Module 7

Leadership
Learning Objectives:
 Analyze theories of leadership
 Understand leading as a function of management

Leadership is a very important, if not the most important factor in the

success of organizations. This has been pointed out time and again
throughout history by leaders and many other proofs that with the right kind
of leadership, organizations can succeed.

What is Leadership?
Leadership may be defined as the process of guiding and directing the
behavior of people in the organization in order to achieve certain objectives.

Leadership is that element that convinces members of an organization to

behave in such a manner that will facilitate the accomplishment of the goals
of the organization.

Kinds of Leadership
Leadership are of two kinds:

1. Formal Leadership – refers to the process of influencing others to

pursue official objectives. Formal leaders are vested with formal
authority and as such, they generally have a measure of legitimate
power. They rely on expedient combination of reward, coercive,
referent, and expert power. M
2. Informal Leadership – refers to the process of influencing others to
pursue unofficial objectives. Informal leaders lack formal authority. Like
formal leaders, they rely on expedient combination of reward, coercive,
referent, and expert power. Informal leaders who are satisfied with
their jobs are valuable assets of the organization. When they are not
satisfied, they become liabilities. Their power to motivate people can
be used to convince employees to cause harm to the organization.

Theories about Leadership

Trait Theories

Trait theories of leadership consider leaders to possess common traits. Early

researchers on leadership placed emphasis on traits and had resulted in the
determination of a wide span of personal attributes such as physical
appearance, intelligence, and self-confidence.
It was found out that the average person who occupies a position of
leadership exceeds the average number of his group to some degree on the
following factors:
1. Sociability
2. Persistence
3. Initiative
4. Knowing how to get things done
5. Self-confidence
6. Alertness to and insight into situations
7. Cooperativeness
8. Popularity
9. Adaptability
10. Verbal facility

Later, researchers, guided by their findings, drafted a more general view of

what good leaders have in common. These consist of the following:

1. Extraversion – individuals who like being around people and are able
to assert themselves.
2. Conscientiousness – individuals who are disciplined and keep
commitments that they make.
3. Openness – individuals who are creative and flexible.
4. Emotional intelligence – individuals who are able to understand and
manage their personal feelings and emotions, as well as their emotions
towards other individuals, events, and objects.

A single statement that describes what trait theories assume is that “leaders
are born than made.”

Behavioral Theories
After some years, trait theories were found to be inadequate in explaining
the basis for effective leadership. As a result, researchers shifted their
interest to behaviors exhibited by specific leaders.

What the researchers developed came to be known as behavioral theories of

leadership. These theories propose that specific behaviors differentiate
leaders from nonleaders.

Four related to leadership behavior will be presented in this section these are
as follows:

1. The Ohio State University Studies. An important leadership

research program was started at Ohio State University during the late
 1940s. The researchers sought to identify independent dimensions of
leader behavior.

A questionnaire was administered in both leadership and military

settings to measure subordinates’ perception of their superiors’
leadership behavior. Beginning with over a thousand dimensions, they
eventually narrowed the list to two categories that substantially
accounted for most of the leadership behavior described by
employees.

The two dimensions were referred to as:

a. Initiating structure – refers to the extent to which a leader is

likely to define his or her role and those of employees in the
search for goal attainment. The leader with a high initiating
structure tendency focuses on goals and results, so he or she
might be seen as similar to a production-oriented supervisor.
Structure is initiated by activities such as assigning tasks,
specifying procedures to be followed, scheduling work, and
clarifying expectations.
b. Consideration – describes the degree to which the leader
creates an environment of emotional support, warmth,
friendliness, and trust. The leader’s behavior would be one that is
friendly and approachable looking out for the personal welfare of
the group, keeping the group informed about are development,
and doing small favors for group members.

2. University of Michigan Studies. At about the same time that the

Ohio State University was engaged in a research program on
leadership, the researchers at the University of Michigan were also
making attempts to locate behavioral characteristics of leaders that
appeared to be related to measures of performance effectiveness.

