goal theory, and Vroom’s decision tree approach together redirected the study of leadership. Not surprisingly, then, other situational theories have also been developed. Moreover, there continue to be changes and refinements to the original situational models. A. The Leader-Member Exchange Model The leader-member exchange model (LMX) of leadership, conceived by George Graen and Fred Dansereau, stresses the importance of variable relationships between supervisors and each of their subordinates. Each superior-subordinate pair is referred to as a “vertical dyad.” Figure 12.1 shows the basic concepts of the leader-member exchange theory. The model suggests that supervisors establish a special relationship with a small number of trusted subordinates referred to as the “in-group.” The in-group often receives special duties requiring more responsibility and autonomy; they may also receive special privileges, such as more discretion about work schedules. Subordinates who are not a part of this group are called the out-group, and they receive less of the supervisor’s time and attention. Note in the figure that the leader has a dyadic, or one-to-one, relationship with each of the five subordinates. Research has confirmed the existence of in-groups and out-groups. In addition, studies generally have found that in-group members tend to have a higher level of performance and satisfaction than out-group members. B. The Hersey and Blanchard Model Another recent situational perspective is the Hersey and Blanchard model, developed as a consulting tool. The Hersey and Blanchard model is based on the notion that appropriate leader behavior depends on the “readiness” of the leader’s followers. In this instance, readiness refers to the subordinate’s degree of motivation, competence, experience, and interest in accepting responsibility. Figure 12.2 shows the basic model. The figure suggests that as the readiness of followers improves, the leader’s basic style should also change. C. Refinements and Revisions of Other Theories While the version of the LPC theory presented in Chapter 11 is still the dominant model, researchers have made several attempts to improve its validity. Fiedler added the concept of stress as a major element of situational favorableness. He also argued that the leader’s intelligence and experience play a major role in enabling her or him to cope with various levels of stress that characterize any particular situation. The path-goal theory evolved to include the four forms of leader behavior discussed in Chapter 11. Finally, Vroom’s decision tree approach also continues to evolve. II. LEADERSHIP THROUGH THE EYES OF FOLLOWERS The three primary approaches to leadership through the eyes of followers are transformational leadership, charismatic leadership, and attributions of leadership. A. Transformational Leadership Transformational leadership focuses on the basic distinction between leading for change and leading for stability. Recall from Chapter 11 the distinction between management and leadership. Transactional leadership is essentially the same as management in that it involves routine, regimented activities. Closer to the general notion of leadership, however, is transformational leadership, the set of abilities that allows the leader to recognize the need for change, to create a vision to guide that change, and to execute the change effectively. Another hallmark of effective leadership is the ability to see which approach is needed. Leaders may also find it necessary to transition from either transformational or transactional leadership to the other. B. Charismatic Leadership Charisma is a form of interpersonal attraction that inspires support and acceptance. Charismatic leadership is accordingly a type of influence based on the leader’s personal charisma. Robert House first proposed a theory of charismatic leadership based on research findings from a variety of social science disciplines. His theory suggests that charismatic leaders are likely to have a lot of self-confidence, firm confidence in their beliefs and ideals, and a strong need to influence people. They also tend to communicate high expectations about follower performance and to express confidence in their followers. Figure 12.3 portrays the three elements of charismatic leadership in organizations that most experts acknowledge today. First, charismatic leaders are able to envision likely future trends and patterns, to set high expectations for themselves and for others, and to model behaviors consistent with meeting those expectations. Next, charismatic leaders are able to energize others by demonstrating personal excitement, personal confidence, and consistent patterns of success. Finally, charismatic leaders enable others by supporting them, empathizing with them, and expressing confidence in them. Charismatic leadership ideas are quite popular but unfortunately, few studies have specifically attempted to test the meaning and impact of charismatic leadership. Lingering ethical concerns about charismatic leadership also trouble some people. CASE STUDY: Leading a Police Force Transformation Summary: When Melvin Wearing obtained the Chief of Police position, morale was terrible, and communication between the chief’s office and the officers was often through union grievances. Wearing wanted to show his pride in police work. He upgraded the department’s technology, raised standards in the training academy, and increased the department’s diversity. The department has earned four national and international awards for community policing. 1. Explain how Chief Wearing can exhibit a transformational leadership style in his role as police chief. As a transformational leader, Wearing is inspirational (he raised standards in the training academy); considerate (he installed air conditioning and laptops in cruisers to improve the work environment); and intellectually stimulating (he restored the force’s credibility, winning awards for community policing). 