Basic Approaches to
Leadership
What Is Leadership?
Leadership
The ability to influence a
group toward the
achievement of goals.
Management
Use of authority inherent
in designated formal rank
to obtain compliance from
organizational members.
Trait Theories
Traits Theories of
Leadership
Theories that consider Leadership Traits
personality, social, (Big 5 Theory):
physical, or intellectual
• Extraversion
traits to differentiate
leaders from non-leaders. • Agreeableness
• Conscientiousness
• Openness
• Neuroticism
Trait Theories
Limitations:
• No universal traits found that predict
leadership in all situations.
• Unclear evidence of the cause and effect
of relationship of leadership and traits.
• Better predictor of the appearance of
leadership than distinguishing effective
and ineffective leaders.
Trait Approach
Traits (examples)
– Extraversion
– Conscientiousness
– Openness
Assumption: Leaders are born
Goal: Select leaders
Problems
– Traits do not generalize across situations
– Better at predicting leader emergence than leader
effectiveness
Behavioral Theories
Behavioral Theories of Leadership
Theories proposing that specific behaviors
differentiate leaders from non-leaders.
• Behavioral theory:
Leadership behaviors can be
taught.
Vs.
Trait theory:
Leaders are born, not made.
Behavioral Approach
Ohio State Studies/U. of Michigan
– Initiating Structure/Production Orientation
– Consideration/Employee Orientation
Assumption: Leaders can be trained
Goal: Develop leaders
Problem: Effective behaviors do not generalize across
situations
Ohio State Studies
Initiating Structure
The extent to which a leader is likely to define and
structure his or her role and those of sub-ordinates
in the search for goal attainment.
Consideration
The extent to which a leader is likely to have job
relationships characterized by mutual trust, respect
for subordinate’s ideas, and regard for their feelings.
University of Michigan Studies
Employee-Oriented Leader
Emphasizing interpersonal relations; taking a
personal interest in the needs of employees and
accepting individual differences among members.
Production-Oriented Leader
One who emphasizes technical or task aspects
of the job.
The
Managerial
Grid
(Blake and Mouton)
CONTINGENCY THEORIES
All Consider the Situation
– Fiedler’s Contingency Model
– Cognitive Resource Theory
– Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership
Model
– Leader Member Exchange Theory
– Path Goal Theory
– Leader Participation Model
Assumptions underlying the different models:
Fiedler: Leader’s style is fixed
Other’s: Leader’s style can and should be changed
Fiedler Model
Leader: Style is Fixed (Task oriented vs. Relationship
oriented)
Key Assumption
– Leader must fit situation; options to accomplish this:
– Select leader to fit situation
– Change situation to fit leader
Fiedler Model
The Fiedler contingency model proposed that effective group
performance depended upon properly matching the leader’s
style and the amount of control and influence in the situation
The keys were to
(1) define those leadership styles and the different types of
situations, and then
(2) identify the appropriate combinations of style and situation
leadership style:
1. task oriented
2. relationship oriented
To measure a leader’s style, Fiedler developed the least-preferred
coworker (LPC) questionnaire
Fiedler Model
LPC Questionnaire: 18 pairs of contrasting adjectives: boring-
interesting, friendly-unfriendly etc.
describe that one person they least enjoyed working with by
rating him or her on a scale of 1 to 8 for each of the 18 sets of
adjectives
1. “high” LPC score—a score of 64 or above: relationship
oriented
2. “Low” LPC score - a score of 57 or below: task oriented
Fiedler assumed a person’s leadership style was fixed regardless
of the situation
Fiedler Model
Fiedler’s research uncovered three contingency dimensions:
Leader-member relations: the degree of confidence, trust, and
respect employees had for their leader; rated as either good or
poor
Task structure: the degree to which job assignments were
formalized and structured; rated as either high or low
Position Power: the degree of influence a leader had over
activities such as hiring, firing, discipline, promotions, and
salary increases; rated as either strong or weak
Fiedler Model
Fiedler Model
Once Fiedler had described the leader variables and the
situational variables, he had everything he needed to define the
specific contingencies for leadership effectiveness.
He studied 1,200 groups where he compared relationship-
oriented versus task-oriented leadership styles in each of the
eight situational categories.
He concluded that task-oriented leaders performed better in
very favorable situations and in very unfavorable situations.
relationship-oriented leaders performed better in moderately
favorable situations
Fiedler Model
Two possible solutions:
1. To bring in a new leader whose style better fit the
situation.
2. To change the situation to fit the leader.
Study the criticisms
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Contingency Approach: Hersey & Blanchard
Situational Model
Considers Leader Behaviors (Task & Relationship)
– Assumes Leaders CAN change their behaviors
Considers Followers as the Situation
– Follower Task maturity (ability & experience)
– Follower Psychological maturity (willingness to take
responsibility)
Assumptions
–Leaders can and should change their style to fit their
followers’ degree of readiness (willingness and ability)
–Therefore, it is possible to TRAIN leaders to better fit their
style to their followers.