The effectiveness criteria used are follows:

a. Productivity for work hour or other similar measures of the
organization’s success in achieving its production goals
b. Job satisfaction of members of the organization
c. Turnover, absenteeism, and grievance rates
d. Costs
e. Scrap loss
f. Employee and managerial motivation

In the course of their studies, the researchers identified two distinct

styles of leadership:
 a. Job-centered managers set tight work standards, organized
tasks carefully, prescribed the work methods to be followed, and
supervised closely.
b. Employee-centered managers encouraged group members to
participate in goal setting and other work decisions, and helped
to ensure high performance by engendering trust and mutual
respect.

The researchers found out that the most productive work groups
tended to have leaders who were employee-centered rather than job-
centered.

3. Yukl Studies. Other researchers like Gary M. Yukl made one step
further than the Michigan and Ohio State studies. He and his
colleagues tried to seek answers to specific behavior of leaders for
varying situations. They were able to isolate nineteen behaviors
consisting of the following:
a. Performance emphasis. The extent, to which a leader
emphasizes the importance of subordinate performance, tries to
improve productivity and efficiency, tries to keep subordinates
working up to their capacity, and checks on their performance.
b. Consideration. The extent to which a leader is friendly,
supportive, and considerate in his or her behavior toward
subordinates and tries to be fair and objective.
c. Praise-Recognition. The extent to which a leader provides
praise and recognition to subordinates with effective
performance, shows appreciation for their special efforts and
contributions, and makes sure they get credit for their helpful
ideas and suggestions.
d. Decision-Participation. The extent to which a leader consults
with subordinates and otherwise allows them to influence his or
her decisions.
e. Training-Coaching. The extent to which a leader determines
training needs for subordinates and provides any necessary
training and coaching.
f. Problem Solving. The extent to which a leader takes the
initiative in proposing solutions to serious work-related problems
and acts decisively to deal with such problems when a prompt
solution is needed.
g. Work Facilitation. The extent to which a leader obtains for
subordinates any necessary supplies, equipment support
services, or other resources, eliminates problems in the work
environment, and removes other obstacles that interfere with the
work.
h. Inspiration
i. Structuring reward contingencies
 j. Autonomy-delegation
k. Role clarification
l. Goal setting
m. Information dissemination
n. Planning
o. Coordinating
p. Representation
q. Interaction facilitation
r. Conflict Management
s. Criticism-discipline

4. The Managerial Grid. It is a graphic portrayal of a two dimensional

view of leadership developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. It is an
approach to understanding manager’s concern for production and
concern for people. As such, the grid was structured to contain two
underlying dimensions labelled Concern for Production and Concern for
People. These attitudinal dimensions are coupled through an
interaction process. The figure below shows each of these concerns as
one of the two axes of the grid, so that concerns for both people and
productivity are combined in various management styles.
 The Managerial grid proposes that there is a best way to manage
people, i.e., the way used by the 9,9 manager, who has 9 units of
concern for production and 9 units of concern for people.

The grid has 9 possible positions along each axis, creating 81 different
positions in which the leader’s style may fall. Managers were found to
perform best under a 9,9 style rather than the other style like 9,1 (the
author type) or 1,1 (the laissez-faire type)

A brief description of selected styles in the grid is provided as follows:

 1,1 Impoverished manager, also referred to as the laissez-faire

leaders. Leaders in this position have little concern for people or
productivity, avoid taking sides, and stay out of conflicts. They
do just enough to get by. This leadership style is a form of
abdication of responsibility.
 1,9 Country club manager. Leaders in this position have great
concern for people and little concern for production. They try to
avoid conflicts and concentrate on being well-liked. To them, no
task is more important than good interpersonal relations. Their
goal is to keep people happy.
 9,1 Authority-obedience manager. Leaders in this position have
great concern for production and little concern for people. They
desire tight control in order to get tasks done efficiently. They
consider creativity and human relations unnecessary.
 5,5 Organization man manager, also called middle-of-the-road
manager. Leaders in this position have medium concern for
people and production. They attempt to balance their concern for
both people and production, but are not committed to either.
 9,9 Team manager. The leadership style of this manager is
considered to be ideal. He has great concern for both people and
product. He works to motivate people to reach their highest
levels of accomplishment.

