PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH

Define what is leadership

Leadership has become a buzzword. However, there are
multitudinous definitions of leadership and we need to understand
what exactly it is.
Explain its impact on followers
A popular saying is that Employees dont leave organizations.
Employees leave managers.
Its a truism that a leaders acts can shape the hearts and minds of
his/her followers. And yet, when followers are unmotivated, or badly
behaved, the leader often punishes such behavior, instead of
looking inward to determine whether he/she is responsible for his
subordinates behavior.
The purpose of this research is to determine the extent to which
effective leadership affects the work ethic and motivation of
employees.
WHO IS AN EFFECTIVE LEADER?
A review of the leadership literature reveals an evolving series of
'schools of thought' from Great Man and Trait theories to
Transformational leadership.
THEORY
Great Man Theory
Trait Theory
Behaviorist Theory
Situational Leadership
Theory
Contingency Theory
Transactional Theory
Transformational Theory

AN EFFECTIVE LEADER
Is born, not made
Has some positive or virtuous
human attributes
Acts a certain way
Acts a certain way in a
certain situation

Relates well with his

followers
Envisions and implements
change

Whilst early theories tend to focus upon the characteristics and

behaviours of successful leaders, later theories begin to consider
the role of followers and the contextual nature of leadership.
Great Man
Theories

Based on the belief that leaders are exceptional

people, born with innate qualities, destined to
lead. The use of the term 'man' was intentional

since until the latter part of the twentieth century

leadership was thought of as a concept which is
primarily male, military and Western. This led to
the next school of Trait Theories

Trait Theories

The lists of traits or qualities associated with

leadership exist in abundance and continue to be
produced. They draw on virtually all the adjectives
in the dictionary which describe some positive or
virtuous human attribute, from ambition to zest for
life

Behaviourist
Theories

These concentrate on what leaders actually do

rather than on their qualities. Different patterns of
behaviour are observed and categorised as 'styles
of leadership'. This area has probably attracted
most attention from practising managers

Situational
Leadership

This approach sees leadership as specific to the

situation in which it is being exercised. For
example, whilst some situations may require an
autocratic style, others may need a more
participative approach. It also proposes that there
may be differences in required leadership styles at
different levels in the same organisation

Contingency
Theory

This is a refinement of the situational viewpoint

and focuses on identifying the situational variables
which best predict the most appropriate or
effective leadership style to fit the particular
circumstances

Transactional
Theory

This approach emphasises the importance of the

relationship between leader and followers,
focusing on the mutual benefits derived from a
form of 'contract' through which the leader
delivers such things as rewards or recognition in
return for the commitment or loyalty of the
followers

Transformation The central concept here is change and the role of

al Theory

leadership in envisioning and implementing the

transformation of organisational performance

From Great Man to Transformational Leadership

Each of these theories takes a rather individualistic perspective of
the leader, although a school of thought gaining increasing
recognition is that of dispersed leadership. This approach, with its
foundations in sociology, psychology and politics rather than
management science, views leadership as a process that is diffuse
throughout an organisation rather than lying solely with the formally
designated leader. The emphasis thus shifts from developing
leaders to developing leaderful organisations with a collective
responsibility for leadership.
The Great Man Approach to Leadership
The Trait Approach arose from the Great Man theory as a way of
identifying the key characteristics of successful leaders. It was
believed that through this approach critical leadership traits could
be isolated and that people with such traits could then be recruited,
selected, and installed into leadership positions. This approach was
common in the military and is still used as a set of criteria to select
candidates for commissions.

1 The Trait Approach to Leadership

The Trait Approach arose from the Great Man theory as a way of
identifying the key characteristics of successful leaders. It was
believed that through this approach critical leadership traits could
be isolated and that people with such traits could then be recruited,
selected, and installed into leadership positions. This approach was
common in the military and is still used as a set of criteria to select
candidates for commissions.
The problem with the trait approach lies in the fact that almost as
many traits as studies undertaken were identified. After several
years of such research, it became apparent that no consistent traits
could be identified. Although some traits were found in a
considerable number of studies, the results
A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 6

were generally inconclusive. Some leaders might have possessed

certain traits but the absence of them did not necessarily mean that
the person was not a leader.
Although there was little consistency in the results of the various
trait studies, however, some traits did appear more frequently than
others, including: technical skill, friendliness, task motivation,
application to task, group task supportiveness, social skill, emotional
control, administrative skill, general charisma, and intelligence. Of
these, the most widely explored has tended to be charisma.
The table below lists the main leadership traits and skills identified
by Stogdill in 1974.
Traits