Contingency Approach: Hersey & Blanchard
Situational Model
Readiness refers to the extent to which people have the
ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task
SLT uses the same two leadership dimensions: task
and relationship behaviors and then combines them
into four specific leadership styles:
Telling (high task–low relationship): The leader defines
roles and tells people what, how, when, and where to do
various tasks.
Selling (high task–high relationship): The leader
provides both directive and supportive behavior.
Contingency Approach: Hersey & Blanchard
Situational Model
Participating (low task–high relationship): The leader
and followers share in decision making; the main role of
the leader is facilitating and communicating.
Delegating (low task–low relationship): The leader
provides little direction or support.
Contingency Approach: Hersey & Blanchard
Situational Model
Four stages of follower readiness:
R1: People are both unable and unwilling to take
responsibility for doing something. Followers aren’t
competent or confident
R2: People are unable but willing to do the necessary
job tasks. Followers are motivated but lack the
appropriate skills.
R3: People are able but unwilling to do what the leader
wants. Followers are competent, but don’t want to do
something.
R4: People are both able and willing to do what is asked
of them.
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership
Theory
Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)
A contingency theory that focuses on followers’
readiness; the more “ready” the followers (the more
willing and able) the less the need for leader
support and supervision.
LOW Amount of Follower Readiness HIGH
Amount of Leader
Support &
HIGH Supervision Required LOW
Contingency Approach: Hersey & Blanchard
Situational Model
R1 (unable and unwilling to do a task): telling style and
give clear and specific directions;
R2 (unable and willing: selling style and display high
task orientation to compensate for the followers’ lack of
ability and high relationship orientation to get followers
to “buy into” the leader’s desires;
R3 (able and unwilling): participating style to gain their
support;
R4 (both able and willing): the leader doesn’t need to do
much and should use the delegating style
Path-Goal Theory
• Leader must help followers attaining goals and reduce roadblocks to
success
Four leadership behaviors:
1. Directive leader: Lets subordinates know what’s expected of
them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific guidance on
how to accomplish tasks.
2. Supportive leader: Shows concern for the needs of followers and
is friendly.
3. Participative leader: Consults with group members and uses
their suggestions before making a decision.
4. Achievement oriented leader: Sets challenging goals and
expects followers to perform at their highest level.
The Path-Goal Theory
Leaders are flexible and can display any or all of these
leadership styles depending on the situation.
Path-Goal Model
Directive leadership leads to greater satisfaction when tasks
are ambiguous or stressful than when they are highly
structured and well laid out.
Supportive leadership results in high employee performance
and satisfaction when subordinates are performing
structured tasks.
Directive leadership is likely to be perceived as redundant
among subordinates with high perceived ability or with
considerable experience.
Directive leadership will lead to higher employee satisfaction
when there is substantive conflict within a work group
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Path-Goal Model
Subordinates with an internal locus of control will be more
satisfied with a participative style
Subordinates with an external locus of control will be more
satisfied with a directive Style
Achievement-oriented leadership will increase subordinates’
expectancies that effort will lead to high performance when
tasks are ambiguously structured. By setting challenging
goals, followers know what the expectations are.
Study the criticisms
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
• Leaders select certain followers to be “IN”
(favorites)
Based on competence and/or compatibility &
similarity to leader
• “Exchanges” with these “IN” followers will be
higher quality than with those who are “OUT”
• RESULT: “IN” subordinates will have higher
performance ratings, less turnover, and greater job
satisfaction
Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
• A leader will implicitly categorize a follower as an “in”
or as an “out.”
• Leaders also encourage LMX by rewarding those
employees with whom they want a closer linkage and
punishing those with whom they do not.
• both the leader and the follower must “invest” in the
relationship
• evidence shows that in-group members have
demographic, attitude, personality, and even gender
similarities with the leader or they have a higher level
of competence than out-group members.
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
Transformational-Transactional Leadership
Transactional Leaders : leaders that lead
primarily by using social exchanges (or
transactions)
• Guide or motivate followers to work toward
established goals by exchanging rewards for
their productivity
Transformational leader: leaders that stimulate
and inspire (transforms) followers to achieve
extraordinary outcomes.
• Transformational leadership develops from
transactional leadership.
Team Leadership Roles
Managing Power
Legitimate power and authority are the same. Legitimate power
represents the power a leader has as a result of his or her
position in the organization.
Coercive power is the power a leader has to punish or control.
Followers react to this power out of fear of the negative results
that might occur if they don’t comply. (e.g. suspend or demote
employees)
Reward power is the power to give positive rewards. A reward
can be anything that a person values such as money, favorable
performance appraisals, promotions, interesting work
assignments, friendly colleagues, and preferred work shifts or
sales territories
Managing Power
Expert power is power that’s based on expertise,
special skills, or knowledge. If an employee has skills,
knowledge, or expertise that’s critical to a work group,
that person’s expert power is enhanced.
Referent power is the power that arises because of a
person’s desirable
resources or personal traits.
Dimensions of Trust
Integrity: honesty and truthfulness
Competence: technical and interpersonal knowledge
and skills
Consistency: reliability, predictability, and good
judgment in handling situations
Loyalty: willingness to protect a person, physically
and emotionally
Openness: willingness to share ideas and information
freely