1. Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership
Chapter Three
Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern Leadership

2. Three Eras of Modern Leadership Research
The trait Era – 1800s to mid 1940s
The behavior era – mid 1940s to 1970s
The contingency era – early 1960s to present

3. The Trait Era
Leaders are born; they have special characteristics and traits
Some traits are related to leadership
No one trait defines leaders or effective leaders
Although traits play a role, they are not the dominant factor in leadership

4. The Behavior Era Behaviors can be learned
Two key categories of behavior: Task and Relationship Orientations
Behaviors alone do not determine effective leadership
Not clear which behaviors are most effective

5. Examples of Major Leadership Behaviors
Structuring/Task
Set goals
Clarify expectations
Set schedules
Assign tasks
Relationship/Consideration
Show empathy and understanding
Be friendly and approachable
Allow participation
Nurture followers

6. Contingency Era No one best way to lead
Simple traits or behaviors alone do not fully explain leadership success
Understanding both leader traits/behaviors and the situation is critical
Personal and situational factors affect leadership effectiveness

7. Elements of Fiedler’s Contingency Model
The leader’s style:
Task or relationship motivation measured by the LPC scale
Situational control:
Leader-member relations
Task structure
Position power

8. 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 to be key employee 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 employee trait
Gets bored with details

9. Fiedler’s Contingency ModelU P E F M A N C
High
Low
Low-LPC
High-LPC
Leader-Member
Relations
Task Structure
Position Power
GOOD
BAD
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MODERATE
LOW
SITUATIONAL CONTROL

10. Implications of Fiedler’s Contingency Model
Leaders must understand their own style (Task vs. Relationship) and their leadership situation (Sit Con)
Leaders should focus on changing the situation to match their style
Leaders can’t change their leadership style
Leaders can seek training to compensate for task ambiguity

11. Elements of the Normative Decision Model
The leader’s decision-making style:
Autocratic
Consultative
Group
Delegation
Contingency factors

12. Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model
Quality requirement (QR)
How important is the quality of the decision?
Commitment requirement (CR)
How important is employee commitment to the decision?
Leader information (LI)
Does leader have enough information to make a decision?
Structure of the problem (ST)
Is the problem clear?

13. Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model
Commitment probability (CP)
How likely is employee commitment if leader makes the decision alone?
Goal congruence (GC)
Do employees agree with organizational goals?
Employee conflict (CO)
Is there conflict among employees over the solution?
Subordinate information (SI)
Do employees have enough information to make a high-quality decision?

14. Implications of the Normative Decision Model
Leaders must understand the situation and how to use different decision styles
Leaders can change leadership styles
Participation can waste time and is not always desirable
Leaders must pay attention to their followers’ needs and reactions when making decisions

15. Path-Goal Theory Leader structuring and consideration
Leader’s Actions:
Focus on obstacle
removal
Employ task and
consideration behaviors
Understand followers’
needs
Effectiveness:
Employee
satisfaction and
motivation
Situational
contingencies:
Task structure
Employee need
for autonomy

16. 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 account
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 to motivate their
followers

17. Attributional Models
Employees Are More Likely To Be Held Responsible When:
The consequences of their actions are severe
When they have a mediocre track record in other similar situations
When other employees are successful in similar situations
The employee is defensive
The manager’s success depends on the employee’s good performance

18. Implications of Attributional Models
Leaders must be aware of their biases
Collecting objective data from multiple sources helps in evaluating subordinates
Considering both situational and personal causes of employee actions is essential

19. Leadership Substitutes: Follower Characteristics
Experience and training substitute for
leader structuring
Professionalism substitutes for
leader consideration and structuring
Lack of agreement with leader’s goals neutralizes leader consideration and structuring

20. Leadership Substitutes: Task Characteristics
Unambiguous tasks substitute for
leader structuring
Direct feedback from the task
substitutes for leader consideration and
structuring
Challenging task substitutes for
leader consideration

21. Leadership Substitutes: Organizational Characteristics
A cohesive team substitutes for leader
consideration and structuring
Leader’s lack of power neutralizes leader
Standardization and formalization substitute
for leader structuring
Organizational rigidity neutralizes leader
structuring
Physical distance neutralizes leader

22. Implications of Leadership Substitutes
Leaders can use various substitutes to free up their time for other activities or develop and empower followers
Technology can support the development of substitutes
Teams and autonomous work groups can use substitutes positively

23. Leader-Member Exchange LMX
Out-group F
In-Group F
Leader F
Follower

24. Stages of LMX Creation of Emotional Bond Development of Trust
Testing and
Assessment

25. Implications of LMX
In order to use in-groups effectively, leaders should:
Base in-group membership on current performance and/or future potential
Review criteria for in-group membership
Set clear performance-related guidelines for in-group membership
Keep membership fluid and dynamic
Maintain different in-groups for different activities