Module 1

Syllabus- Leadership -Definition of Leadership, Leader vs. Manager, Trait

Approach to Leadership, Behavioural / style Approach to Leadership,
Situational Approaches to Leadership, Emerging Leadership Approaches -
Charismatic, Transformational, Servant, Team, Psychodynamic and Emergent.

Definition of Leader:
 First, a leader is one who lead
 Second, the definition implies that the leader is in front, determining the
direction and setting the pace for others to follow.
 The third implication is that a leader need not only be an individual, it can
be a group, an organisation, an industry, a political party or even a
country.

Leaders take a more abstract, qualitative approach when it comes to how they
relate to their team. As Simon Sinek said, “Leadership is about making others
feel safe.”

Leaders prioritize and are responsible for the people on their team and their
growth. They seek to have a healthy, open dialogue with their team and aren’t
afraid to ask for feedback – or give it in a helpful way.

Having high emotional intelligence (EI) is important to leaders. Their focus on

this skill helps them create a collaborative environment, lead with empathy, and
encourage their team. This approach builds trust and strong relationships with
their reports and, in turn, can enforce a positive company culture. Leaders view
themselves as part of the team, rather than above and separate from it.

Definition of Leadership:
Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals
to achieve a common goal.

Manager:
Managers are there to tell people what to do – they assign and delegate tasks,
and tell people how to complete them. Managers maintain structure in their
organization by the book and aren’t as focused on creativity, collaboration, or
innovation that pushes their team to grow.
A manager’s main goal is to meet organizational objectives. Because of this,
they focus on planning, organizing, and controlling things and people. They
place a high value on cognitive intelligence and tend to focus more on the
quantitative side of work – they are task-oriented and efficiency is important to
them. As long as the systems and processes they have in place are working,
managers tend to stick to the status quo.
When it comes to leadership style, many managers take a more autocratic,
authoritarian approach. While this may work in some career fields, such as
healthcare, law enforcement, and the military, this style isn’t extremely effective
in many other workplaces.
People who are in management positions started in a junior position and worked
their way up. Because they’re typically experts at the roles they’re managing, it
can become easy to micromanage instead of lead.

Leader Vs Manager
Theories of Leadership
1. Trait theory of leadership / Great man theory
2. Behavioural theory of leadership
3. Situational theory of leadership
A. Trait theory of leadership / Great man theory
Some of the leaders in the history have always been identified as strong leaders
based on the qualities or traits that they display. Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi,
Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher, Nelson Mandela, Narayana Murthy of
Infosys, Apple‟s Cofounder Steve Jobs etc. has been identified, based on the
traits that they displayed. For instance, when Margaret Thatcher was the prime
minister of the Great Britain, she was regularly described as a confident, iron-
willed, determined and decisive leader. Thus, the trait theories of leadership
consider personal qualities and characteristics that differentiate leaders from
non-leaders (Robbins, Judge, & Sanghi, 2007).
In the beginning, the assumption behind trait theory was that „leaders are born
and not made‟. This concept was popularly known as the „Great Man Theory‟
of leadership. The great man theory was originally proposed by Thomas Carlyle
in 1949 and the assumption behind this theory is that „great leaders will arise,
when there is great need‟. The theory also assumes that a leader cannot be a
normal person and they are different from the average person in terms of
personality traits such as intelligence, perseverance and ambition. However, a
proposition of „Great Woman‟ finds no place, especially in leadership studies
mainly due to the fact that gender issues were out of context, when the theory
was proposed and moreover, it was only male members of the society who were
into such research and such biasness was hardly realized by the people then.
In the period of 1960s, various research studies were made on the traits of a
leader and about 80 traits that a leader could display was identified. The trait
theory assumes that leaders are born with inherited traits and good leaders have
the right combination of traits. In 1974, stogdill identified certain traits and
skills that are essential for a leader, which are as follows:

Traits
 Adaptable to situations  Alert to social environment  Ambitious and
achievement oriented  Assertive  Cooperative  Decisive  Dependable 
Dominant (desire to influence others  Energetic (high activity level) 
Persistent  Self-confident  Tolerant to stress  Willing to assume responsibility
Skills
 Clever (Intelligent)  Conceptually skilled  Creative  Diplomatic and tactful
 Fluent in speaking  Knowledgeable about group task  Organised
(administrative ability)  Persuasive  Socially-skilled

A comprehensive review of the leadership literature on traits, reveal that one of

the significant approach that was developed was the Big Five Personality
Framework. Though various traits were identified by different studies, it was
possible that such traits were somehow clubbed or subsumed under the Big Five
approach. Though the approach seems to be complex, it offers useful insights.
Leaders who are extraverted (individuals who like being around people and are
able to assert themselves), conscientious (individuals who are disciplined and
keep commitments they make), and open (individuals who are creative and
flexible) do seem to have an advantage when it comes to leadership, suggesting
that good leaders do have key traits in common.
In recent years, another trait that has been identified with leadership is the
Emotional Intelligence (EI). Advocates of EI argue that without it, a person can
have outstanding training, a highly analytical mind, a compelling vision, and an
endless supply of terrific ideas, but still not make a great leader. The general
assumption is that, empathetic leaders can sense others‟ needs, listen to what
followers say (and don‟t say), and are able to read the reactions of others.

