Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-1 Chapter 3 Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-2 Learning Objectives  Identify the three major eras in the study of leadership and their contributions to modern leadership  Explain the methods, results, shortcomings, and contributions of the trait and behavioral approaches to leadership and identify their impact on current approaches  Present the principles of a contingency approach to leadership  Discuss the most significant early theories of leadership and their implications for current theory and practice of leadership

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-3 Eras of Modern Leadership  The trait era – 1800s to mid 1940s  Focus on leader personality  The behavior era – mid 1940s to 1970s  Focus on leader behavior  The contingency era – early 1960s to present  Focus on understanding both the leader and the leadership situation

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-4 The Trait Era – Assumptions and Findings Assumptions  Leaders are born  Leaders have special characteristics and traits  Leaders and followers have different traits Findings  No single trait or set of traits clearly define leaders  Traits play a minimal role  Traits are not the dominant factor in leadership

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-5 The Behavior Era – Assumptions and Findings Assumptions  Behaviors rather than traits matter  Behaviors are observable and measureable  Behaviors can be taught Findings  Key behaviors are task/structuring and relationships/ consideration  Behaviors alone do not determine effective leadership  No clear findings as to which behaviors are most effective

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-6 Examples of Major Leadership Behaviors Task – Structuring  Set goals  Clarify expectations  Set schedules and timelines  Assign tasks Relationships - Consideration  Show empathy and understanding  Be friendly and approachable  Allow participation  Nurture followers

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-7 The Contingency Era – Assumptions and Findings  No one best way to lead  Simple traits or behaviors alone do not explain or predict leadership  Understanding both leader trait/ behavior and situation is needed  Personal and situational factors affect leadership effectiveness

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-8 Fiedler’s Contingency Model  Leadership effectiveness is a function of the match or fit between leader’s style and the leadership situation  The leaders’ style has a trait-like quality and cannot be changed from one situation to another  The leader must change the situation to fit his/her style

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-9 Elements of Fiedler’s Contingency Model Leadership  The leaders’ style  Task or relationship motivation measured by the LPC scale  Situational control  Leader-member relations  Task structure  Position power

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-10 Task and Relationship-Motivated Leaders Task- Motivated (Low- LPC)  Draws self-esteem from task completion  Focuses on task first  Can be harsh with failing followers  Considers competence a key follower trait  Enjoys details  Relationship- Motivated (High-LPC)  Draws self-esteem from interpersonal relationships  Focuses on people first  Likes to please others  Considers loyalty to be key follower trait  Gets bored with details

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-11 Fiedler’s Contingency Model - Predictions SITUATIONAL CONTROL GROUPPERFORMANCEGROUPPERFORMANCE High Low HIGH MODERATELOW GOOD BAD HIGHLOW HIGH LOW HIGH LOW HIGH LOW Low-LPC High-LPC HIGH Leader-Member Relations Task structure Position Power

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-12 Practical Implications of Fiedler’s Contingency Model  Leaders must understand their own style and their leadership situation  Leaders should focus on changing their leadership situation to match their style rather than try to change their style  A good relationship with followers is key to a leaders’ ability to lead  Leaders can seek training to compensate for lack of task structure

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-13 The Normative Decision Model  Leaders are effective when they use decision styles that match the situation  Leaders can learn to change and use different decision styles  Understanding the leadership situation is essential to effectiveness

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-14 Elements of the Normative Decision Model  The leaders’ decision style  Autocratic  Consultative  Group/delegation  Situational contingency factors  Quality of the decision  Acceptance of decision by subordinates

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-15 Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model  Quality requirements (QR)  Commitment requirement (CR)  Leader information (LI)  Structure of the problem (ST)  Commitment probability (CP)  Goal congruence (GC)  Employee conflict (CO)  Subordinate information (SI)

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-16 Practical Implications of the Normative Decision Model  Leaders must understand their leadership situation  Leaders must learn different decision styles  Participation is not always desirable  Leaders’ must pay attention to their followers’ needs and reactions when making decisions

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-17 Path-Goal Theory  The leaders’ primary role is to motivate followers to complete their task by removing obstacles  The leader must change his/her behaviors based on needs of the followers

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-18 Path-Goal Theory Effectiveness: Employee satisfaction and motivation Leaders’ Actions: 3 Focus on obstacle removal 3 Become comfortable with both task and consideration behaviors 3Understand followers’ perception Leader structuring and consideration Situational contingencies:  Task structure  Employee need for autonomy

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-19 Practical Implications of Path- Goal Theory  Leaders must understand their followers’ perception of the task  Leaders must take their followers’ need for challenge and autonomy into consideration  When followers need challenge or the task is challenging, leaders must avoid being directive  When the task is routine, boring or stressful, leaders must be supportive

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-20 Substitute for Leadership Model (SLM)  There are some situations where leaders are not needed  Various factors can substitute for leadership behaviors or neutralize the leader’s actions  Leaders must learn to recognize situations and use appropriate behaviors

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-21 SLM: Follower Characteristics  Experience and training substitute for leader structuring  Follower professionalism substitute for leader consideration and structuring  Lack of value for goals neutralizes leader consideration and structuring

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-22 SLM: Task Characteristics  Unambiguous tasks substitute for leader structuring  Direct feedback from task substitutes for leader structuring and consideration  Challenging tasks substitute for leader consideration

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-23 SLM: Organizational Characteristics  A cohesive team substitutes for leader structuring and consideration  Leaders’ lack of power neutralizes structuring and consideration  Standardization and formalization substitute for leader structuring  Organizational rigidity neutralizes leader structuring  Physical distance from followers neutralizes structuring and consideration

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-24 Practical Implications of the SLM  Leaders can use various substitutes to free up their time or to empower and develop followers  Technology can support the development of substitutes  Teams and autonomous work groups can use substitutes positively

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-25 Leader-Member Exchange Model (LMX)  Leadership is a personal relationship between leaders and each of their followers  Leaders do not treat every follower the same way  Every follower does not experience leadership the same way  Leaders have closer and richer relationships with followers in their in- group than with those who are in out-group

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-26 LMX F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F4F4 F4F4 F3F3 F3F3 F1F1 F1F1 F2F2 F2F2 F5F5 F5F5 F F Leader In-Group Out-Group F F Follower/ Subordinate

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-27 Stages of LMX Development of Trust Creation of Emotional Bond Testing and Assessment

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-28 Practical Implications of LMX  Avoid highly differentiated groups  Keep membership fluid and dynamic  Maintain different in-groups for different activities  Base in-group membership on performance and potential  Review criteria for in-group membership regularly  Consider culture when determining membership

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-29 Leadership Challenge  India is a vertical collectivistic culture where group membership determines one’s worth  Office manager is acting in accordance with his culture  Carefully evaluate the consequences of not hiring the “cousin”  In-groups are formed differently in different cultures

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-30 Leading Change: Goodnight  Challenging work, flexible hours, and many benefits keep employees happy  Goodnight believes in removing obstacles to let employees do their job  He provides opportunities for challenge and performance  The role of the leader at SAS is to facilitate employee performance

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-31 Leadership in Action: Caring Dictator  Highly successful leader and organization  Hartnett is autocratic and non-participative  Hartnett provides clear goals and rules  Caring father figure  Careful selection of managers and employees who fit the organization  Leadership works because it fits the situation

Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 3-32 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.