Leadership Mrs. McMahon and Mr. Thornberg Fall 2006/Spring 2007

Current Leadership Theories Great Man Theory Trait Theory Behavioral Theories Participative Leadership Situational Leadership Contingency Theories Transactional Leadership Transformational Leadership

Great ManTheory Assumptions: Leaders are born not made. Great Leaders will arise if there is a need

Great Man Theory Description: Study of people who were already great leaders Aristocratic Leadership and breeding Mythic domain in times of need great men will arise – Churchill, Eisenhower, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha

Great Man Theory Discussion: Gender issues not on table Most researchers male

Trait Theory Assumptions: People are born with inherited traits Some traits are particularly suited to leadership People who make good leaders have the right combination of traits

Trait Theory Description: Early research based on focus of the day >inherited traits Attention focused on finding those traits, often by studying successful leaders If people could be found with these traits they, too, could become great leaders

Stogdill(1974) identified the following traits and skills Traits: Adaptable to situations Alert to the social environment Ambitious and achievement oriented Assertive Cooperative Dominant Energetic Persistent Self confident Tolerant of stress Willing to assume responsibility

Traits – Stogdill (1974) Skills: Clever Conceptually skilled Creative Diplomatic and Tactful Fluent in speaking Knowledgeable about group task Organized (administrative ability) Persuasive Socially Skilled

Traits (con’t) McCall and Lombardo (1983) identified four primary traits by which leaders could succeed or ‘derail” Emotional Stability Admitting Error Good Interpersonal Skills Intellectual Breadth

Traits (con’t) Discussion: Many different studies and they agree only in the general saintly qualities Inherited traits were sidelined for a long time in favor of situational factors Twin studies have now shown us that far more is inherited – perhaps a leadership gene exists

Behavioral Theory Assumptions: Leaders can be made rather than born Successful leadership is based in definable, learnable behavior

Behavior Theory Description: Behavior Theories do not seek inborn traits or capabilities, rather they look at what leaders actually do Leadership becomes teachable

Behavior Theory (con’t) Discussion: Opens the floodgates to leadership development rather than psychometric assessment With a large enough study, you can correlate statistically significant behaviors with success. You can also identify behaviors which lead to failure

Behavior Theory subset - Role Theory Assumptions: People define roles for themselves People form expectations about the roles People encourage others to act within the role expectations

Behavior subset - Role Theory Description: We all have schemas about the role of leaders We send signals to leaders which influence leaders Role conflict can occurr when people have differing expectations of their leaders

Behavior Theory subset – Managerial Grid Description: Defined by Blake and Merton in the early 1960s Impoverished Management – lazy Authority-Compliance – focus on task Country Club Management – concern for people low focus on task Team Management – People commited to task and leader committed to people

Management Grid Concern for People Country Club Management Team Management Middle of the Road Management Impoverished Management Authority Compliance Concern for Production TASK

Behavior subset – Management Grid Discussion: This is a well known grid that uses Task vs. Person preference that appear in the Michigan Leadership Studies and Ohio State Leadership Studies

Participative Leadership Assumptions: Involve in decision making improves understanding of issues People are more committed to actions People are less competitive Social Commitment greater Several people deciding make better decisions than one

Participative (con’t) Autocratic Leader Leader Proposes Decision, listens to feed back, then decides Team Proposes decision, Leader has final decision Joint Decision With Team as equals Full Delegation Of the Decision to Team

Participative (con’t) Discussion: This can also be known as consultation, empowerment, joint decision making, democratic leadership, Management by objective, and power-sharing. Participative leadership can be a sham if leaders ignore opinions given to them

Participative subset – Lewin’s Leadership Styles Description: Kurt Lewin did leadership decision experiments in 1939 and identified 3 different styles of leadership –Autocratic –The leader takes the decisions without consulting others. This caused the most discontent –Democratic – Most appreciated people are involved but can be problematic when there is a wide range of opinions

Lewin (con’t) Laissez-Faire – Minimize leaders part. Works best when people are capable and motivated

Lewin (con’t) Discussion: Lewin discovered the most effective style was Democratic. Excessive autocratic styles lead to revolution, Whilst under laissez-faire, people were not coherent in their work and did not put in the energy that they did when they were actively led

Situational Leadership Assumptions: The best action of the leader depends on a range of situational factors

Situational Leadership (con’t) Style: The leader’s perception of the follower and the situation will affect what they do rather than the truth of the situation Leaders here work on such factors as external relationships, acquisition of resources, managing demands on the group and managing the structures and culture of the group

Situational Leadership (con’t) Discussion: Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) identified 3 factors that lead to the leaders action –1. forces in the situation –2. forces in the follower –3. forces in the leader

Contingency Theory Assumptions: Leaders ability to lead is contingent upon various situational factors, including the leaders preferred style the capabilities and behaviors of the followers and also various situational factors

Contingency Theory (con’t) Description: Contingency theories are a class of behavior theory that contend there is no best way of leading and that leadership style that is effective in one situation may not be successful in others

Contingency Theory (con’t) Discussion: Situational Theory tends to focus more on the behaviors a leader should adopt, whereas contingency theory takes a broader view that includes the contingent factors about leader capability and other variables in the situation.