B. Behavioural Theories
(Ohio State Studies, University of Michigan Studies, The Managerial
Grid)

In the 1940s, apart from the research studies being conducted on the traits
displayed by leaders, research was also conducted on the behaviours exhibited
by leaders. The first and foremost study on leadership was carried out by
psychologist, Kurt Lewin and his associates in 1939 and identified different
styles of leadership, viz. autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire leadership,
which has been discussed in the next unit. While the assumption behind traits
theory is that „leaders are born, rather than made‟, behavioural theories assume
that specific behavioural patterns of leaders can be acquired through learning
and experience. While the trait theory concentrates on „what the leaders are‟,
the behavioural theories concentrate on „what the leaders do‟. In this section,
four different behavioural pattern of leadership has been dealt with, which are as
follows:
(1) Ohio State Studies
One of the foremost studies that emanated on behavioural theories was
the study made by Ohio State University in 1945 by E.A. Fleishman, E.F.
Harris and H.E. Burtt. The study narrowed the leadership behaviours into
two categories, viz. initiating structure and consideration, under which the
various leadership behaviours were clubbed.
a) Initiating Structure: Initiating structure refers to the extent to which
a leader is likely to define and structure his or her role and those of
employees in the search for goal attainment. It includes behaviour
that attempts to organize work, work relationships, and goals. A
leader with initiating structure is generally task oriented, with focus
on performance of employees and meeting of deadlines.
b) Consideration: As per „consideration‟ category, a leader pays more
attention to the employee of the organization rather than the task
and shows concern for the well-being, comfort and satisfaction of
employees. That is, a leader focuses on the relationships that are
characterised by mutual trust, respect for employees‟ ideas, and
regard for their feelings.
The two-factor conceptualization of Ohio Studies has been gaining wide
recognition in recent times.
(2) University of Michigan Studies
Similar to the Ohio State University studies, research on leadership
studies was also carried out by the University of Michigan‟s Research
centres, in 1946 by Rensis Likert and his associates. The study made an
analysis of the relationship between leadership behaviours and
organizational performances. Michigan Studies also identified a twofactor
component, viz. „employee-oriented leader‟ and „production-oriented
leader‟.
(i) Employee-Oriented Leader: The concern of the employee-oriented
leaders were more on the interpersonal relations with the
employees and such leaders paid more attention on the needs of the
employees and accepted the individual differences among
members.
 (ii) (ii) Production-Oriented Leader: The production oriented-leaders
paid attention to the technical aspects of the job or the tasks
assigned to the employees, rather than on employees. Such leaders
gave least importance to the group members, and regarded the
employees as only a means to achieve the ends, that is, the goals of
an organization.
It can be found that the two-factor conceptualization of the Ohio study is
similar to the two way dimension of the Michigan studies. While the
employee-oriented leadership can be compared with the „consideration‟
component of Ohio studies, production-oriented leadership can be
compared with „initiating structure‟. While the Ohio studies considered
both its components to be important for effective leadership, the
Michigan studies gave supremacy to the component of „employee-
orientation‟ over „production-orientation‟.

(3) The Managerial Grid

Like the Ohio State studies and Michigan studies, the Managerial Grid
theory of leadership was also based on the styles of „concern for people‟
and concern for production‟. The Managerial Grid theory of leadership
was proposed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964. This theory
which is depicted in a graphical form is also known as the „Leadership
Grid Theory‟. The grid is a nine-by-nine matrix which outlines 81
different styles of leadership. The grid has 9 possible positions along each
axis creating 81 different positions in which the leader’s style may fall.
Through the Managerial Grid, 5 kinds of Leadership Style was identified,
which include the following:
(i) Impoverished, in which there is low concern for people and
production (1 by 1)
(ii) (ii) Country Club, wherein the concern for production is low,
but for people is high (1 by 9)
(iii) (iii) Task, in which there is high concern for production and
low concern for people (9 by 1)
(iv) (iv) Middle of the Road, where there is moderate concern for
both the production and the people (5 by 5)
(v) (v) Team, wherein there is high concern for both the people
and production (9 by 9)
This theory, thus offers a useful framework for conceptualizing and
understanding the leadership styles.
 Though behavioural theories make its contribution in
understanding leadership effectiveness, it cannot be considered as
the utmost option, to determine the success of leadership. In other
words, it cannot be said with utmost clarity that a leader depicting a
certain kind of leadership traits and behaviours are always
successful. At times, the situational contexts play a strong role in
determining the effectiveness of leaders.

C. Contingency/Situational Theories
(1) (Fiedler Model Fred, Cognitive Resource Theory, Hersey and
Blanchard’s Situational Theory, Leader-Member Exchange Theory,
Path-Goal Theory, Leader-Participation Model)

Sometimes the success of a leader does not depend upon the qualities, traits and
behaviour of a leader alone. The context in which a leader exhibits her/his skills,
traits and behaviour matters, because same style of functioning may not be
suitable for different situations. Thus the effectiveness of leadership also
depends upon situations. Several research studies, when analyzing the reason
for inconsistent results in differing conditions with the same leadership style,
laid their focus on situational variables. This theory views leadership in terms of
a dynamic interaction between a number of situational variables like the leader,
the followers, the task situation, the environment, etc. Some of the noteworthy
studies on situational contexts that gained wide recognition include Fiedler‟s
model, Hersey and Blanchard‟s Situational theory, Leader-Member Exchange
theory, Path-Goal theory and Leader-Participation model, which has been
discussed over here.