Contingency Theories
The trait and behavioral theories failed to point out that leadership situations
are not similar, and it is easy to presume that there is no single leadership
style that will fit all situations. This line of thinking led researchers to engage
in research activities that were later called contingency. The individual
researchers share a fundamental assumption: successful leadership occurs
when the leader’s style matches the situation.
The various theories related to the situational approach to leadership consist
of the following:
1. Continuum of Leadership Behavior – by Tannenbaum and Schmidt
2. The Contingency Leadership Model – by Fiedler
3. The Path-Goal – by House and Mitchell
4. The Hershey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theories
5. The Leader-Member Exchange Approach – by Graen
6. The Normative Decision Model – by Vroom and Jago
7. The Muczyk-Reimann Model

Continuum of Leadership Behavior. The first contingency model of

leadership was developed by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. Schmidt
and is referred to as the continuum of leadership behavior. This model
consists of seven alternative ways for managers to approach decision
making, depending on how much participation they want to allow
subordinates in the decision making process.

Shown in the illustration below are the alternative behaviors of the leader
which are situated between the two extremes of authoritarian and
participative approaches.

ALTERNATIVE BEHAVIORS OF THE LEADER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager
makes “sells” presents presents presents defines permits
decision decision ideas tentativ problem limits, subordina
and and e s, gets asks tes to
announc invites decision suggesti group to function
es it question subject on, make within
s to makes decision limits
change decision defined
by
superior

Authoritarian
Participation
(boss-centered (subordinates-
leadership) centered
leadership)

CONTINUUM OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR

The leader’s choices depend on three factors:

1. Forces in the manager
2. Forces in subordinates
3. Forces in the situation

Under this approach, the effective leaders are flexible, able to select
leadership behaviors needed in a given time and place.

Forces in the manager consist of: the manager’s background, knowledge,

values, and experience. How the manager will lead will primarily be
influenced by these forces. For example, if the manager worked for ten years
as a subordinate of a well-performing leader who adapted the participative
style, he will tend to be a participative leader himself.

In choosing an appropriate leadership style, the manger must also consider

the forces in subordinates.

The leadership style of greater participation and freedom can be exercised

by the manger if the subordinates:
1. Are craving for independence and freedom of action
2. Want to have decision making responsibility
3. Identify with the organization’s goals
4. Are knowledgeable and experienced enough to deal with the problem
efficiently
5. Have experience with previous managers that lead them to expect
participative management.

When the above conditions are absent, managers will have to lean toward
the authoritarian style.
Lastly, the manager’s choice of leadership style must reckon with situational
forces such as: the organization’s preferred style, the specific work group,
the nature of the group’s tasks, the pressures of time, and environmental
factors.

There are instances when the organization’s top management favors certain
leadership style, and most managers will have to move towards it.

There are groups that are more likely to perform well in an environment of
participation rather than its opposite, the authoritarian form. An example is
that group of accountants working in an accounting firm serving clients.
The nature of the problem and time pressures are examples of situational
factors that may influence the choice of leadership style. For example, the
team leader of the emergency crew of a large hospital has no option but to
adapt an authoritarian leadership style.

The contingency Leadership Model. This is a leadership model developed

by Fred Fiedler which proposes that effective group performance depends on
the proper match between the leader’s style and the degree to which the
situation favors the leader.

Fiedler measure leadership style through the use of the Least Preferred
coworker (LPC) Scale which is actually an instrument that toward someone
with whom he or she least prefers to work. Low scores on the LPC is a
reflection of the leader who is task-oriented, reflect a leadership style, or
controlling, and with a structuring leadership style. High scores reflect a
leadership style that is relationship-oriented, or one that is passive and
considerate.

