Have you ever thought why a
certain person inspires us to aim at something beyond our capabilities? Why we
admire certain people for their personalities and the ability to evoke awe? Or
conversely, why do some people, who spend their entire lives managing people, end
up despised, or at the most tolerated by those very people? In spite of being
in the highest positions of power, why do some people simply not command
genuine respect?
Theodore Roosevelt famously commented on the difference
between a leader and a boss, saying “The leader leads and the boss drives”.
This can sum up why leaders are
admired and followed willingly, while mere bosses are not. Leadership, in fact,
has nothing to do with position and authority and everything to do with
inspirational behavior and actions.
“Leadership is not a title. It’s behavior. Live it.”- Robin Sharma
Leadership as a concept has
fascinated numerous thinkers and management gurus over the years. Theories
attempting to explain and define leadership have abounded.
Starting from the early theories
of Trait and Behavior, to the later ones of Transformational and Distributed Leadership,
almost every aspect of leadership has been touched upon in management
literature. While earlier thinkers believed that leadership was based on
certain inborn characteristics in people, and that leaders were born, not made,
later theories focused on the environment and situations that generated
leadership behavior.
So what are the various theories
of leadership over the years?
Some early theories:
·
Trait
theory, originally propounded by Charles Bird, and later by Stogdill
·
Behavioral
theory, based on research studies conducted by the Ohio State University and
University of Michigan
·
Management
or Leadership Grid theory, founded
by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Moulton
·
Situational
or Contingency theory, developed by Fred Fiedler
·
Path-goal
theory, proposed by Robert House
·
Participation
Theory, by Victor Vroom and Phillip Yetton
So let’s start from the beginning.
The Trait
Theory. Charles Bird, in the Trait Theory, lists some traits that could
lead to successful leadership, that include:
o
Good personality
o
Intellectual ability
o
Initiative
o
Maturity
o
Self-confidence
o
Flexibility
o
Willingness to accept responsibility
o
Fairness
Stogdill further classified the following traits and skills:
o
Adaptability
o
Decision
o
Ambition
o
Persistence
o
Energy
o
Dominance
o
Tolerance to stress
o
Diplomacy
o
Intelligence
o
Social skills
o
Conceptual skills
While some of the specified
traits like energy, self-esteem, and cognitive abilities are definitely linked
to leadership behavior, the Trait theory has been found to be faulty. Critics argue that it relies too much on
inborn traits, and measures traits only after a person has already become a
leader. While some traits may work in some situations, they may not in some
others. It is also difficult to draw a
common list of personal traits found in every leader.
Yet, despite these limitations,
the concept of individual leadership traits or leadership potential works to
this day. You tend to admire people like Barrack Obama and Ratan Tata for their
personal charisma as much as their contribution in their area of work.
Behavioral
Theory
As opposed to traits, this theory
that resulted from the studies of Ohio State University and University of
Michigan, focuses on activities of leaders to identify behavioral patterns that
affected employee satisfaction and performance. As per this theory, a
particular behavior of a leader gives greater satisfaction to followers, so
they recognize him as a good leader.
The Leadership Behaviour Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) assessed
leadership styles from the responses of the subordinates or followers, and the Leader Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ)
assessed the leader’s own perception of his/her style.
The following two mutually independent leadership behaviors
were identified:
o Initiating
Structure Behavior (IS), i.e., the leader allocates tasks and sets up formal
communication channels
o Consideration
Behavior (C), i.e., shows concern for followers and creates a supportive work
climate
A leader may be high IS or a high C, or both.
Rensis Likert conducted the
University of Michigan studies to clearly define two types of leadership
behavior:
o
Task-centred Leader Behaviour
o
Employee-centred Leader Behaviour
Which simply means that your boss or
leader is either simply focused on achieving organizational goals and tasks,
and pushes you for the same, or that he/she is concerned only about you and
other team mates, and seeks to establish supportive relationships at the
workplace.
The Managerial
Grid
Concern for people and concern for production form the two
basic patterns of leadership behavior, as per this theory propounded by Blake
and Moulton.
Here, as per the grid, 1.1 is
impoverished management lacking in both task and relationship considerations.
On the other extreme end of the grid is 9.9 which is the ideal leadership
behavior, and results in team management.
Let’s say, you have a boss whom you
gel with, and who gives you a free rein to do things as you wish. You love your
boss, and so do others in your team, but management frequently tells him to
pull up his socks. And at the end of the first quarter, you discover you are
way behind your targets. Your boss is soon shown the door for repeated
under-performance. Your boss is the typical Country-Club manager.