(2) Fiedler Model Fred

Fiedler was the first person to develop a comprehensive model for the
contingency theory of leadership in 1967. The basic premise behind this
theory is that, effective performance of an organization or a group of
people in an organization highly depend upon the style adopted by a
leader and the degree to which a situation gives control to the leader.
In order to assess the style followed by a leader, Fiedler developed
„Least-Preferred Coworker‟ (LPC) scale, in which the leaders were asked
 to give their preference on the employee with whom they have least
preference to work with. If the least preferred co- worker was described
in favourable terms, such response was rated as ‘relationship oriented’
and if rated in unfavourable terms, a leader was regarded as ‘production
oriented’. However, in contrast, the response derived from such study did
not show a clear cut picture, as some of the responses had a score in the
mid range. Through such responses, it was difficult to classify a leader
either as a relationship-oriented or a production oriented leader, as the
scoring was neither high nor low. Fiedler’s model thus illuminated
attention on a new dimension of leadership studies. Thus through this
study, it was suggested that, if a situation requires a task-oriented leader
and the person in that leadership position is relationship-oriented, either
the situation has to be modified or the leader replaced, if optimal
effectiveness is to be achieved (Robbins, Judge, & Sanghi, 2007).
Based on the results derived, Fiedler has identified three situational
factors, viz. leadermember relations, task structure and position power,
which determine leadership effectiveness. A brief discussion on such
situational factors is as follows:
a. Leader-Member Relations: The degree of confidence, trust and
respect that members have on their leader;
b. Task Structure: The degree to which the job assignments are
structured or unstructured;
c. Position Power: The degree of influence a leader has over power
variables such as hiring, firing, discipline, promotions, and salary
increases
Fiedler’s model evaluates the effectiveness of leadership, based on the
degree of existence of the above mentioned situational factors. The degree
varies from good to poor in leader-member relations, high to low in task
structure and strong to weak in position power. According to Fiedler, a
leadership is said to have more control of organizational situations, if the
leader-member relations are good, task assignments are highly structured
along with a stronger power positions. Similarly, the situations in an
organization would be unfavourable, if the respect that members have for
leaders is poor, with unstructured task assignments and weak position
power.
As depicted in the figure 5.2, based on the situational factors, Fiedler
model identifies 8 different kinds of situations or categories in which a
leader can identify her/his position. Fiedler states that a task oriented
leader performs better in situations that are very favourable to her/him and
in situations that are very unfavourable. That is, when faced with a
Category I, II, III, VII or VIII situation, task-oriented leaders perform
better. Relationship-oriented leaders perform better in moderately
favourable situations – categories IV through VII. In recent years, Fiedler
has condensed these 8 situations down to 3. He states that task-oriented
leaders perform better in situations of high and low control, while
relationship-oriented leaders perform best in moderate control situations.
However, one of the major drawbacks in Fiedler model is that the style
adopted by a particular leader is fixed. It is assumed that a leader can
follow only a particular style in any given situation and the theory suggests
change of a leader to fit a situation. For instance, the assumption is that, if
a situation in an organization is highly unfavourable, and the organization
is led by a relationship oriented leader, the organization‟s performance
could be improved by replacing the leader with one who is task-oriented.
The other alternative suggested is to change the situation to suit the leader.
That is by restructuring tasks or increasing or decreasing the power
positions, the leader is expected to bring the situation under control.
Though Fiedler‟s model offers useful propositions, the practical
application of the theory is highly questionable. In practice, it is generally
 difficult to assess how good the leadermember relations are, how
structured the task is, and how much position-power a leader has (Robbins,
Judge, & Sanghi, 2007).

(3) Cognitive Resource Theory

Cognitive Resource Theory In the early 1990s, the original model of
Fiedler was reconceptualised by Fiedler and his associate Joe Garcia, as
Cognitive Resource Theory. In this model, the focus has been laid on the
role of stress as a form of situational unfavourableness and how a
leader‟s intelligence and experience influence her/his reaction to stress.
The assumption behind this theory is that stress is the enemy of
rationality and a leader cannot think in a logical and analytical manner, if
she/he is under high level of stress. According to this proposition, the
importance of a leader‟s intelligence and experience to effectiveness
differs under low and high stress situations. Fiedler and Gracia state that a
leader‟s intellectual ability correlates positively with performance under
low stress but negatively under high stress. And conversely, a leader‟s
experience correlates negatively with performance under low stress but
positively under high stress. Thus, according to Fiedler and Gracia, the
level of stress in a situation, determines whether an individual‟s
intelligence or experience will contribute to leadership performance.

(4) Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Theory

One of the path-breaking models that were developed in the leadership
studies is that of the Situational Leadership Theory (SLT), that was put
forward by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard. The focus of this theory is
laid on the followers and the readiness that followers show in accepting a
leadership. The basic assumption behind this theory is that, it is the
followers who accept or reject a leader and thus, effectiveness of a leader
also depends on their followers. Thus, regardless of what a leader does,
effectiveness of leadership depends upon the actions of the followers. By
readiness, Hersey and Blanchard mean to say the extent to which people
have the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task set by the
leader. In analysing the leader-follower relationship, the Situational
Leadership Theory, equates the relationship with that of a parent and a
child.
 According to Hersey and Blanchard there are four types of leadership
behaviour that varies from highly directive to highly laisssez-faire, which
again depends upon the ability and willingness of followers to perform a
given task. According to SLT, if a follower is unable and unwilling to do a
task, the leader needs to give clear and specific directions; if followers are
unable and willing, the leader needs to display high task orientation to
compensate for the followers‟ lack of ability and high relationship
orientation to get the followers to „buy into‟ the leader‟s desire; if
followers are able and unwilling, the leader needs to use a supportive and
participative style; and if the employee is both able and willing, the leader
doesn‟t need to do much.