To determine how favorable the leadership environment is, Fiedler maintains

that it will depend on three factors:
1. Leader-member relations
2. Task Structure
3. Position Power

Leader-member relations refer to the degree of confidence, trust, and

respect the followers have in their leader.

Task structure refers to the extent to which the tasks the followers are
engaged in are structured. Tasks structure is high when the task is clearly
specified and known as to:

1. What followers are supposed to do

2. How they will do it
3. When and in what sequence it is to be done
4. What decision options they have

Task structure is low when the task in unclear, ambiguous, or unspecifiable.

Position power refers to the power inherent in the leadership position.
Generally, greater authority means greater position power. The leader with a
strong position power will find it easier to perform his job. Some positions,
such as the presidency of a big manufacturing firm, carry a great deal of
power and authority. The president of a civic organization, on the other hand,
has less power over members. Thus, leaders with high position power can
easily influence subordinates, while those with less position power finds it
difficult to perform their tasks.
Together, the three factors determine how favorable the situation is for the
leader. The most favorable situation exists when there is good leader-
member relations, high task structure, and strong position power. The least
favorable situation happens when there is poor relations, low degree of
structure, and weak position power.

After identifying the leadership style of the manager or leader, and after
defining the situation, the next move is to match the situation to the leader.
Fiedler believed that task-oriented leaders tend to perform better in
situations that are either highly favorable or highly unfavorable. Thus, if a
leader is moderately liked and possesses some power, and the job tasks for
subordinates are somewhat vague, the leadership style needed to achieve
the best results is relationship-oriented.

The Path-Goal Model. This is a leadership model developed by Robert

House and Terrence Mitchell that states that the leader’s job is to create a
work environment through structure, support, and rewards that helps
employees reach the organization’s goals.

The two major roles involved are:

1. The creation of a good orientation
2. The improvement of the path toward the goals so that they will be
attained.

The path-goal process is illustrated below. The first step is for leader to
identify employee needs, then to provide appropriate goals, and then to
connect goal accomplishment to rewards that may be expected.

THE PATH-GOAL LEADERSHIP PROCESS

House and Mitchell identified four leadership behaviors:

 1. The directive leader. This is the type of leader who lets followers know
what is expected of them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific
guidance as to how to accomplish tasks.
2. The supportive leader. This is the type of leader who is friendly and shows
concern for the needs of followers.
3. The participative leader. This is the leader who consults with followers and
uses their suggestions before making a decision.
4. The achievement-oriented leader. This is the leader who sets challenging
goals and expects followers to perform at their highest level.

According to House, leaders are flexible and any of them can display any or all of
these behaviors depending on the circumstances.

The Hershey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory

Developed by Paul Hershey and Kenneth Blanchard the Situational Leadership
Theory (SLT) suggests that a leader’s style should be determined by matching it
with the maturity level (or readiness) of each subordinate.

The leader must know follower’s readiness and then use a leadership style that fits
the level. Readiness refers to the ability and willingness of subordinate to take
responsibility for directing their own behavior.

Readiness consists of two concerns:

1. Job readiness (or task competence)
2. Psychological readiness (or commitment)

A person who has high task competence has the knowledge and abilities to perform
the job without a manager structuring or directing the work. A person who has high
commitment has the self-motivation and desire to do high quality work.

Based on the foregoing, subordinates may be classified as follows:

1. Those with low competence and low commitment (D-1)
2. Those with low competence but with high commitment (D-2)
3. Those with high competence but with low commitment (D-3)
4. Those with high competence and high commitment (D-4)

To match the various states of readiness by subordinates, Hershey and Blanchard

devised four leadership style available to leaders:

1. A “directing” style that is best for low follower readiness. The direction
provided by this style defines roles for people who are unable and unwilling to
take responsibility themselves; it eliminates any insecurity about the task
that must be done.
2. A “coaching” style that is best for low to moderate follower readiness. This
style offers both task direction and support for people who are unable but
willing to take task responsibility; it involves combining directive approach
with explaining and reinforcement in order to maintain enthusiasm.
3. A “supporting” style that is best for moderate to high follower readiness.
Able but unwilling followers require supportive behavior in order to increase
 their motivation; by allowing followers to share in decision making, this style
help enhance the desire to perform a task.
4. A “delegating” style that is best for high readiness. This style provides little
in terms of direction and support for the task at hand; it allows able and
willing followers to take responsibility for what needs to be done.