- Adaptable to situations

- Alert to social
environment

- Ambitious and
achievement-orientated

- Assertive

- Cooperative

- Decisive

- Dependable

- Dominant (desire to
influence others)

- Energetic (high activity

level)

- Persistent

- Self-confident

- Tolerant of stress

- Willing to assume
responsibility

Skills

- Clever (intelligent)

- Conceptuallyskilled

- Creative

- Diplomatic and tactful

- Fluent in speaking

- Knowledgeable about
group task

- Organised
(administrative ability)

- Persuasive

- Socially skilled

Leadership Skills and Traits (Stogdill, 1974)

4.2 The Behavioural School
The results of the trait studies were inconclusive. Traits, amongst
other things, were hard to measure. How, for example, do we
measure traits such as honesty, integrity, loyalty, or diligence?
Another approach in the study of leadership had to be found.
After the publication of the late Douglas McGregor's classic book The
Human Side of Enterprise in 1960, attention shifted to behavioural
theories. McGregor was a teacher, researcher, and consultant
whose work was considered to be "on the cutting edge" of managing
people. He influenced all the behavioural theories, which emphasize
focusing on human relationships, along with output and
performance.
4.2.1 McGregors Theory X & Theory Y Managers
Although not strictly speaking a theory of leadership, the leadership
strategy of effectively-used participative management proposed in
Douglas McGregor's book has had a tremendous impact on
managers. The most publicized concept is McGregor's thesis that
leadership strategies are influenced by a leader's assumptions
about human nature. As a result of his experience as a consultant,
McGregor summarised two contrasting sets of assumptions made by
managers in industry.
Theory X managers
believe that:

The average human

being has an inherent
dislike of work and
will avoid it if

Theory Y managers believe that:

work is as natural as play or rest,

and the average human being,
under proper conditions, learns
not only to accept but to seek
responsibility.

possible.

Because of this
human characteristic,

most people must be

coerced, controlled,
directed, or threatened with
punishment to get them to
put forth adequate effort to
achieve organizational
objectives.

The expenditure of physical and

mental effort in

People will exercise self-direction

and self-control to achieve
objectives to which they are
committed.

The capacity to exercise a

relatively high level of

 The average human being

prefers to be directed,
wishes to avoid
responsibility, has relatively
little ambition, and wants
security above all else.

imagination, ingenuity, and

creativity in the solution of
organizational problems is widely,
not narrowly, distributed in the
population, and the intellectual
potentialities of the average
human being are only partially
utilized under the conditions of
modern industrial life.

Theory X and Y Managers (McGregor, 1960)

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 7
It can therefore be seen that a leader holding Theory X assumptions
would prefer an autocratic style, whereas one holding Theory Y
assumptions would prefer a more participative style.
4.2.2 Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid
The Managerial Grid developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton
focuses on task (production) and employee (people) orientations of
managers, as well as combinations of concerns between the two
extremes. A grid with concern for production on the horizontal axis
and concern for people on the vertical axis and plots five basic
leadership styles. The first number refers to a leader's production or
task orientation; the second, to people or employee orientation.
The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964)
Blake and Mouton propose that Team Management - a high
concern for both employees and production - is the most effective
type of leadership behaviour.
4.3 The Contingency or Situational School
Whilst behavioural theories may help managers develop particular
leadership behaviours they give little guidance as to what
constitutes effective leadership in different situations. Indeed, most
researchers today conclude that no one leadership style is right for
every manager under all circumstances. Instead, contingencysituational theories were developed to indicate that the style to be
used is contingent upon such factors as the situation, the people,
the task, the organisation, and other environmental variables. The
major theories contributing towards this school of thought are
described below.