This theory, thus gives a new dimension to the study of leadership, and
the aspects that appeals in this theory is the importance given to the
followers and the capacity of the leader to compensate for the ability and
motivational limitations in their followers. However, in spite of the wide
recognition and popularity that this theory has gained, it is said to have
internal ambiguities and inconsistencies.

(5) Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Another new dimension to leadership theories was added with the
proposition of the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory. The
assumption behind this theory is that a leader cannot use a fairly
homogenous style with all of the people in their work unit and a leader
 act differently with different people and tend to have her/his „in-group‟.
Thus, as per this theory, a leader maintains a special relationship with a
small group of their followers, due to time pressures. The people in the
„in-group‟ tend to get more attention, have the trust of the leader and also
enjoy special privileges and even have an informal interaction with the
leader. On the contrary, followers in the „out-group‟ spend less time with
the leaders, have limited access to rewards and privileges and the leader-
follower relation is based on a formal authority interactions.

The people in the „in-group‟ are chosen based on the personal

compatibility with the leader, competence, attitude and personality
exhibited by the followers. Though the „ingroup‟ is chosen by the
leaders, it is the follower‟s characteristics that drive the leader‟s
categorising decision.
However, dangers are inherent in being a part of the inner circle. That is,
sometimes, the fortune of the inner circle, tend to rise or fall along with
the leader. In general, followers in the in-group status will have higher
performance ratings, lower turnover intentions, greater satisfaction with
their superior, and higher overall satisfaction than the out-group.

(6) Path-Goal Theory

Path-Goal Theory was developed by Martin Evans and Robert House in
1970-71, taking inputs from the concept of initiating structure and
consideration of the Ohio State Studies and the Expectancy Theory of
 Motivation. The base behind Path-Goal theory is that effective leaders
clarify the path to help their followers to move forward from their current
position towards achieving the work goals. In this process, the leader
reduces the roadblock that occurs in the path of the followers, and makes
their journey easier. Thus, the essence of path goal theory is that, it is the
leader‟s job to provide the followers with the information, support and
other resources, necessary for them to achieve their goals (Robbins,
Judge, & Sanghi, 2007).
This theory identifies four types of leadership behaviour, viz. directive
leader, supportive leader, participative leader and achievement-oriented
leader. Unlike Fiedler, who assumes the leader to follow a fixed
leadership style, the theory put forward by House, assumes the leader to
be a flexible person, who can display different kinds of behaviours based
on a given situation. The four types of leadership behaviour, identified by
Robert House are as follows:
(i) Directive Leader: A directive leader clarifies the followers of the
role expected of them, schedules the work to be done and gives the
needed direction or guidance as to how to accomplish tasks;
(ii) Supportive Leader: A supportive leader behaves in an friendly
manner with the followers, and the main concern of the leader is
placed on the needs of the followers, rather than on accomplishing
the tasks;
(iii) Participative Leader: A participative leader involves the followers
in the consultation process and also gets the suggestions or views
of the followers, before making a decision;
(iv) Achievement-Oriented Leader: An achievement oriented leader set
challenging goals for the followers and expects them to perform at
their highest level.
The above mentioned leadership styles under the path-goal theory is
contingent upon two factors such as, characteristics of employees and
environmental factors. While environmental factors include aspects such
as task structure, formal authority system, work group, etc. employee
characteristics include aspects like locus of control, experience, perceived
ability, etc.

(7) Leader-Participation Model

The Leader-Participation Model was developed by Victor Vroom and
Phillip Yetton in 1973 and this theory is called by different names as,
Decision-Participation Model and Normative Model. This model was
called normative, as it provided a sequential set of rules that should be
followed in determining the form and amount of participation in decision
making, as determined by different types of situations.
According to this model, three set of variables affect the performance of
the leader in terms of his capacity as a decision maker, which include:
(i) Quality of the decision;
(ii) Degree of acceptance of the decision by subordinates; and
(iii) Time required in making the decision. Thus, based on the variables
identified, Vroom and Yetton defined 5 different kinds of decision
making procedures. That is, it represents a continuum from
authoritarian approaches (AI, AII), Consultative approaches (CI,
CII) and a group based approach (G2) which is as follows:

 A1: Leader takes known information and then decides alone.

 A2: Leader gets information from followers, and then decides
alone.
 C1: Leader shares problem with followers individually, listens to
ideas and then decides alone.
 C2: Leader shares problems with followers as a group, listens to
ideas and then decides alone.
 G2: Leader shares problems with followers as a group and then
seeks and accepts consensus agreement.
The contingency theories that make an analysis of situational context,
thus brings to light the challenging role that a leader has to play.
Especially women leaders, whose life is a mix of a complex fabric of
personal, professional and community involvements and responsibilities,
becomes all the more complex in a contingent situation. Since women
leaders function in more than one context (family, work place,
community), managing different contexts simultaneously remains a major
challenge for women leaders (Klenke, 2011). While the theories that have
been discussed above are conventional theories, which have unique inputs
to offer even to this day, it has also given way to new set of leadership
theories viz. Transactional and Transformative theories of leadership,
Visionary Leadership theory, etc. While the conventional theories laid
 their focus on the traits, qualities, behaviour exhibited by a leader, the
modern theories makes a shift in the way leaders were perceived. From
the position of an omnipotent hero and saviours of organizations, the
leaders are now looked at as normal people, whose decisions can lead
both to success or failure of an organization. Thus the modern theories,
gives more importance to the leader-follower equation. While the
traditional theories are leader centric, the new theories have follower-
centric perspective.

