Leadership
Download
1 / 31

LEADERSHIP - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 129 Views
  • Uploaded on

LEADERSHIP. Leadership. Bennis (1959) Probably more has been written and less known about leadership than about any other topic in the behavioral sciences. Burns (1978) Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'LEADERSHIP' - Sophia


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Leadership1
Leadership

  • Bennis (1959) Probably more has been written and less known about leadership than about any other topic in the behavioral sciences.

  • Burns (1978) Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth.

  • Yukl (1989) The field of leadership is presently in a state of ferment and confusion. Most widely known theories are beset with conceptual weakness and lack of strong empirical support


Leadership2
LEADERSHIP

  • TRAIT APPROACHES

  • STYLE APPROACHES

  • CONTINGENCY APPROACHES


Traits
TRAITS

  • PEOPLE WHO ARE LEADERS IN ONE SITUATION ARE MORE LIKELY TO LEAD IN OTHER SITUATIONS

  • KENNY & ZACCARO: (ROTATION STUDIES) TRAITS ACCOUNT FOR 49-82% VARIANCE IN OF LEADER EMERGENCE


Traits1
TRAITS

  • SEVERAL TRAITS SHOW WEAK RELATIONS TO BEING A LEADER(DOMINANCE, INTELLIGENCE, GENDER, TASK ABILITY, ADJUSTMENT, EXTRAVERSION)

  • SOME FACTORS MAY SHOW STRONGER RELATIONS (SELF-CONFIDENCE, PARTICIPATION)


Traits2
TRAITS

  • ABILITY, SOCIAL SKILLS, MOTIVATION MAY BE USEFUL

  • LESS SURE THAT TRAITS PREDICT EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP


Style
STYLE

  • OHIO STATE MODEL

  • CONSIDERATION

  • (FRIENDLY, APPROACHABLE, USES GROUP SUGGESTIONS, TREATS MEMBERS AS HIS/HER EQUALS, ADVANCE NOTICE OF CHANGES)

  • INITIATING STRUCTURE

  • (ASSIGNS TASKS, MAKES ATTITUDES CLEAR TO GROUP, SCHEDULES WORK, DECIDES WHAT WORK IS DONE & HOW IT IS DONE)


Easy Fusion

Going

Consideration

Do Hard

Nothing Nosed

Initiating Structure


86%POS; 7%NEG

CONSIDERATION

SATISFACTION

INITIATING

STRUCTURE

PERFORMANCE

72%POS;0%NEG


Ohio state model
OHIO STATE MODEL

  • BOTH CONSIDERATION AND INITIATING STRUCTURE ARE IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF LEADERSHIP.

  • GOOD LEADERS SHOULD EMPHASIZE BOTH ACHIEVING GOALS AND TREATING PEOPLE WELL.


Transformational leadership
Transformational Leadership

  • Building commitment to organizational objectives and empowering employees to accomplish these objectives.

  • Activates higher order needs.

  • Followers feel trust, admiration, loyalty, respect for the leader, and are highly motivated.


Transactional transformational

Transactional

Contingent Rewardclarify work required for rewards

Active Mgt. by Excmonitoring & taking corrective action

Passive Mgt by Excpunish for obvious deviations from performance standards

Transformational

Charismaidentification & strong emotions

Inspiration (vision)

Intellectual Stimulationincrease awareness of problems, new perspective

Individualized Considerationsupport, encourage, develop

Transactional-Transformational


Transformational leadership meta analysis lowe 1996
Transformational Leadership Meta-Analysis (Lowe, 1996)

  • Three Transformational Scales were related to leader effectiveness in most studies

  • Charisma

  • Intellectual Stimulation

  • Individualized Consideration


Transactional transformational1
Transactional-Transformational

  • Both types of leader behavior are related to leader effectiveness.

  • Transformational behavior may be more strongly related.

  • Effective leaders use a mix of transactional and transformational behaviors.


Contingency theories
CONTINGENCY THEORIES

  • THE SITUATION DETERMINES THE SPECIFIC LEADERSHIP STYLE THAT IS MOST EFFECTIVE.

  • FIEDLER SHOWS THAT SOMETIMES PERSON ORIENTED (RELATIONSHIP MOTIVATED) LEADERS GET BETTER PERFORMANCE, OTHER TIMES TASK ORIENTED LEADERS GET BETTER RESULTS.