4.3.1 Fiedler's Contingency Model

Fiedler's contingency theory postulates that there is no single best
way for managers to lead. Situations will create different leadership
style requirements for a manager. The solution to a managerial
situation is contingent on the factors that impinge on the situation.
For example, in a highly routine (mechanistic) environment where
repetitive tasks are the norm, a relatively directive leadership style
may result in the best performance, however, in a dynamic
environment a more flexible, participative style may be required.
Fiedler looked at three situations that could define the condition of a
managerial task:
1. Leader member relations: How well do the manager and
the employees get along?
2. Task structure: Is the job highly structured, fairly
unstructured, or somewhere in between?
3. Position power: How much authority does the manager
possess?
Managers were rated as to whether they were relationship oriented
or task oriented. Task oriented managers tend to do better in
situations that have good leader-member relationships, structured
tasks, and either weak or strong position power. They do well when
the task is unstructured but position
A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 8
power is strong. Also, they did well at the other end of the spectrum
when the leader member relations were moderate to poor and the
task was unstructured. Relationship oriented managers do better in
all other situations. Thus, a given situation might call for a manager
with a different style or a manager who could take on a different
style for a different situation.
These environmental variables are combined in a weighted sum that
is termed "favourable" at one end and "unfavourable" at the other.
Task oriented style is preferable at the clearly defined extremes of
"favourable" and "unfavourable" environments, but relationship
orientation excels in the middle ground. Managers could attempt to
reshape the environment variables to match their style.
Another aspect of the contingency model theory is that the leadermember relations, task structure, and position power dictate a
leader's situational control. Leader-member relations are the

amount of loyalty, dependability, and support that the leader

receives from employees. It is a measure of how the manager
perceives he or she and the group of employees is getting along
together. In a favourable relationship the manager has a high task
structure and is able to reward and or punish employees without
any problems. In an unfavourable relationship the task is usually
unstructured and the leader possesses limited authority. The
spelling out in detail (favourable) of what is required of subordinates
affects task structure.
Positioning power measures the amount of power or authority the
manager perceives the organization has given him or her for the
purpose of directing, rewarding, and punishing subordinates.
Positioning power of managers depends on the taking away
(favourable) or increasing (unfavourable) the decision-making power
of employees.
The task-motivated style leader experiences pride and satisfaction
in the task accomplishment for the organization, while the
relationship-motivated style seeks to build interpersonal relations
and extend extra help for the team development in the organization.
There is no good or bad leadership style. Each person has his or her
own preferences for leadership. Task-motivated leaders are at their
best when the group performs successfully such as achieving a new
sales record or outperforming the major competitor. Relationshiporiented leaders are at their best when greater customer
satisfaction is gained and a positive company image is established.
4.3.2 The Hersey-Blanchard Model of Leadership
The Hersey-Blanchard Leadership Model also takes a situational
perspective of leadership. This model posits that the developmental
levels of a leader's subordinates play the greatest role in
determining which leadership styles (leader behaviours) are most
appropriate. Their theory is based on the amount of direction (task
behaviour) and socio-emotional support (relationship behaviour) a
leader must provide given the situation and the "level of maturity"
of the followers.

Task behaviour is the extent to which the leader engages in

spelling out the duties and responsibilities to an individual or
group. This behaviour includes telling people what to do, how
to do it, when to do it, where to do it, and who's to do it. In
task behaviour the leader engages in one- way
communication.

Relationship behaviour is the extent to which the leader

engages in two-way or multi-way communications. This
includes listening, facilitating, and supportive behaviours. In

relationship behaviour the leader engages in two-way

communication by providing socio-emotional support.

Maturity is the willingness and ability of a person to take

responsibility for directing his or her own behaviour. People
tend to have varying degrees of maturity, depending on the
specific task, function, or objective that a leader is attempting
to accomplish through their efforts.
In summary therefore leader behaviours fall along two
continua:

Directive Behaviour

One-Way Communication

Followers' Roles Clearly

Communicated

Close Supervision of
Performance

Supportive Behaviour

Two-Way Communication

Listening, providing support

and
encouragement

Facilitate interaction Involve

follower in
decision-making

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre

for Leadership Studies 9
For Blanchard the key situational variable, when determining the
appropriate leadership style, is the readiness or developmental level
of the subordinate(s). As a result, four leadership styles result:

Directing: The leader provides clear instructions and specific

direction. This style is best matched with a low follower
readiness level.

Coaching: The leader encourages two-way communication

and helps build confidence and motivation on the part of the
employee, although the leader still has responsibility and
controls decision making. Selling style is best matched with a
moderate follower readiness level.

Supporting: With this style, the leader and followers share

decision making and no longer need or expect the relationship

to be directive. Participating style is best matched with a

moderate follower readiness level.