Emerging Leadership Approaches

 Charismatic,
 Transformational
 Servant
 Team
 Psychodynamic
 Emergent

Defining Leadership styles:

Leadership style is the pattern of behaviour that a leader exhibits, in influencing
his/her subordinates towards the goals of an organization. Leadership style
change from group to group and also from situation to situation. When a group
lacks the sense of direction or purpose, directive style can be adopted by a
leader, and when groups are clear of the organizational goals and objectives and
perform well, non-directive styles can be adopted by a leader.
The study of leadership style has been in vogue right from 1930s, when
researches were conducted on the leadership theories. When the traits and
behaviours of leaders were explored, the classification that was arrived at was
„task oriented‟ and „employee oriented‟ leaders. Such classification further was
expanded by the scholars in later years, which got extended as different styles of
leadership. In this unit, effort has been made to explore the different types and
styles of leadership. But before we get into the leadership styles that exist, it is
critical to understand the factors that influence the leadership styles.
Factors influencing Leadership Style The behavioural pattern, exhibited by a
leader is influenced by various factors. Some of the factors that influence the
leadership styles are as follows (D'Souza, 1987):

(i) Personality of the Leader: The very personality of the leader has its
impact on the style of leadership that he/she adopts. The value system
that a leader follows influences him/her in adopting a certain style.
The leadership style also gets influenced by the amount of trust that a
leader has on his/her employees. The inclination that a leader has
towards a directive style or team-building style also influences the
leadership style. Further, the personality displayed by a leader in
uncertain situations also decides the style of leadership to be adopted
by him/her.
(ii) Personality of Group Members: The kind of personality exhibited
by the followers in an organization, also help in deciding the style to
be adopted. For instance, if employees in an organization prefer high
need for independence, show readiness to assume responsibility,
display interest in problem solving and decision making, then leaders
permit greater freedom.
(iii) Nature of Task: The nature of task performed in an organization,
plays a greater role in determining the leadership style. If the nature of
task to be performed in an organization is quite critical and the time is
too short in taking decisions, autocratic styles may be used by leaders,
 whereas in handling simple task with no pressures of time, the leader
might adopt a participative style.
(iv) Nature of the Environment: The structure of the organization may
determine the kind of leadership to be adopted. For instance some
organizations may put a heavy emphasis on the leader‟s abilities to
work effectively with people. At other times, the social, economic and
political pressures that an organization faces prompt certain style of
leadership to be followed. A successful leader is sensitive to the
influences in various situations and they are in a position to determine
the right style of leadership to be followed in handling various
situations.

I- Charismatic Leadership
Charismatic leadership has generally been analyzed in terms of the effects
the leader has on followers, or in terms of the relationship between leaders
and followers. Charismatic and transformational theories return our focus to
organizational leadership. Charismatic and transformational leaders
influence followers who then rally toward a shared goal. Social, cultural,
economic, and political systems are all impacted by these leaders. \
Weber’s Conceptualization of Charisma
The sociologist Max Weber saw in a charismatic leader someone who single-
handedly visualizes a transcendent vision or course of action that is not only
appealing to potential followers but also compels them to act on it because
they believe the leader is extraordinarily gifted.
Vision is the ability to imagine different and better conditions and the ways
to achieve them. Other attributes of charisma identified in the political and
sociological literature include acts of heroism, an ability to inspire and build
Confidence and a “powerful aura.”
Charisma is defined as a social construct between the leader and follower, in
which the leader offers a transformative vision or ideal that exceeds the
status quo and then convinces followers to accept this course of action not
because of its rational likelihood of success, but because of their implicit
belief in the extraordinary qualities of the leader.
Locus of Charismatic Leadership
The locus of charismatic leadership focuses on one question: what is the
basis of charisma?
(a) the situation or social climate facing the leader External locus of
charismatic leadership. For those sharing this viewpoint, Charismatic
leadership could not take place unless the society was in a state of crisis—
that charisma is situationally determined. The charismatic leader is simply an
opportunist who capitalizes on a crisis situation. Charismatic leadership is
born out of stressful situations. Under stressful situations, charismatic
leaders are able to express sentiments that are different from the established
order.
(b) the leader’s extraordinary qualities Charisma is primarily the result of
leaders’ innate attributes as seen by their followers. These attributes include
a strong sense of vision, exceptional communication skills, strong
conviction, trustworthiness, high self-confidence, intelligence energy and a
proactive orientation.
(c) a combination of the situation and the leader’s qualities. Those who
believe that charismatic leadership does not depend on the leader’s innate
qualities or the presence of a crisis alone, but rather that it is the interaction
of the two.

The Effects of Charismatic Leaders on Followers

Followers of charismatic leaders often develop a strong sense of trust and
bonding with the leader. Such a strong emotional bond is possible because
the charismatic leader is believed to have the power to effect radical change
by virtue of his or her transcendent vision. There is the effect of
unconditional acceptance of the charismatic leader by his/her followers that
is not often seen with other types of leaders. Followers develop a strong
sense of self-confidence and self-efficacy as they work to realize the leader’s
vision. Some scholars have found that this cycle of influence ultimately
increases followers’ organizational citizenship behavior and empowerment.
Followers of charismatic leaders tend to assume greater risk than they would
with other types of leaders. Another effect of charismatic leadership on
followers is to motivate them to set or aim for higher goals and ideals and
have greater confidence in their ability to achieve such goals.