  • THE LEADER’S STYLE NEEDS TO MATCH THE DEMANDS OF THE SITUATION.


Easy Fusion

Going

Consideration

Do Hard

Nothing Nosed

Initiating Structure


Situational control
SITUATIONAL CONTROL

  • LEADER/MEMBER RELATIONS

  • TASK STRUCTURE (CLEAR GOALS, & FEEDBACK)

  • LEADER POSITION POWER


Fiedler s contingency theory

FAVORABLE

GOOD LEADER/ MEMBER RELATIONS

STRUCTURED TASK

POWERFUL LEADER

UNFAVORABLE

POOR LEADER/ MEMBER RELATIONS

UNSTRUCTURED TASK

LITTLE LEADER POWER

FIEDLER’S CONTINGENCY THEORY


Fiedler s contingency theory1
FIEDLER’S CONTINGENCY THEORY

PERSON ORIENTED

LEADER = BETTER PERF

TASK ORIENTED

LEADER =

BETTER PERF

TASK ORIENTED

LEADER =

BETTER PERF

+ + + + - - - -

+ + - - + + - -

+ - + - + - + -

FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE


Leader substitutes
Leader Substitutes

  • Instrumental Leadership leads to effective task performance, and Supportive Leadership leads to group maintenance.

  • But, factors other than leader behavior can help insure effective performance and group maintenance.

  • Thus, there are times when leader behaviors are unnecessary.

  • There are times when leader behaviors are ineffective.


Yukl multiple linkage model
Yukl: Multiple Linkage Model

  • Leader behavior can improve group performance because it can affect intervening variables (effort, teamwork, etc.) which affect group performance.

Leader

Behavior

Intervening

Variables

Group

Performance


Yukl intervening variables
Yukl: Intervening Variables

  • Effort

  • Ability & Role Clarity

  • Teamwork

  • Organization of Work

  • Cohesiveness & Cooperation

  • Resources & Support Services

  • External Coordination


Yukl situational constraints
Yukl: Situational Constraints

  • Affect leader’s impact on group performance in 3 ways:

  • 1. Neutralizers constrain managerial behavior & moderate its effect.

  • 2. Substitutes directly influence intervening variables making leader action unnecessary.

  • 3. Determine the relative importance of intervening variables.


Short Term

Correct deficiencies in intervening variables

Long Term

Make the situation more favorable

reduce constraints

increase substitutes

reduce importance of intervening variables not under control

Leaders must understand factors affecting group performance and monitor and take appropriate action on both a short term and a long term basis.


Examples of long term leader action
Examples of Long-Term Leader Action

  • Develop better relations w/ superiors

  • Gain more control of resource acquisition

  • start new, more profitable activities

  • upgrade personnel, equipment & facilities

  • modify formal group structure to reduce chronic problems

  • modify culture to increase motivation to excel.


Vroom & Yetton Model

  • Overall decision effectiveness depends upon decision quality and decision acceptance.

  • Acceptance: Participation generally leads to high levels of acceptance. Acceptance is important when a decision can affect work motivation or when subordinates must implement the decision.

  • Quality: Participation may or may not improve the quality of the decision. It depends on the resources and motivations of the leader and subordinates.


Participation
Participation

  • More participation now than 15 yrs ago.

  • Participation increases with age & level in the organization

  • Participation is greatest in academics and government, then private sector, least in military

  • Women are more participative

  • Most leaders show flexibility/ variability across situations


Success rates by decision type
Success Rates by Decision Type

  • AI 24%

  • AII 57%

  • CI 45%

  • CII 74%

  • GII 64%

  • Noncontingent participation increases effectiveness, but contingent participation is more closely predictive of decision effectiveness.


Vroom yetton jago model
Vroom Yetton/Jago Model

  • 65-70% of actual decisions match model

  • Quality violations are less frequent than acceptance violations

  • 22% of decision violating model were successful and 68% of decisions matching model were successful (V & Y, 1978).

  • 37% for violations and 62% for matches (V & J, 1988).

  • Number of rule violations is correlated with quality (r = -.31), acceptance (r = -.60) and overall effectiveness (r = -.49)


Old vs new vroom model

Old Model

Quality r = .24

Commitment r = . 53

Effectiveness r = .29

New Model

Quality r = .38

Commitment r = .84

Effectiveness r = .75

Old vs New Vroom Model


ad