Delegating: This style is appropriate for leaders whose

followers are ready to accomplish a particular task and are
both competent and motivated to take full responsibility.
Delegating style is best matched with a high follower
readiness level.
To determine the appropriate leadership style to use in a given
situation, the leader must first determine the maturity level of
the followers in relation to the specific task that the leader is
attempting to accomplish through the effort of the followers.
As the level of followers' maturity increases, the leader should
begin to reduce his or her task behaviour and increase
relationship behaviour until the followers reach a moderate
level of maturity. As the followers begin to move into an above
average level of maturity, the leader should decrease not only
task behaviour but also relationship behaviour. Once the
maturity level is identified, the appropriate leadership style
can be determined.

4.3.3 Tannenbaum & Schmidts Leadership Continuum

One criticism of early work on leadership styles is that they looked
at styles too much in black and white terms. The autocratic and
democratic styles or task-oriented and relationship-oriented styles
which they described are extremes, whereas in practice the
behaviour of many, perhaps most, leaders in business will be
somewhere between the two. Contingency theorists Tannenbaum
and Schmidt suggested the idea that leadership behaviour varies
along a continuum and that as one moves away from the autocratic
extreme the amount of subordinate participation and involvement in
decision taking increases. They also suggested that the kind of
leadership represented by the democratic extreme of the continuum
will be rarely encountered in formal organisations.
Four main leadership styles can be located at points along such a
continuum:

Autocratic: The leader takes the decisions and announces

them, expecting subordinates to carry
them out without question (the Telling style).

Persuasive: At this point on the scale the leader also takes

all the decisions for the group without

discussion or consultation but believes that people will be

better motivated if they are persuaded that the decisions are
good ones. He or she does a lot of explaining and 'selling' in
order to overcome any possible resistance to what he or she
wants to do. The leader also puts a lot of energy into creating
enthusiasm for the goals he or she has set for the group (the
Selling style).

Consultative: In this style the leader confers with the group

members before taking decisions and, in fact, considers their
advice and their feelings when framing decisions. He or she
may, of course, not always accept the subordinates' advice
but they are likely to feel that they can have some influence.
Under this leadership style the decision and the full
responsibility for it remain with the leader but the degree of
involvement by subordinates in decision taking is very much
greater than telling or selling styles (the Consulting style).

Democratic: Using this style the leader would

characteristically lay the problem before his or her
subordinates and invite discussion. The leader's role is that of
conference leader, or chair, rather than that of decision taker.
He or she will allow the decision to emerge out of the process
of group discussion, instead of imposing it on the group as its
boss (the Joining style).
What distinguishes this approach from previous discussions of
leadership style is that there will be some situations in which
each of the above styles is likely to be more appropriate than
the others.

Telling: In an emergency, a telling style may be most

appropriate and would normally be
considered justified by the group (as long as the general
climate of that group is supportive and
mature).

Selling: The selling style would tend to fit situations in

which the group leader, and he or she
alone, possesses all the information on which the
decision must be based and which at the same

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre

for Leadership Studies 10

time calls for a very high level of commitment and enthusiasm on

the part of group members if the
task is to be carried through successfully.

Consulting: The consulting style is likely to be most

appropriate when there is time in which to
reach a considered decision and when the information on
which the decision needs to be based
lies among the members of the group.

Joining: The joining style is appropriate under similar

conditions, with the important exception that
this is likely to be appropriate only in those instances where
the nature of the responsibility associated with the decision is
such that group members are willing to share it with their
leader, or alternatively the leader is willing to accept
responsibility for decisions which he or she has not made
personally.

4.3.4 Adairs Action-Centred Leadership Model

John Adair has a long pedigree in the world of leadership. The Adair
model is that the action-centred leader gets the job done through
the work team and relationships with fellow managers and staff.
According to Adair's explanation an action-centred leader must:

direct the job to be done (task structuring)

support and review the individual people doing it

co-ordinate and foster the work team as a whole

Action-Centred Leadership Model (Adair, 1973)
His famous three circle diagram is a simplification of the
variability of human interaction, but is a useful tool for
thinking about what constitutes an effective leader/manager
in relation to the job he/she has to do. The effective
leader/manager carries out the functions and exhibits the
behaviours depicted by the three circles. Situational and
contingent elements call for different responses by the leader.
Hence imagine that the various circles may be bigger or
smaller as the situation varies i.e. the leader will give more or
less emphasis to the functionally-oriented behaviours

according to what the actual situation involves. The challenge

for the leader is to manage all sectors of the diagram:

define the task

make the plan

allocate work and resources

control quality and rate of work

check performance against plan

adjust the plan

maintain discipline

build team spirit

encourage, motivate, give a sense of purpose

appoint sub-leaders

ensure communication within group

develop the group

attend to personal problems

praise individuals

give status

recognise and use individual abilities

develop the individual

Task

Team

Individual

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre

for Leadership Studies 11
4.4 Leaders and Followers
The models discussed so far have dwelt on the leader as some
frontal figure who stands out from the rest as being somehow
different and leading the rest of the people. The discussion now

moves to recognition of the importance of the leaders relationship

with his/her followers and an interdependency of roles. No longer
the hero or solo leader but the team leader. Not the leader always
out in front but the leader who has the capacity to follow. Not the
master, but the servant.
4.4.1 Servant Leadership
The notion of Servant Leadership emphasises the leaders duty to
serve his/her followers - leadership thus arises out of a desire to
serve rather than a desire to lead
Robert Greenleaf, founder of the Center for Servant Leadership
describes it as follows:
The servant-leader is servant first... It begins with the natural
feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious
choice brings one to aspire to lead. He or she is sharply different
from the person who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to
assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions.
For such it will be a later choice to serve after leadership is
established. The leader-first and the servant-first are two extreme
types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are part of
the infinite variety of human nature.
The difference manifest itself in the care taken by the servant-first
to make sure that other peoples highest priority needs are being
served. The best test, and difficult to administer , is: do those
served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become
healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to
become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in
society; will they benefit, or, at least, will they not be further
deprived?
Taken from the Servant as Leader published by Robert Greenleaf in
1970. Characteristics of Servant Leaders are as follows:
Servant-Leadership is a practical philosophy which supports people
who choose to serve first, and then lead as a way of expanding
service to individuals and institutions. Servant- leaders may or may
not hold formal leadership positions. Servant-leadership encourages
collaboration, trust, foresight, listening, and the ethical use of power
and empowerment.
Taken from the Center for Servant Leadership web site, April 2003.
The emphasis on serving a higher purpose has made this model
popular within the Church and other religious institutions.

4.4.2 The Following Part of Leading

Katzenbach and Smith, authors of 'The Wisdom of Teams' talk of the
"following part of leading", saying that the critical behaviours of
leaders are:
By asking such questions such as "What do you
think we should do?" or "How do you suggest
Asking questions
we proceed?" you take a step behind another
instead of giving
person. Whether you stay behind, of course,
answers
depends on your intention to actually follow the
suggestion or answer of that other person.

Providing
opportunities for
others to lead
you

This goes beyond the traditional notion of

looking for growth opportunities for other
people. Unless the opportunity in question
bears a real risk for your personal performance
outcome, you are not actually positioning
yourself as a follower.

Rolling up your sleeves and contributing "sweat

Doing real work equity" to the efforts and outcomes of other
in support of
people earns you their appreciation as someone
others instead of upon whom they can depend, regardless of the
only the reverse relative hierarchical or functional position each
of you holds.
A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 12
In addition to following other people yourself, you
must learn to help them follow each other. This
requires you to get beyond considering yourself
the "central switch" through which all decisions
Becoming a
flow. Instead, you need to look for every possible
matchmaker
chance to help people find their best
instead of a
collaborators. "Have you asked Sally or Rasheed
"central switch"
what they think?" is often the only input required
to facilitate the effort at hand, although you then
must submit your effort and support to whatever
the people in question suggest.

Seeking

The pejorative meaning associated with

common
understanding
instead of
consensus

consensus management has nothing to do with

either effective leading or effective following.
Leaders who know when and how to follow build
deep common understanding, not superficial
consensus, around the purpose, goals, and
approach at hand. They submit themselves and
others to the discipline of ensuring that all sides
to any disagreement are fully understood by
everyone, recognizing that mutual understanding
is far more powerful than any particular decision
to choose path A over path B. All people will
follow strong, commonly understood purposes
and goals more easily than the "put-up jobs"
associated with consensus.

Key Behaviours of Leaders (Katzenbach and Smith, 1994)

They go on to say that the indicators of when a leader must follow
are:
As a leader, you must follow another individual,
regardless of hierarchy, if:

Individual
performance

That individual, through experience, skill,

and judgement, knows best.

That individual's growth demands that

you invest more in his or her skill
and self-confidence than in your own.

Only that individual, not you, has the

capacity (the time and opportunity) to
"get it done"

Team
performance

As a leader, you must follow the team if:

The team's purpose and performance

goals demand it

The team, not you, must develop skills

and self-confidence

The team's agreed-upon working

approach requires you, like all the others,

to do real work

Organizational
performance

As a leader, you must follow others, regardless

of hierarchy, if:
The organization's purpose and performance
goals demand it
The need for expanding the leadership
capacity of others in the
organization requires it
"Living" the vision and values enjoins you to
do so

When a leader must follow Leaders (Katzenbach and Smith, 1994)

4.4.3 TeamLeadership
In the late 1970s Meredith Belbin conducted a study of teams
focusing on the factors separating successful and unsuccessful
teams via a college business game at Henley a feature of which was
shared leadership.
Through the game Belbin found that the composition of the team
was important and that individual differences in style, role and
contribution far from underlining personal weaknesses, were a
source of potential team strength. Balanced teams comprised of
such individuals who engaged in complementary role behaviour
performed better than unbalanced teams.
Nine distinctive roles were identified in the study, with most people
being found to embrace a mix of two or three roles whilst also
avoiding others with which they were uncomfortable. Where there
was an individual with clear, useful and appreciated attributes they
would fit into a team on the basis of the strengths they brought.
These people would also have weaknesses that belonged to the
same cluster of characteristics as the strength itself. These potential
deficiencies were considered the price that has to be paid for a
particular strength, a price that is worth paying, and were referred
to as allowable weaknesses. Belbin found no ideal team member,
individual who could perform all of the roles.
From this work, Belbin drew the distinction between the Solo and
the Team leader. He suggests that leaders are not notable for
admitting their weaknesses, whether allowable or not. They act as

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre

for Leadership Studies 13
though they have no weaknesses. To many people the image of the
leader - a person heading up a team of followers, ever ready to take
on any role and assuming any responsibility - is very familiar to us
for it is the one based upon our past experiences and beliefs. Belbin
classified such leaders as Solo leaders and in the workplace this
type of behaviour may have great advantages, for internal barriers
can be overcome and decisions, especially those of an urgent
nature, can be made and put into effect with little or no delay.
The increasing complexity and the discontinuous nature of modern
work however, poses greater problems where Solo leadership is less
appropriate and Team leadership more suited. The key difference
between the Solo leader and Team leadership revolves around the
behaviour and participation of the two as illustrated below:
SOLO LEADER

TEAM LEADER

Plays unlimited role the Solo Leader

interferes in everything

Chooses to limit role to

preferred team roles
delegates roles to others

Strives for conformity the Solo Leader

tries to mould people to particular
standards

Builds on diversity the

Team Leader values
differences between
people

Collects acolytes The Solo Leader

collects admirers and sycophants

Seeks talent The Team

Leader is not threatened
by people with special
abilities

Develops colleagues the

Directs Subordinates subordinates take
Team Leader encourages
their leads and cues from the Solo
the growth of personal
Leader
strengths

Projects objectives the Solo Leader

Creates mission the
makes it plain what everyone is expected Team Leader projects the
to do 1. Chooses to limit role to preferred vision which others can

team roles delegates roles to others

act on as they see fit

Solo and Team Leader (Belbin, 1993)

Belbin uses a definition from Charles Handy to illustrate his
hypothesis of Solo leadership: A leader shapes and shares a vision
which gives point to the work of others (Handy, 1992).
Using Team Role theory the word shape indicates to us shaper,
whilst the word vision implies plant. Looking at leadership using
Handys definition is interesting for vision is certainly important to
leadership, but does it have to be unique to an individual? Where it
is unique to an individual with a drive to enact it such as a Shaper,
strong Solo leadership is likely to prevail. Vision alternatively may be
borrowed by a Shaper who treats it as a product of the self and
similarly will adopt a Solo leadership style. Many organisations have
rewarded Solo leadership behaviour by promoting individuals to
management and leadership positions, for such individuals have
met past organisational needs
In todays organisation the alternative approach, the Team Leader, is
more appropriate. Whilst Team leadership may not be as natural as
Solo leadership, Belbin suggests it can be learned through
understanding the nature of leadership and the qualities required. In
the rapidly changing and uncertain work environment of today no
one person has all the answers to leadership. A Team leadership
style based upon the development of the strengths and the
allowable weaknesses of all of the roles will permit a more holistic,
or participative, style of leadership where teamwork, problem
solving, decision making and innovation can flourish with
heightened teamwork and work performance.
4.4.4 Transactional and Transformational Leadership
James MacGregor Burns writing in his book Leadership was the first
to put forward the concept of transforming leadership.
To Burns transforming leadership is a relationship of mutual
stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and
may convert leaders into moral agents. Burns went on to also
further define it by suggesting that:
[Transforming leadership] occurs when one or more persons
engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise
one another to higher levels of motivation and morality...

A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre

for Leadership Studies 14
Burns draws upon the humanistic psychology movement in his
writing upon transforming leadership by proposing that the
transforming leader shapes, alters, and elevates the motives, values
and goals of followers achieving significant change in the process.
He proposed that there is a special power entailed in transforming
leadership with leaders armed with principles [that] may ultimately
transform both leaders and followers into persons who jointly
adhere to modal values and end-values .
Burns sees the power of transforming leadership as more noble and
different from charismatic leadership, which he terms heroic
leadership, and executive or business leadership. Despite this it is
surprising that most of the application of Burns work has been in
these two types of leadership.
Bernard Bass developed Burns concept of transforming leadership
in Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations into
transformational leadership where the leader transforms followers
the direction of influence to Bass is thus one-way, unlike Burns
who sees it as potentially a two-way process. Bass, however, deals
with the transformational style of executive leadership that
incorporates social change, a facet missing from Burns work. For
Bass transformational leaders may:

expand a followers portfolio of needs

transform a followers self-interest

increase the confidence of followers

elevate followers expectations

heighten the value of the leaders intended outcomes for the

follower

encourage behavioural change

motivate others to higher levels of personal achievement

(Maslows self-actualisation).
Tichy and Devanna in their book Transformational Leadership
built further on the work of Burns and Bass in organisational
and work contexts. They described the hybrid nature of
transformational as ... not due to charisma. It is a
behavioural process capable of being learned.

Bass writing with a research colleague Avolio suggested that

Transformational leadership is closer to the prototype of
leadership that people have in mind when they describe their
ideal leader, and it is more likely to provide a role model with
which subordinates want to identify.
Transactional leadership has been the traditional model of
leadership with its roots from an organisational or business
perspective in the bottom line. Stephen Covey writing in
Principle-Centred Leadership suggests that transformational
leadership ... focuses on the top line and offers contrast
between the two (a selection being):

Transactional Leadership

Transformational
Leadership

Builds on mans need to get a

job done and make a living

Builds on a mans need

for meaning

Is preoccupied with power and

position, politics and perks

Is preoccupied with
purposes and values,

Is mired in daily affairs

Is short-term and hard data

orientated

morals, and ethics

Transcends daily affairs

Focuses on tactical issues

Is orientated toward
long-term goals without

Relies on human relations to

lubricate human

compromising human
values and principles

interactions

Focuses more on
missions and strategies

Follows and fulfils role

expectations by

Releases human
potential identifying
and

striving to work effectively

within current

developing new talent

systems

Supports structures and

systems that
reinforce the bottom line,
maximise efficiency, and

Designs and redesigns

jobs to make them
meaningful and
challenging

guarantee short-term profits

Aligns internal
structures and systems
to
reinforce overarching
values and goals

Comparison of Transactional and Transformational Leadership

(Covey, 1992)
Both kinds of leadership are necessary. Transactional leadership has
remained the organisational model for many people and
organisations who have not moved into or encouraged the
transformational role needed to meet the challenges of our
changing times.
A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 15
The goal of transformational leadership is to transform people
and organisations in a literal sense to change them in mind and
heart; enlarge vision, insight, and understanding; clarify purposes;
make behaviour congruent with beliefs, principles, or values; and
bring about changes that are permanent, self-perpetuating, and
momentum building
According to Bass and Avolio, transformational leaders display
behaviours associated with five transformational styles:
Transformational Style

1) Idealized Behaviors:

Leader Behaviour

Talk about their most important

values and beliefs

Specify the importance of

having a strong sense of
purpose

Consider the moral and ethical

consequences of decisions

Champion exciting new

possibilities

living one's ideals

2) Inspirational
Motivation: inspiring others

3) Intellectual
Stimulation: stimulating
others

Talk about the importance of

trusting each other

Talk optimistically about the

future

Talk enthusiastically about what

needs to be accomplished

Articulate a compelling vision of

the future

Express confidence that goals

will be achieved

Provide an exciting image of

what is essential to consider

Take a stand on controversial

issues

Re-examine critical assumptions

to question whether they are
appropriate

Seek differing perspectives

when solving problems

Get others to look at problems

from many different angles

Suggest new ways of looking at

how to complete assignments

Encourage non-traditional
thinking to deal with traditional
problems

Encourage rethinking those

ideas which have never been
questioned
before

4) Individualized

Spend time teaching and

coaching

Treat others as individuals

rather than just as members of
the group

Consider individuals as having

different needs, abilities, and

Consideration: coaching
and development

aspirations from others

Help others to develop their

strengths

Listen attentively to others'