How One Acquires Charismatic Qualities –

-Through training and practice, you can improve your communication and
interpersonal skills.
- Through education, you can develop your visionary skills by practicing the
act of creating a vision.
- You can practice being candid.
- Through a leadership development workshop or seminar, you can develop
an enthusiastic, optimistic, and energetic personality profile.
Charismatic leaders are said to possess special traits that influence their
behaviors.
> Three such traits described in the chapter are envisioning, empathy, and
empowerment.
> Explain how each of these traits influences how followers perceive the
charismatic leader.

Charisma: A Double-Edged Sword

Charisma can be a double-edged sword capable of producing both positive
and negative outcomes. A meaningful approach for differentiating between
positive and negative charisma is in terms of the values and motives of the
leader. Values research proposes that two opposing but complementary
motives drive an individual’s behavior: self-glorification and self-
transcendence. The self-glorification motive is about the self-maintenance
and self-enhancement of the leader. On the other hand, the self-
transcendence motive is about the collective interest or good of the broader
society.
Two types of charismatic leaders are identified: The socialized charismatic
leader (SCL) is one who possesses an egalitarian, self-transcendent, and
empowering personality and uses charisma for the benefit of others.
The personalized charismatic leader (PCL) is one who possesses a dominant,
self-centered, self-aggrandizing, and narcissistic personality and uses
charisma for self-glorification.

II- Transformational Leadership

Burns proposed two leadership approaches for getting work done:
transactional and transformational.
- Transformational leaders earn their reputation from their known
accomplishments.
- Transformational leaders are known for moving and changing organizations
“in a big way,” by communicating to followers an inspiring vision of the
future
- Transformational leaders seek to transform a mediocre organization by
influencing followers to buy into a new vision and new possibilities.
Transformational leadership seeks to change the status quo by articulating
to followers the problems in the current system and a compelling vision of
what a new organization could be, whereas transactional leadership seeks to
maintain stability within an organization through regular economic and
social exchanges that achieve specific goals for both leaders and their
followers.
The Effects of Transformational Leadership
Positive effects on:
- organizational performance, culture, and learning.
- Follower organizational commitment.
- Employee turnover rates, performance and citizenship behavior.

Effective transformational leaders shift focus from self-interest to collective

interests. Transformational leadership is associated with improved creativity
and decision quality.
Transformational versus Transactional Leadership

The Transformation Process

Transformational leaders are usually brought into an organization that is
experiencing a decline or in need of a major change in direction. This often
involves fundamental changes in vision, mission, strategies, and policies.
The transformational leader usually employs his/her charisma and power to
influence follower behaviors and work ethic. Four-part process that starts
with the transformational leader’s ability to:
(1) challenge the status quo and make a convincing case for change
(2) present an inspiring vision of the future
(3) provide effective leadership during the transformation,
(4) institutionalize the change
In today’s world, Elon Musk is another example of a transformational leader.
His company SpaceX was the first ever private spaceflight company to send
a crewed spacecraft to space. And he is famously quoted as saying:
“Failure is not an option. If things are failing, you are not innovating.”
Richard Branson is also an excellent example of a transformational leader.
His Virgin Group owns several companies across a range of industries, from
broadband to international travel.
Branson himself isn’t an expert in all of these industries, but his charismatic
personality gives him the power to inspire others to get excited about these
ideas and make them work.
Servant Leadership and Attributes of the Effective Servant Leader
Servant leadership is linked to ethics, virtues, and morality. At the core of
servant leadership is self-sacrifice for others without regard to what one might
receive in return. The leader makes a conscious decision to hold followers in
high regard.
Attributes of the Effective Servant Leader:

Earning and Keeping Others’ Trust

Servant leaders earn followers’ trust by being honest and true to their word.
They work hard to preserve their integrity. They don’t have any hidden agendas,
and they are not afraid to give up power, recognition, or control to followers if it
helps move the organization forward. Servant leadership is about influence that
is based on trust, not power.
Service over Self-Interest
The hallmark of servant leadership is the desire to help others, rather than the
desire to attain power and control over others. Doing what’s right for others
takes precedence over protecting one’s position. Servant leaders make decisions
to further the interests of the group rather than their own interests.
Effective Listening
Servant leaders do not impose their will on the team; rather, they listen carefully
to the problems others are facing and then engage the team to find solutions.
They show love, acceptance, and encouragement for their followers and are
very empathetic.
Helping Others Discover Their Inner Spirit
Help followers discover the strength of their inner spirit and their potential to
make a difference. This requires servant leaders to be empathetic to the
circumstances of others. Servant leaders are not afraid to show their
vulnerabilities.