Situational
Theory or Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
This theory moves away from the personality
of the leader to the relationship with the group or followers and emphasizes
that the situation or contingency decides the best style of leadership.
In a nutshell it says:
•
Leadership style varies according to situation
•
No single style of leading works in all
situations
•
It is dependent on
▫
Subordinate considerations
▫
Supervisor considerations
▫
Task considerations
So your boss who is otherwise quite
pleasant and easy going suddenly turns into a monster wielding a stick when a
critical project has to be completed. She repeatedly supervises you,
communicates the urgency of your task, and is behind your back most of the
time. You wonder what the matter with her is. Nothing. She is simply switching
her leadership style to authoritarian as per the contingency or situation in
hand.
Least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale: Fiedler fixes the leadership style of the leader by the LPC
scale, an instrument for measuring an individual’s leadership orientation. The
LPC scale asks a leader to describe the person with whom they have worked least
well. Individuals rating their least preferred coworker more favorably on these
scales are more relationship motivated, and those who rate the coworker negatively
are task oriented. Therefore, the scale measures the leader’s orientation and
motivation.
Path-Goal
Theory
An individual will do something
only if it leads to attaining his/her goals, and if he/she appreciates the
payoff in doing the work. This is the crux of this theory. A leader facilitates
achievement of individual goals while aligning these to the organization’s
objectives. So leadership behavior is motivational, it coaches and supports
followers.
•
Leader’s work is to guide followers in attaining
their goals and integrating individual goals to group/organizational objectives
•
Influence the subordinate’s perception of the benefits
in achieving organizational/group goals
Robert House identified four
leadership styles:
▫
Directive, where the leader tells subordinates
what to do, gives guidance
▫
Supportive, where he/she shows concern towards
subordinates
▫
Participative, where subordinates are consulted
in decision making, or asked to take a decision themselves
▫ Achievement-oriented, where the leader helps
subordinates in setting and accomplishing goals
The leader’s style is flexible
and he/she may use any or all of the above styles depending on the situation.
The theory was later revised to
emphasize that the leader also makes up for deficiencies in subordinates and in
the work environment.
To give an example, let’s say your team has to submit a
market survey report by a scheduled date, and there is a lack of sufficient
data. Also two team members are absent just before the submission date. Your
leader will strive to attain the required information from all possible
sources, provide guidance and inputs to you all, and actively help you and
other team members complete the report in time. In short, he/she has helped you
achieve your goals.
Situational
Leadership Model
This
model was developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard. The focus of this model
is on followers and their progress from low competence and commitment
individuals to high competence and commitment ones.
Salient Features:
- This model focuses on followers.
- It suggests that leaders should adopt different approaches according to the type of followers.
- It proposes a 'continuum' of leadership adaptation in response to the development of followers.
Followers are classified into the following categories:
- Those who
have low Competence and low Confidence and commitment
- Those who
have low Competence but high Confidence and commitment
- Those who
have high Competence but low Confidence and commitment
- Those who
have high Competence and high Confidence and commitment
Leaders need to adapt their leadership approach according to follower
willingness and ability.
The continuum progresses from:
To
illustrate with an example, in a group of people there are two workers who have
low confidence and are generally unwilling to do any work. With these two
people, the leader will specify firmly what needs to be done (Telling). One
worker is very enthusiastic and willing to put in his best, but he is a
newcomer and doesn’t know much about the job. Here the selling approach will be
used by the leader (explaining the task, methods and remaining available for
guidance). Another person may be very competent, but may lack confidence and
willingness. Here the leader will encourage inputs, and appreciate efforts
(Participating). With the remaining two workers who are competent as well as
committed, the delegating approach will be used (giving responsibility for
planning and execution of the task).
Participation
Theory
Here again, the situational model of leadership behavior is
stressed. Vroom and Yetton defined the following styles of leadership for
making decisions.
So the process moves
away from autocratic decision making to group decision making where each team
member participates in deciding the final course of action.
Participative leadership works best
in situations where multiple opinions are required like marketing a new product
or deciding on a new training program. The style works in creative set-ups like
advertising or software design. However, when decisions need to be taken fast,
this style proves cumbersome.
The early theories of Leadership
are relevant to this date and shape many leadership development programs that
focus on imbibing leadership skills to participants.
Comments
Post a Comment