2. Describe the environment facing Chief Wearing in terms of leader-member relations, task structure, and position power. Using Fiedler’s model, what leadership style do you think is most appropriate given the situation you just described? Does this style match Chief Wearing’s? Leader-follower relations: Wearing was not accepted or trusted by police force members because he was the first black chief of police and faced scrutiny. Communication was poor. Task structure: Wearing faced a highly unfavorable situation (morale was low). Position power: The police department conferred power on Wearing to get the job done and reduce crime. This increased Wearing’s influence. According to Fiedler, the situation at the police department requires a task-oriented leader because task-oriented leaders do well when the situation is extremely unfavorable (where leader-member relations, task structure, and leader position power are all very low). This style does not match Wearing’s relationship-oriented style. Wearing had been an assistant chief, and officers called him “compassionate” and “humanistic.” He upgraded both the work environment and the training. However, Wearing also moved to a more task-oriented style. “He communicated to his officers that he did not want them to even think about messing around.” 3. If you were Chief Wearing, how might you use the information you learned in this chapter to enhance the diversity of the police force? You could institute cultural sensitivity training and avoid institutional biases, or pattern of preferences inherent in organizations that create barriers toward women in leadership positions. C. Attribution and Leadership The attribution perspective holds that when behaviors are observed in a context associated with leadership, different people may attribute varying levels of leadership ability or power to the person displaying those behaviors. The attributions we make subsequently affect both our own behavior and the actual capacity of an individual to behave like a leader. The attribution perspective on leadership is especially clear during presidential campaigns. Candidates and their handlers strive to make sure that they are always shown in the best possible light. Global Issues: Effect of Culture on Perceptions of Leaders’ Attributes Some examples of universal Some examples of universal Some examples of culturally positive leader attributes: negative leader attributes: contingent leader attributes: Trustworthy Irritable Cunning Dependable Dictatorial Sensitive Excellence oriented Uncooperative Evasive Honest Ruthless Risk taker Motivating Egocentric Ruler III. ALTERNATIVES TO LEADERSHIP In some cases, circumstances may exist that render leadership unnecessary or irrelevant. The factors that contribute to these circumstances are called leadership substitutes. In other cases, factors may exist that neutralize or negate the influence of a leader even when that individual is attempting to exercise leadership. A. Leadership Substitutes Leadership substitutes are individual, task, and organizational characteristics that tend to outweigh the leader’s ability to affect subordinates’ satisfaction and performance. In other words, if certain factors are present, the employee will perform his or her job capably without the direction of a leader. Several basic leadership substitutes are identified in Table 12.1. Individual ability, experience, training, knowledge, motivation, and professional orientation are among the characteristics that may substitute for leadership. Similarly, a task characterized by routine, a high degree of structure, frequent feedback, and intrinsic satisfaction may also render leader behavior unnecessary. Explicit plans and goals, rules and procedures, cohesive work groups, a rigid reward structure, and physical distance between supervisor and subordinate are organizational characteristics that may substitute for leadership. Research has provided support for the concept of leadership substitutes, but additional research is needed to identify other potential substitutes and their impact on leadership effectiveness. B. Leadership Neutralizers In other situations, even if a leader is present and attempts to engage in various leadership behaviors, those behaviors may be rendered ineffective—neutralized—by various factors. These factors are referred to as leadership neutralizers. In addition to group factors, elements of the job itself may also limit a leader’s ability to “make a difference.” Finally, organizational factors can also neutralize at least some forms of leader behavior. IV. THE CHANGING NATURE OF LEADERSHIP Among the recent changes in leadership that managers should recognize are the increasing role of leaders as coaches and gender and cross-cultural patterns of leader behavior. A. Leaders as Coaches Whereas leaders were once expected to control situations, direct work, supervise people, closely monitor performance, make decisions, and structure activities, many leaders today are being asked to change how they manage people. Perhaps the best description of this new role is that the leader is becoming a coach instead of an overseer or supervisor. A coaching perspective would call for the leader to help select team members and other new employees, to provide some general direction, to help train and develop the team and the skills of its members, and to help the team get the information and other resources it needs. The leader may also have to help resolve conflict among team members and mediate other disputes that arise. Coaches from different teams may need to play important roles in linking the activities and functions of their respective teams. But beyond these activities, the leader keeps a low profile and lets the group get its work done with little or no direct oversight from the leader. Within the coaching role, some leaders have also excelled at taking on more responsibilities as a mentor—the role of helping a less experienced person learn the ropes to better prepare himself or herself to advance within the organization. B. Gender and Leadership Given that most leadership theories and research studies have focused on male leaders, developing a better understanding of how females lead is clearly an important next step. The one difference that does seem to arise in some cases is that women have a tendency to be slightly more democratic in making decisions, whereas men have a similar tendency to be somewhat more autocratic. There are two possible explanations for this pattern. One possibility is that women may tend to have stronger interpersonal skills than men and are hence better able to effectively involve others in making decisions. The other possible explanation is that women may encounter more stereotypic resistance to their occupying senior roles. If this is the case, they may actively work to involve others in making decisions so as to help minimize any hostility or conflict. C. Cross-Cultural Leadership In this context, culture is used as a broad concept to encompass both international differences and diversity-based differences within a single culture. We focus first on intra-country cultural issues. Cross-cultural factors clearly play a growing role in organizations as their workforces become more and more diverse. Religion is also a potential issue in leadership. There are cross-cultural issues even when leaders and followers have less visible indicators of diversity. D. International Leadership and Project GLOBE Cross-cultural issues are also obvious in international contexts. Japan is generally characterized by collectivism, while the United States is based more on individualism. The Japanese executive, then, will find it necessary to recognize the importance of individual contributions and rewards and the differences in individual and group roles that exist in Japanese and U.S. businesses. And, obviously, similar issues will result if an American leader is posted to Asia. Project GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Research Project) was initiated by Robert House to learn more about international leadership. GLOBE identified six leader behaviors that can be observed and assessed across a variety of cultures. These behaviors are: • Charismatic / value-based leadership: the ability to inspire, to motivate, and to promote high performance; includes being visionary, self-sacrificing, trustworthy, decisive, and performance oriented • Team-oriented leadership: emphasizes team building and creating a sense of common purpose; including being collaborative, diplomatic, and administratively competent • Participative leadership: the extent to which leaders involve others in making decisions; being participative and nonautocratic • Humane-oriented leadership: being supportive, considerate, compassionate, and generous; displaying modesty and sensitivity • Autonomous leadership: refers to being independent and individualist; being autonomous and unique • Self-protective leadership: includes behaviors intending to ensure the safety and security of the leader and the group; includes being self-centered, status conscious, conflict inducing, and face saving. These behaviors have been—and are being—studied in 62 global societies. Based on the preliminary results, the original 62 societies were condensed into 10 cultural clusters—societies that yielded highly similar results to one another. In general, the findings of GLOBE suggest that within any cultural cluster, followers react in similar ways to various leader behaviors. Of course, as noted earlier, this research is still ongoing, and it would be premature to draw overly strong generalizations at this point. V. EMERGING ISSUES IN LEADERSHIP Finally, there are also three emerging issues in leadership that warrant discussion. These issues are strategic leadership, ethical leadership, and virtual leadership. A. Strategic Leadership We will define strategic leadership as the capability to understand the complexities of both the organization and its environment and to lead change in the organization so as to achieve and maintain a superior alignment between the organization and its environment. Strategic leadership puts greater weight on the leader’s ability to think and function strategically. To be effective in this role, a manager needs to have a thorough and complete understanding of the organization—its history, its culture, its strengths, and its weaknesses. In addition, the leader needs a firm grasp of the organization’s environment. Finally, looking at environmental trends and issues, the strategic leader works to improve not only the current alignment but also the future alignment. B. Ethical Leadership Ethical leadership is the process of leading based on consistent principles of ethical conduct. The behaviors of top leaders are being scrutinized more than ever, and those responsible for hiring new leaders for a business are looking more and more closely at the backgrounds of those being considered. C. Virtual Leadership Finally, virtual leadership is also emerging as an important issue for organizations. Virtual leadership, therefore, is leadership via various forms of distance technologies. How do managers carry out leadership when they do not have regular personal contact with their followers? Communication between leaders and their subordinates will still occur, of course, but it may be largely by telephone, texting, and email. Building on this, managers should then also take advantage of every single opportunity whenever they are in face-to-face situations to go further than they might have done under different circumstances to develop a strong relationship. Beyond these simple prescriptions, there is no theory or research to guide managers functioning in a virtual world. Summary and Applications The leader-member exchange model (LMX) of leadership stresses the importance of variable relationships between supervisors and each of their subordinates. There are three primary approaches to leadership through the eyes of followers. Transformational leadership focuses on the basic distinction between leading for change and leading for stability. Perspectives based on charismatic leadership assume that charisma is an individual characteristic of the leader. The attribution perspective holds that when behaviors are observed in a context associated with leadership, others may attribute varying levels of leadership ability or power to the person displaying those behaviors. In some cases, circumstances may exist that render leadership unnecessary or irrelevant. The factors that contribute to these circumstances are called leadership substitutes. In other cases, factors may exist that neutralize or negate the influence of a leader even when that individual is attempting to exercise leadership. The nature of leadership continues to evolve. Among recent changes in leadership that managers should recognize is the increasing role of leaders as coaches. Finally, there are three emerging issues in leadership. Strategic leadership is a new concept that explicitly relates leadership to the role of top management. In addition, leaders in all organizations are being called upon to maintain high ethical standards for their own conduct, to unfailingly exhibit ethical behavior, and to hold others in their organizations to the same standards. The growing importance of virtual leadership needs to be further studied. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Compare and contrast the leader-member exchange and the Hersey and Blanchard models of leadership. Leader-Member Exchange theory suggests that leaders form unique independent relationships with each of their subordinates. A key factor is whether the individual subordinate is in the leader’s out-group or in-group. The Hersey and Blanchard theory suggests that leader behaviors should vary in response to the level of readiness of the followers. 2. Are you now or have you ever been a member of an in-group? An out-group? Is so, in what ways did your experience differ? Answers will vary. Being a member of an in-group may confer status, prestige, power, tangible and intangible rewards, and greater opportunities for desirable job assignments and advancement. The out-group members often experience just the opposite on all counts. Students may recall with resentment and frustration, if not outright anger, their out-group experiences. Victims of prejudice often have bitter out-group experiences. 3. Which of the three traditional situational theories discussed in Chapter 12 is most similar to the leader-member exchange model? To the Hersey and Blanchard model? The LPC model, focusing on several aspects of the relationships between leader and followers, would seem closest to the Leader-Member Exchange model, while Path-Goal theory may be closest to Hersey and Blanchard, with the latter’s emphasis on the readiness of the subordinates. 4. Identify an individual who could serve as an example of a transformational leader. How successful or unsuccessful has this person been? Answers will vary. Only a person with considerable influence over others could be a successful transformational leader. The changes brought about and carried through under such a leader could easily intimidate a less self-confident individual. The now deceased Steve Jobs of Apple Computer and Pixar seemed to be an example of a highly successful transformational leader. 5. Name the three people today whom you consider to be the most charismatic. How well do they or might they function as leaders? Answers will vary. It will be interesting to hear what qualities the students’ suggested individuals possess that makes them so charismatic. Whoever is currently president of the United States is often said to be charismatic, at least before the media erodes that impression. Charismatic business leaders of the recent past have included Jack Welch of GE, Lee Iaccoca of Chrysler, H. Ross Perot, Herb Kelleher of Southwest Airlines, Donald Trump, and H. Wayne Huizenga of Blockbuster. Outside the business world charismatic leaders have included Jesse Jackson, Lou Holtz (former head football coach at Notre Dame University), David Letterman, and Bill Cosby. Though of course, the last example has changed recently. 6. In your opinion, is it possible for someone with little or no charisma to become charismatic? If so, how? If not, why? Opinions will vary. The elements that seem to comprise charisma, such as self-confidence, enthusiasm, communication skills, honesty, playfulness, etc., could be learned or cultivated to some degree if the person were strongly motivated. Whether or not someone could become charismatic enough to win followers might be debatable, however. Yes, I believe it is possible for someone with little or no charisma to develop charismatic qualities. Charisma is not solely an innate trait; it can be cultivated through practice and self-awareness. Here are a few ways to enhance charisma: 1. Improving Communication Skills: Learning to speak clearly, confidently, and engagingly can draw others in and make interactions more impactful. 2. Active Listening: Showing genuine interest in others by listening attentively fosters connection and makes people feel valued, which can enhance one’s charismatic presence. 3. Building Emotional Intelligence: Understanding and managing one’s emotions, as well as empathizing with others, can improve relational dynamics and increase likability. 4. Body Language: Adopting open and expressive body language, such as maintaining eye contact and using gestures, can make one appear more approachable and engaging. 5. Practicing Authenticity: Being true to oneself and expressing genuine feelings can help create a sense of trust and rapport, which are key elements of charisma. Through these strategies, individuals can develop their charismatic qualities over time, making it possible for those who initially lack charisma to become more engaging and influential in their interactions. 7. Have you ever made direct leadership attributions about someone based on the context in which you observed them? Responses will vary. As young people, observers often admire someone in various contexts- a teacher, counselor, neighbor, even a parent—about whom it is easy to make leadership attributions. If the person later demonstrates a lack of leadership ability (feet of clay) the observer may suffer a strong sense of disillusionment and letdown. Yes, I have made direct leadership attributions based on the context in which I observed someone. For example, during a group project, I noticed one team member consistently taking charge and organizing tasks effectively. Given the high-pressure environment and tight deadlines, I attributed their leadership qualities to their ability to remain calm and decisive under stress. This observation led me to view them as a natural leader, capable of guiding the team and making critical decisions. However, I also recognized that their leadership style might differ in a more relaxed context, highlighting the importance of situational factors in assessing leadership behavior. 8. What are some of the substitutes and neutralizers to leadership that might exist in your classroom? Expertise and experience based on talent or competence as a learner might be examples in a classroom setting. After all, your students may have had many years of experience being students, and thus have developed competence in that role. Such competence could serve as at least a partial substitute for leadership in the classroom. A neutralizer could take the form of an indifferent or even hostile student who challenges everything that is said by the instructor and everyone else, creating a difficult—albeit interesting—classroom situation. 9. Do you believe that men and women differ in how they lead? Is so, what are some of the factors that might account for the differences? This may be a touchy subject. Responses will vary based on biases and experiences or a mixture of both. To the extent that men and women are socialized differently they may lead differently as well. Different expectations on the part of followers may also influence behavior exhibited by leaders of different genders. Yes, I believe that men and women can differ in their leadership styles, often shaped by socialization, cultural expectations, and individual experiences. Some factors that might account for these differences include: 1. Communication Styles: Women are often found to adopt more collaborative and inclusive communication approaches, while men may be more direct and assertive. This can influence how they engage with team members and make decisions. 2. Empathy and Emotional Intelligence: Research suggests that women may exhibit higher levels of empathy and emotional intelligence, leading to a leadership style that focuses on building relationships and understanding team dynamics. 3. Risk-Taking Behavior: Men may be more inclined to take risks in decision-making, which can impact their leadership approach. Women might prioritize careful analysis and consensus-building before taking action. 4. Social Expectations: Societal norms and expectations around gender can shape leadership behavior. Women often face pressure to demonstrate competence while also balancing warmth and approachability, which can influence their leadership style. 5. Work-Life Balance Perspectives: Women may place a greater emphasis on work-life balance due to societal expectations regarding caregiving roles, which can impact their leadership priorities and strategies. While these differences can exist, it's essential to recognize that leadership styles are not solely determined by gender; individual personality, experiences, and situational context also play significant roles. 10. In what ways does strategic leadership differ from “non-strategic” leadership? Strategic leadership focuses on managing change in an organization and thinking and functioning strategically. The strategic leader must know the organization and its history thoroughly and the environment in which it operates. Understanding the interface between the organization and its environment and how to improve the interaction between them is vital. Strategic leadership is broader than “non-strategic” and more future-oriented. 11. Some people have held that highly successful managers and leaders all face situations in which they cannot be entirely truthful and still succeed. For instance, a politician who personally believes that a tax increase is inevitable may feel that to fully disclose this belief will result in a significant loss of votes. Do you agree or disagree with the idea that sometimes people cannot be entirely truthful and still succeed? How many votes will our hypothetical politician lose when his/her constituents find out he/she is a liar and cannot be trusted? In the long run, honesty is always the best policy. If a person cannot succeed in a given position without lying, it’s time to find another position. What price is a person’s integrity? Should you auction it off to the highest bidder? However, the advice given by a member of the U.S. diplomatic corps to an audience of young, aspiring diplomats upon his retirement is worth pondering: “Always tell the truth. Never tell the whole truth. And never pass up a chance to go to the bathroom.” GROUP EXERCISE – Who Are the Leaders? Learning Objective: This exercise offers you an opportunity to compare your concepts with those of others in your class about who leaders are. Task: 1. Make a list of ten very effective leaders – individuals whom most everyone would recognize as leaders. 2. In small groups share and discuss your lists. a. Were the same leaders on more than one student’s list? b. What, if anything, do these individuals have in common – education, industry, type of jobs held, family history, etc.? 3. Have each group agree on a list of ten leaders and share those group lists with the entire class. What, if anything do the leaders on the various group lists have in common? If any leader appears to be radically different from the others, discuss what sets that person apart from other leaders and yet makes them one of the best-known leaders. Try repeating the exercise with the possibilities narrowed: e.g., females, Native Americans, minorities, managers/executives, politicians, religious leaders, international, or from a particular industry. What additional information do you learn from this? VIDEO EXERCISE Numi Organic Tea: Danielle Oviedo Summary: When Danielle Oviedo showed up for her first day as the manager of the Distribution Center at Numi Organic Tea in Oakland, California, her new direct reports were not happy about the change. They loved Oviedo’s predecessor, who was more like a friend than a boss to them. Danielle was hired because of her effectiveness and success as a manager in previous positions. She also had experience leading much big teams in similar departments. Prior to Danielle’s arrival, lead times for Numi’s customer orders were not competitive. Upon her arrival at Numi, Danielle identified the problem: employees were performing tasks in isolation with little attention to anything else. To solve the issue, Danielle trained the Distribution Center employees in every critical task and process, explaining how all the pieces fit together. Importantly, Danielle helped her team understand their jobs on a conceptual level so they could see how their work linked directly to Numi’s larger goals. Unlike old-school managers who hide in their offices and manage employees from afar, Danielle is out on the floor working with teammates, ensuring they understand the process, and being supportive. 1. How would you describe Danielle Oviedo’s approach to leadership? In this instance, Danielle was a transformational leader. When Danielle started her position, she analyzed how employees currently performed their tasks. Everyone was working on their own tasks and there was no sense of urgency and no teamwork. Danielle instilled that everyone must work together and they will succeed, or fail, as a team. Her success at turning around quick delivery times and motivating her employees to meet those delivery times may have saved Numi Tea from a certain demise. 2. What would you predict about Danielle’s future success as a leader? Why? Danielle should be a successful manager in the future. Her ability to listen to her employees and her open communication abilities will prove an asset in future managing jobs. Danielle provides constructive feedback by letting employees know why she would be unable to use a suggestion. This attention to detail will build trust with her employees and instill the motivation to help Danielle perform her job. 3. In what ways, if any, does Danielle function as a coach? Danielle acts as a coach by linking all the activities of shipping into one large team effort. She has direct contact with each person, building a relationship and trust. When the employees trust the leadership they are motivated to do their best. Now What? Imagine that your boss is delegating parts of a project to you and to another team member. Because the other team member has a longer work history with the boss and is highly trusted, you are assigned the unchallenging portions of the project. What do you say or do? How can you improve your relationship with your boss to get more challenging assignments and eventually earn a promotion? Go to this chapter’s “Now What?” video, watch the challenge video, and choose a response. Be sure to also view the outcomes of the two responses you didn’t choose. OB Concepts Applied: leader-member exchange; in-group; empowerment; initiating structure; consideration; leadership styles Discussion Questions 1. In terms of LMX, what type of relationship is exhibited in the challenge video? Amy uses a directive leadership style, letting subordinates know what she expects of them, giving specific guidance as to what to do and how to do it, and scheduling the work to be done. As a directive leader, Amy organizes and schedules the project, “Bill, why don’t you take a pass at the first two sections. I’ll take on the next two. Alex, if you could try to find a presentation template, that would be great.” 2. In the challenge video, according to the Hersey Blanchard model, how does Amy perceive Alex? Amy appears to perceive Alex at low readiness as she is using the “telling” style of assigning tasks. She even tells Alex how many copies of the report she needs. In the final scenario, when Alex asks how he can be assigned more challenging tasks, her perception may change to the participating style by asking Alex to accompany her on a product demonstration. 3. Which other aspects of leadership discussed in this chapter are illustrated in these videos? Explain your answer. Amy shows a bit of charisma by asking Alex to accompany her on a product demonstration run. The attribution perspective holds that when Alex asked for more challenging tasks, Amy responded by including him in some activities. She perceived that Alex was ready. Amy does not appear to lead any differently than a man would in the same situation. 4. If this were you, what would you do to improve your relationship with your boss to get assignments that are more challenging and eventually earn a promotion? I would be an effective follower because effective followers are important to effective leadership. Because leaders depend on their followers for good information, one of the most important follower characteristics is a willingness to tell the truth. By being accountable and loyal, I would be more trusted and valuable to my boss. Then I believe I would move from the out-group to the in-group. The in-group members get challenging assignments which lead to promotions. Solution Manual for Organizational Behavior: Managing People and Organizations Ricky W. Griffin, Jean M. Phillips, Stanley M. Gully 9781305501393, 9780357042502
Download
Close
Close