IV. Team Leadership

Idea:
The leader acts like a coach or facilitator. The focus is on the whole team
working together instead of one person controlling everything.
How it works:
 The leader watches the team and understands what they need.
 If the team is doing fine, the leader steps back and lets them work.
 If problems arise, the leader steps in to guide, solve conflicts, or help with
decisions.
 The leader also makes sure everyone’s voice is heard and that the team
moves toward the goal.
Strengths:
 Builds trust and cooperation among members.
 People feel included and valued, so motivation increases.
 Because many ideas are discussed, the team often finds creative and
better solutions.
 Useful for complex projects where teamwork matters.
Weaknesses:
 Decision-making can be slow because everyone gives input.
 If team members are not responsible or skilled, the style may not work
well.
 Requires the leader to have strong people skills (like listening, conflict
resolution, and empathy).
Example:
Think of a football coach. The coach doesn’t play on the field but guides,
motivates, and helps players work as one team. Similarly, in a company project
team, the leader makes sure all members know their tasks, helps them when
conflicts happen, and encourages them to reach the goal together.

V. Psychodynamic Leadership

The psychodynamic approach consists of several different ways of looking at

leadership. There is no single model or theory. One fundamental concept
underlies the psychodynamic approach: personality. As used here, the term
means a consistent pattern of ways of thinking, feeling, and acting with regard
to the environment, including other people. A personality is characterized by a
list of tendencies or qualities, such that one person might be shy, intelligent, and
rigid in behavior, whereas another is creative, independent, and spontaneous.

1. Eric Berne and Transactional Analysis

Although Transactional Analysis (TA) has not been applied directly to
leadership, some of
the basic ideas are interesting and can elucidate leader and follower interactions.
The most basic concept is that of the ego state, which Berne (1964) defined as
“a coherent system of feelings and operationally as a set of coherent behavior
patterns”. This concept is an effort to link feelings and experiences with how
people actually behave.

Three ego states in TA

1. Parent Ego State
When a person thinks, feels, or behaves in ways copied from her or his own
parents, that person is said to be in the parent ego state. It can be in either a
controlling or a nurturing parent state.
2. Child Ego State
Similarly, thinking, feeling, or behaving as one did as a child. It can be in either
a free child or an adapted child state. The adapted child can be considered the
state in which a person conforms and adapts to the demands of others.
Conversely, the free child, previously labeled the rebellious child, is the ego
state in which one acts and feels like an uninhibited and unsocialized child.
3. Adult Ego State
Is characterized by thoughts, feelings, or behaviors that are the direct result of
whatever is happening around the person. The adult ego state is one in which an
individual is engaging in what is known as reality testing.

2. Sigmund Freud and Personality Types

Freud developed the process known as psychoanalysis and wrote extensively
on the subject of human beings and their personalities. Most of his work was
devoted to psychopathologies—that is, psychological problems such as
neuroses and psychoses. However, Freud did use the concept of personality. In
one instance, he provided a schema consisting of three personality types. To
Freud, personality was a typical or regular way in which human beings relate to
the world. There is a core personality, inborn and instinctual, but values,
attitudes, and beliefs are overlaid on that core personality.

Three personality types

1. Erotic personality
The erotic personality is one in which people seek to love and be loved. They
prefer to be liked and accepted over being admired and respected. The erotic
personality enjoys talking with others for the simple pleasure of having a
conversation and getting to know someone. In work situations, erotics want the
group or team to become a close-knit family of nice people who get along. They
want to know about the backgrounds of the people with whom they work and
even try to delve into personal matters. However, people with an erotic
personality are also quite dependent and needy.
2. Obsessive personality
People with an obsessive personality try to live up to standards, follow rules,
and obey a strict conscience. Obsessives prefer order and stability rather than
acceptance and liking. The most important value is maintaining the status quo,
which means following the rules and regulations of society and the
organization. Such people have a strong conscience that guides them to do the
right thing. This kind of person searches for ways to improve, and particularly
to become more knowledgeable and competent. On the negative side,
obsessives can be very
aggressive and domineering. They believe they are right and do not want to be
questioned.
3. Marketing personality
The marketing personality is characterized as being highly adaptable; such
people
conform and align themselves with the right people and situations. Marketers
easily adapt to changes in society and in organizations. They usually seek to
develop and grow personally, wanting not only to become more competent, but
also to grow emotionally. Marketers are good at facilitating and networking, and
at using and enjoying the process of collaboration in order to achieve consensus.
4. Narcissistic personality
The narcissist is not vain and does not attempt to impress, but takes pride in and
will talk about actual accomplishments. In fact, Maccoby pointed out that one of
the important characteristics of the narcissist is humor, which is most often self-
directed. On the positive side, the narcissist has a clear vision of what to do and
does not take into account what other people say or do in the pursuit of that
vision.

