1. WEEK 3

3. Ideally, all managers should be leaders.
Leader - Someone who can influence others and who has managerial authority.
Leadership - What leaders do; the process of influencing a group to achieve goals.
Ideally, all managers should be leaders.
Leadership is the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of a vision or set of goals. The source of this influence may be formal, such as that provided by managerial rank in an organization. But not all leaders are managers, nor, for that matter, are all managers leaders. Just because an organization provides its managers with certain formal rights is no assurance they will lead effectively.
Nonsanctioned leadership—the ability to influence that arises outside the formal structure of the organization—is often as important or more important than formal influence. In other words, leaders can emerge from within a group as well as by formal appointment.
Organizations need strong leadership and strong management for optimal effectiveness. We need leaders today to challenge the status quo, create visions of the future, and inspire organizational members to want to achieve the visions. We also need managers to formulate detailed plans, create efficient organizational structures, and oversee day-to-day operations.

4. Early Leadership Theories: Trait and Skills Theories
Research focused on identifying personal characteristics that differentiated leaders from non-leaders was unsuccessful.
Later research on the leadership process identified seven traits associated with successful leadership:
Drive, the desire to lead, honesty and integrity, self-confidence, intelligence, job-relevant knowledge, and extraversion
Trait theories of leadership thus focus on personal qualities and characteristics. The search for personality, social, physical, or intellectual attributes that differentiate leaders from non-leaders goes back to the earliest stages of leadership research.
Early research efforts to isolate leadership traits resulted in a number of dead ends. A review in the late 1960s of 20 different studies identified nearly 80 leadership traits, but only 5 were common to 4 or more of the investigations. By the 1990s, after numerous studies and analyses, about the best we could say was that most leaders “are not like other people,” but the particular traits that characterized them varied a great deal from review to review.

5. Early Leadership Theories: Style (Behavioral) Theories
University of Iowa Studies (Kurt Lewin)
Identified three leadership styles:
Autocratic style: centralized authority, low participation
Democratic style: involvement, high participation, feedback
Laissez faire style: hands-off management
Research findings: mixed results
No specific style was consistently better for producing better performance.
Employees were more satisfied under a democratic leader than under an autocratic leader.

6. Early Leadership Theories: Style (Behavioral) Theories
University of Michigan Studies
Identified two dimensions of leader behavior:
Employee oriented: emphasizing personal relationships
Production oriented: emphasizing task accomplishment
Research findings:
Leaders who are employee oriented are strongly associated with high performance.

7. Early Leadership Theories: Style (Behavioral) Theories
Ohio State Studies
Identified two dimensions of leader behavior:
Initiating structure: the role of the leader in defining his or her role and the roles of group members.
Consideration: the leader’s mutual trust and respect for group members’ ideas and feelings.
While trait research provides a basis for selecting the right people for leadership, behavioral theories of leadership imply that we can train people to be leaders.
The most comprehensive theories resulted from the Ohio State Studies in the late 1940s, which sought to identify independent dimensions of leader behavior. Beginning with more than a thousand dimensions, the studies narrowed the list to two that substantially accounted for most of the leadership behavior described by employees: initiating structure and consideration.
Initiating structure is the extent to which a leader is likely to define and structure his or her role and those of employees in the search for goal attainment. It includes behavior that attempts to organize work, work relationships, and goals. A leader high in initiating structure is someone who “assigns group members to particular tasks,” “expects workers to maintain definite standards of performance,” and “emphasizes the meeting of deadlines.”
Consideration is the extent to which a person’s job relationships are characterized by mutual trust, respect for employees’ ideas, and regard for their feelings. A leader high in consideration helps employees with personal problems, is friendly and approachable, treats all employees as equals, and expresses appreciation and support.

9. Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid
Appraises leadership styles using two dimensions:
Concern for people
Concern for production
Places managerial styles in five categories:
Impoverished management
Task management
Middle-of-the-road management
Country club management
Team management

10. Authority–Compliance (9,1)
The 9,1 style of leadership places heavy emphasis on task and job requirements, and less emphasis on people, except to the extent that people are tools for getting the job done. Communicating with subordinates is not emphasized except for the purpose of giving instructions about the task. This style is result driven, and people are regarded as tools to that end. The 9,1 leader is often seen as controlling, demanding, hard driving, and overpowering.
Country-Club Management (1,9)
The 1,9 style represents a low concern for task accomplishment coupled with a high concern for interpersonal relationships. Deemphasizing production, 1,9 leaders stress the attitudes and feelings of people, making sure the personal and social needs of followers are met. They try to create a positive climate by being agreeable, eager to help, comforting, and uncontroversial.
Impoverished Management (1,1)
The 1,1 style is representative of a leader who is unconcerned with both the task and interpersonal relationships. This type of leader goes through the motions of being a leader but acts uninvolved and withdrawn. The 1,1 leader often has little contact with followers and could be described as indifferent, noncommittal, resigned, and apathetic
Middle-of-the-Road Management (5,5)
The 5,5 style describes leaders who are compromisers, who have an intermediate concern for the task and an intermediate concern for the people who do the task. They find a balance between taking people into account and still emphasizing the work requirements. Their compromising style gives up some of the push for production and some of the attention to employee needs. To arrive at an equilibrium, the 5,5 leader avoids conflict and emphasizes moderate levels of production and interpersonal relationships. This type of leader often is described as one who is expedient, prefers the middle ground, soft-pedals disagreement, and swallows convictions in the interest of “progress.”
Team Management (9,9)
The 9,9 style places a strong emphasis on both tasks and interpersonal relationships. It promotes a high degree of participation and teamwork in the organization and satisfies a basic need in employees to be involved and committed to their work. The following are some of the phrases that could be used to describe the 9,9 leader: stimulates participation, acts determined, gets issues into the open, makes priorities clear, follows through, behaves open-mindedly, and enjoys working.

11. Paternalism
Paternalism / maternalism refers to a leader who uses both 1,9 and 9,1 styles but does not integrate the two. This is the “caring dictator” who acts graciously but does so for the purpose of goal accomplishment.

12. Opportunism
Opportunism refers to a leader who uses any combination of the basic five styles for the purpose of personal advancement. An opportunistic leader will adapt and shift his or her leadership style to gain personal advantage, putting self-interest ahead of other priorities.

15. HOW DOES THE STYLE APPROACH WORK?
The style approach provides a framework for assessing leadership in a comprehensive way, as behavior with a task and relationship dimension. The style approach works not by telling leaders how to behave, but by describing the major components of their behavior. An example may help explain how the style approach works. Imagine two college classrooms on the first day of class…
Professor Smith comes to class, introduces herself, takes attendance, goes over the syllabus, explains the first assignment, and dismisses the class. Professor Jones comes to class and, after introducing herself and handing out the syllabus, tries to help the students to get to know one another by having each of the students describe a little about themselves, their majors, and their favorite nonacademic activities. The leadership styles of professors Smith and Jones are quite different. The preponderance of what Professor Smith does could be labeled task behavior, and the majority of what Professor Jones does could be labeled relationship behavior. The style approach provides a way to inform the professors about the differences in their behaviors. Depending on the response of the students to their style, the professors may want to change their behavior to improve their teaching on the first day of class.
Overall, the style approach offers a means of assessing in a general way the behaviors of leaders. It reminds leaders that their impact on others occurs through the tasks they perform as well as in the relationships they create.

16. Strengths and Weakneses of Style Approaches
The style approach broadened the scope of leadership research to include the behaviors of leaders and what they do in various situations.
The style approach is validated by a mass of research studies that offer a possible approach to understanding the leadership process.
Whenever leadership occurs, the leader is acting out both task and relationship behaviors; the key to being an effective leader often rests on how the leader balances these two behaviors. Together they form the core of the leadership process
Based on the style approach, leaders can assess their actions and determine how they may want to change to improve their leadership style.

17. Strengths and Weakneses of Style Approaches
First, the research on styles has not adequately shown how leaders’ styles are associated with performance outcomes
This approach has failed to find a universal style of leadership that could be effective in almost every situation.
The style approach is that it implies that the most effective leadership style is the high–high style