concerns

Promote self development

Instill pride in others for being

associated with them

Go beyond their self-interests

for the good of the group

Act in ways that build others'

respect

Display a sense of power and

competence

Make personal sacrifices for

others' benefit

Reassure others that obstacles

will be overcome

5) Idealized Attributes:
Respect, trust, and faith

Transformational Leadership Styles and Behaviours (Bass and Avolio,

1994)
Transformational leadership is a process in which the leaders take
actions to try to increase their associates' awareness of what is right
and important, to raise their associates' motivational maturity and
to move their associates to go beyond the associates' own selfinterests for the good of the group, the organization, or society. Such

leaders provide their associates with a sense of purpose that goes

beyond a simple exchange of rewards for effort provided.
The transformational leaders are proactive in many different and
unique ways. These leaders attempt to optimize development, not
just performance. Development encompasses the maturation of
ability, motivation, attitudes, and values. Such leaders want to
elevate the maturity level of the needs of their associates (from
security needs to needs for achievement and self-development).
They convince their associates to strive for a higher level of
achievement as well as higher levels of moral and ethical standards.
Through the development of their associates, they optimize the
development of their organization as well. High performing
associates build high performing organizations.
A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks Centre
for Leadership Studies 16
Hooper and Potter (1997) extend the notion of transformational
leadership to identify seven key competences of transcendent
leaders: those able to engage the emotional support of their
followers and thus effectively transcend change.
4.5
1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)
Setting direction Setting an example Communication Alignment
Bringing out the best in people
The leader as a change agent
Providing decision in a crisis and on the ambiguous
Dispersed Leadership
The importance of social relations in the leadership contract, the
need for a leader to be accepted by their followers and a realisation
that no one individual is the ideal leader in all circumstances have
given rise to a new school of leadership thought. Referred to as
informal, emergent or dispersed leadership, this approach
argues a less formalised model of leadership where the leaders role
is dissociated from the organisational hierarchy. It is proposed that
individuals at all levels in the organisation and in all roles (not
simply those with an overt management dimension) can exert
leadership influence over their colleagues and thus influence the
overall leadership of the organisation.
Heifetz (1994) distinguishes between the exercise of leadership
and the exercise of authority thus dissociating leadership from

formal organisational power roles whilst Raelin (2003) talks of

developing leaderful organisations through concurrent, collective
and compassionate leadership.
The key to this is a distinction between the notions of leader and
leadership. Leadership is regarded as a process of sense-making
and direction-giving within a group and the leader can only be
identified on the basis of his/her relationship with others in the
social group who are behaving as followers. In this manner, it is
quite possible to conceive of the leader as emergent rather than
predefined and that their role can only be understood through
examining the relationships within the group (rather than by
focussing on his/her personal characteristics or traits).
The origins of such an approach have their foundations more in the
fields of sociology and politics than the more traditional
management literature and draw on concepts such as organisational
culture and climate to highlight the contextual nature of leadership.
It is a more collective concept, and would argue for a move from an
analysis and development of individual leader qualities to an
identification of what constitutes an effective (or more appropriate)
leadership process within an organisation. A move in focus from the
individuals to the relationships themselves.
The implications of such an approach to the development of
leadership and management standards will be explored further in
Section 8.

WHAT IS WORK ETHIC?

WHAT IS MOTIVATION?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Bolden R., Gosling J., Marturano A. and Dennison P., 2003. A
Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks
[pdf] Exeter: Centre for Leadership Studies. Available at:
http://www2.fcsh.unl.pt/docentes/luisrodrigues/textos/Lideran
a.pdf
X

The first section of the report begins with a review of

leadership theories and tracks their evolution over the past 70
years from the great man notion of heroic leaders, through
trait theories, behaviourist theories, situational leadership,
contingency theory and on to transactional and
transformational leadership. Each of these offers some
insights into the qualities of successful leaders, but there has

been a shift in focus from the generic characteristics and

behaviours of the individual to a recognition of the importance
of responding to different situations and contexts and the
leaders role in relation to followers. The review concludes
with an introduction to the notion of dispersed leadership
and a distinction between the process of leadership and the
socially-constructed role of leader.