In a further development of the personality types, Maccoby distinguished

between productive and unproductive versions of each type. There can be
productive erotics, unproductive obsessives, and productive marketing types, or
their opposites. Erich Fromm (1947) introduced the idea of productiveness and
identified five key elements to define the productive person: The productive
person is free and not dependent, is guided by reason, is active or proactive,
understands his or her own situation, and has a purpose in life. Maccoby (2003)
added perseverance to the list of characteristics of a productive person. At the
other end of the spectrum are unproductive people, characterized as limited and
averse to risk, irrational, reactive, superficial, aimless, and uncommitted.
In working as a consultant with top executives in many large organizations and
across various cultures, Maccoby sensed that the best executives were
productive narcissists. They had a vision and were able to motivate others to
accept the vision and work toward it. However, there are strengths and
weaknesses in the productive narcissist personality, summarized in Table 13.1.
Finally, Maccoby (2003, pp. 204–215) provided advice on how to work with a
narcissist. It is important for followers to know their own personality types. A
narcissistic leader will not satisfy the needs of any of the other personality
types, and followers need to fulfill those needs somewhere else. Second,
followers need to develop excellent knowledge of their own field that
supplements and does not compete with the narcissist’s knowledge. Third, if
followers know their own personalities and needs and can support the narcissist,
then that kind of leader will more readily accept them as partners. Fourth,
followers should avoid getting ego-involved with
the leader because she or he will not be able to satisfy those who have their own
vision. Finally, followers should do everything they can to protect the image of
the productive narcissist.
The productive narcissist is needed in organizations and in work teams, where a
vision of the future is important for surviving and coping with chaos and
change. Because the narcissist takes risks, the result can be wonderful or
disastrous. Maccoby concentrates on the productive narcissist as the leader of
organizations in times of crisis and change. However, the productive versions of
the erotic, obsessive, and marketing personality types can also be effective in
their own ways. Friendly, empathic, and nurturing people make excellent
leaders of organizations and work groups that provide services to human beings.
The obsessive personality type is ideal for running an organization that strives
to produce goods or services in a consistent, predictable, and routine manner.
Finally, the marketing personality works well in an organization or a team that
is subject to the whims of other organizations and constituencies.

3. Carl Jung and Personality Types

Human behavior is predictable and understandable, and that became the basis
for Carl Jung’s way of classifying people and their personalities (Jung, 1923,
1993). He believed that people have preferences for how they think and feel and
these preferences become the basis for how people work, relate, and play.
Jung believed there are four dimensions important in assessing personality. The
first concerns where a person derives her or his energy (either internally or
externally). The second involves the way in which a person gathers information
(either in a precise, sequential way or in a more intuitive and random way). The
third is the way in which a person makes decisions (either rationally and
factually or in a subjective and personal way). The fourth concerns the
difference between a person who plans and is organized and one who is more
spontaneous and pliant.
These became the basis of the classification of types:
Extraversion versus introversion: Whether a person prefers to derive energy
externally or
Internally Sensing versus intuiting: Whether a person prefers to gather
information in a precise or in an insightful way.
Thinking versus feeling: Whether a person prefers to make decisions rationally
or subjectively
Judging versus perceiving: Whether a person prefers to live in an organized or
a spontaneous
way.

1. Extraversion and Introversion

Extraversion is a preference for obtaining information, inspiration, and energy

from outside the self. One characteristic of extraverts is that they talk a great
deal. Such people like to be in contact with other people, and they like action.
They are often seen as energetic and well liked in social situations and may be
the life of the party. The spelling used here comes from Jung himself, who
preferred extraversion to extroversion.

An introvert uses her or his own ideas and thoughts and does not need external
stimulation. Such people would rather listen than talk. They like to acquire
information through reading or watching informative television shows. One
clue to introversion is the desire to be alone at times in order to be able to think
and reenergize. Constant exposure to people and activities can be draining.

2. Sensing and Intuition

The dimensions of sensing and intuition have to do with the way in which
people acquireinformation. Sensors collect data through their senses, and their
thinking revolves around facts and practical matters. Such people are quite
detail oriented and happy to deal with the “real world.” They focus on what they
can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste. Precision and accuracy
are the favorite words of a sensor. Other people are intuitive. They tend to be
much more conceptual and theoretical. Common everyday experience bores
them. They would prefer to be creative, to fantasize about the future, to apply
ingenuity to a problem. In gathering information, intuitors look for possibilities
and relationships; they use a theoretical framework to get and understand data.
In contrast to the sensor, the intuitor is more likely to use the phrases
approximately or as far as I know.

3. Thinking and Feeling

After information has been acquired, people need to make decisions based on
the data. The two ways of deciding are thinking and feeling. Thinkers use logic,
strive for objectivity, and are analytical. They often seem to be detached and
uninvolved with people, preferring to guide their actions on the basis of possible
results. The opposite preference produces feelers. They tend to be more
subjective, seek harmony with others, and take into account the feelings of
people. Such people are more involved with others at work or elsewhere and are
seen as considerate and humane.

4. Judging and Perceiving

Kroeger and Theusen (2002) suggested that the difference between
perceivers and judgers results in some of the most frustrating issues in working
and leadership. Judgers prefer structure, plans, schedules, and resolution. They
are decisive and deliberate, and quite sure of their way of doing things.
Perceivers tend to be much more flexible, adaptable, tentative, and open ended.
They are spontaneous. Perceivers often do not take deadlines seriously and may
change their minds and decisions without difficulty.

VI. Emergent Leadership

Idea:
Leadership that appears naturally. A person becomes a leader not because of a
title or position but because the group starts to respect and follow them.
How it works:
 In a group without a fixed leader, someone takes initiative.
 This person may speak clearly, organize tasks, or suggest solutions.
 Over time, the group begins to see them as the leader, even if no one
officially appointed them.
 Leadership is earned through trust, communication, and action.
Strengths:
 Very democratic — leadership comes from the group’s choice.
 Encourages people to step up and show initiative.
 Can lead to authentic and strong trust because respect is earned.
 Works well in flexible, self-managed groups.
Weaknesses:
 The emergent leader may not always have the best skills — sometimes
the most popular person becomes the leader instead of the most capable.
 Leadership may keep shifting, which can cause confusion.
 Can create conflict with officially appointed leaders (formal vs informal
leader).
Example:
A group of students is doing a project. No one is assigned as leader. One student
starts to arrange meetings, sets deadlines, and encourages others. The group
slowly begins to follow this student — they have emerged as the leader even
without a formal title.