The Leader-Member Exchange Approach

This refers to the leadership theory developed by George Graen and his associates
which recognize that leaders develop unique working relationships with each group
member. Leaders and their followers exchange information, resources, and role
expectations that determine the quality of their interpersonal relationships.

The effect of leader-member relations come into view when the leader, knowingly or
unknowingly, creates in-groups and out-groups within the organization.
Subordinates with in-group status will have higher performance ratings, less
turnover, and greater job satisfaction.

In-group members have attitudes and values similar to those of the leader and
interact frequently with the leader. They are given additional rewards, responsibility,
and trust in exchange for loyalty and performance. They become part of a smoothly
functioning team headed by the formal leader.

Out-group members are treated in accordance with a more formal understanding of

supervisor-subordinate relations. They have less in common with the leader and
operate in a way that is somewhat detached from the leader. They are less likely to
experience good teamwork.

The equality of the relationship between the leader and each group member has
important job consequences. Good relationships can lead to important effects such
as higher productivity and satisfaction, improved motivation, and smoother
delegation.

Normative Decision Model

Also known as “the leader-participation model” and “decision making model of
leadership”, the normative decision model of leadership”, the normative decision
model was developed by Victor and Philip Yetton. Some years later, the model was
revised by Vroom and Arthur Jago to make it more accurate.

The model views leadership as a decision making process in which the leader
examines certain factors within the situation to determine which decision making
style will be most effective.

Five decision making styles are presented by the normative model, each reflecting a
different degree of participation by group members:

1. Autocratic I – the leader individually solves the problem using the information
already available.
2. Autocratic II – the leader obtains data from subordinates and then decides.
 3. Consultative I – the leader explains the problem to individual subordinates
and obtains ideas from each before deciding.
4. Consultative II – the leader meets with group of subordinates to share the
problem and obtain inputs, and then decides.
5. Group II – the leader shares problem with group and facilitates a discussion of
alternatives aiming to reach a group agreement on a solution.

The normative decision model is based on the following assumptions:

1. The leader can accurately classify problems according to the criteria offered.
2. The leader is able and willing to adapt his or her leadership style to fit the
contingency condition he or she faces.
3. The leader is willing to use a rather complex model.
4. The employees will accept the legitimacy of different styles being used for
different problems, as well as the validity of the leader’s classification of the
situation at hand.

The normative model will be useful if all these assumptions are valid.

The Muczyk-Reimann Model

This model was developed by Jan P. Muczyk and Bernard C. Reimann, and it
suggests that “participation” behavior is concerned with the degree to which
subordinates are allowed to be involved in decision making. It is separated from
“direction” which is viewed as the degree of supervision exercised in the execution
of the tasks associated with carrying out the decision.

Muczyk and Reimann propose that leaders should be allowed to adapt to different
situations. This paves the way for delegation which covers decision making and
execution.

To make delegation effective, four leadership styles are considered:

1. The directive autocrat. The leader makes decisions unilaterally and closely
supervises the activities of subordinates.
2. The permissive autocrat. This leader makes decision unilaterally but
allows subordinates a great deal of latitude in execution.
3. The directive democrat. This leader wants full participation but closely
supervises subordinate activity.
4. The permissive democrat. This leader allows high participation in decision
making and in execution.

Muczyk and Reimann maintains that there are situations that would be right for
each of the leadership styles they presented. For instance, the directive autocrat
would be the appropriate leader for subordinates who are less skilled, less mature
psychologically, and given limited time to perform.

Reference/s:
Human Behavior in Organization by: Roberto G. Medina Ph.D
https://www.iedunote.com/managerial-grid-model-leadership-styles
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/lead_path_goal.html