Samenvatting

Summary Leadership and Organisational Culture (1st exam): Week 3, week 4 and week 5

0 keer verkocht

Instelling
Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)

This summary contains: Yukl & Gardner (2020) – chapter 4 Yukl & Gardner (2020) – chapter 6 Benoliel, P. & Somech, A. (2014). The health and performance effects of participative leadership Cheong, M., Spain, S.M., Yammarino, F.J., & Yun, S. (2016). Two faces of empowering leadership: Enabli...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 3 van de 28 pagina's

Bekijk voorbeeld

Geupload op 1 juli 2022
Aantal pagina's 28
Geschreven in 2020/2021
Type Samenvatting

organisational culture
leadership
organizational culture
thompson et al
leadership and organisational culture
leadership and organizational culture
yukl amp gardner
magee amp galinsky
judge et al

3. Leader substitutes theory
4. Least Preferred Co-worker Theory
No questions about these
5. Multiple Linkage model
6. Cognitive Resources Theory of Leadership

It is based on Vroom’s expectancy value
theory. The main premise of this model is
that leaders should make sure that they
improve their follower’s performance by
enhancing their motivation. This depends
on things such as how much follower’s
value their outcomes and how much
influence they have over their outcomes
(expectancy). Depending on what a leader
believes their followers need, they can
vary their behavior. When employees
don’t know what they need to do, leaders
need to be directive. In other settings, employees need coaching and thus leaders need to be
supportive. Sometimes leaders simply have to provide information or they need input of
followers, which would be seen as a participative style of leadership. The idea of the path-goal
theory is that the leader removes obstacles in the pathway of the employee to reach their
goals/to perform. Thus, the leader enhances the path to the goal by using rich behavior to
perform.
Depending on what the employees and tasks need, the leader can change their behavior.

Criticism on contingency theories
• Meta-categories of leader behavior; difficult to test
• Causality not explained
• Impact behavioral patterns
• Little (to no) or even opposite evidence (except for the NDM)
• Little practical guidance
However:
• Several important insights were gained, such as the research of Thomson & Glaso
• And a lot of leadership research applies a contingency perspective

A contingency approach helps to determine how a
leader can be effective. The trait approach
considered which (universal) characteristics leaders
need in order to be successful. The behavior
approach concerned leaders’ (correct) behaviors
that predicted leadership effectiveness. However,
both traits and behaviors are contingent upon the
situation.

Week 3
Readings for week 3
Yukl & Gardner (2020) – chapter 4
Decision making by managers
Some findings of decision-making processes involve the following:
- Emotions and intuition → in most decision processes, emotions are involved since
information is often distorted and unclear. The greater the job demands and the stress,
the more likely it is that managers make their decisions based on emotions and

27

, intuition (especially when the problem is novel and previous tactics are not
appropriate).
- Important decisions → making important decisions does not happen in a single
moment, rather it is a long process with many small actions and the help of many
different people. How long this process is, depends on whether the involved parties
have conflicting interests, when diffusion of power exists, or when managers have
different mental models regarding the problem.
- Informal and adaptive → most decisions are made outside of the formal planning
process and are formulated in a flexible and adaptive manner. Formal planning is
merely a confirmation of strategic decisions already reached through the informal
political process.
- Routine decision → now not all decisions involve major change or are a long process.
Managers also make many short-term decisions to solve operational problems, setting
short-term goals, or assigning work to employees. These decisions are often made by
the manager alone, involve little conflict and often involve established procedures.

Participative leadership
Participative leadership (PL) is a form of relational-
oriented leadership where leaders involve their employees
in making decisions. There’s a difference in the extent to
which employees are involved in the decision-making
process: no involvement to complete involvement:
- Autocratic decision → manager makes the
decision alone without asking for employees’
opinions.
- Consultation → manager makes the decision
alone after asking and considering employees’
opinions and suggestions
- Joint decision → manager meets with employees, discusses the problem and make the
decision together (here the manager is equal to the employees).
- Delegation → manager gives employees full responsibility and authority to decide on
their own.
These different decision procedures lead to different processes and potential benefits of PL (see
model below).
Decision quality → when employees cooperate and share their knowledge, participation will
likely lead to higher decision quality.
Decision acceptance → when employees have influence in decision-making, they will identify
with the decision and will be more likely to accept it.
Satisfaction with the decision process → an opportunity to express opinions and preferences
(called voice) will lead to higher feelings of procedural justice and satisfaction with the process.
Development of participant skills → the more employees are involved, the more they learn.

Note: the benefits of PL are called potential because it depends on the processes and situational
variables. The benefits could also turn the other way around (e.g., decision quality → when there

28

, is no cooperation among members and important knowledge of several employees is not
incorporated into the decision making, participation will rather lead to a lower decision quality).
The benefits also depend on who is involved in the decision process. (1) Downward consultation
(with subordinates; could lead to all four of the benefits), (2) Lateral consultation (with peers;
could lead to higher decision quality and decision acceptance), (3) Upward consultation (with
bosses; could lead to higher decision quality but can also be a sign of lack of self-confidence), (4)
Consulting with outsiders (with clients or suppliers; could lead to higher decision quality,
decision acceptance and satisfaction).
The relationship between participative leadership and employee performance is moderated by
the amount of information that was shared. Furthermore, employee perceptions of leadership
effectiveness mediated the combined effects of participative leadership and information sharing
on objective work performance.

Normative decision model
Normative decision model (NDM)
A contingency theory on the effectiveness of decisions
- 5 decision types
- 7 decision rules
§ For quality and acceptance (implementation)
The basic idea of this model is that a manager
chooses a decision procedure. Note: in this
model, there are five (two types of autocratic
decision (A-I / A-II), two types of consultation
(C-I / C-II), and one type of joint decision (G-II).
The decision procedure influences the decision
quality and decision acceptance. Finally, those
two aspects function as a mediator for the
relationship between decision procedure and
work performance. Since the normative decision
model is a contingency theory, the influence of
the type of decision procedure depends on
situational variables, such as the importance and
complexity of the decision, the distribution of
relevant information, subordinate attitudes regarding the decision, and leader dependence on
subordinates.

Based on this model, decision rules are made as a guide which decision procedure fits best (or
worst) with the circumstances:
- When decision importance is high and subordinates possess relevant information
lacked by the leader, autocratic decision (A-I and A-II) is NOT appropriate.
- When decision quality is important and subordinates do not share a leader’s concern
for task goals, a group decision (G-II) is NOT appropriate.
- When decision quality is important, the problem is unstructured, and the leader
doesn’t have enough information and expertise, a consultation or group decision (C-II
or G-II) is recommendable.

29

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper psychologystudent1. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,09. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 66184 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis