Leadership in Organizations
Practice and perspectives
Kevin Roe
Chapter 2 | Trait theory – description, analysis and use __________________________________ 2
Chapter 3 | Behavioural models _____________________________________________________ 4
Chapter 4 | The style approach to leadership ___________________________________________ 8
Chapter 5 | Situational and Contingent Leadership _____________________________________ 12
Chapter 6 | Charisma and transformational leadership __________________________________ 17
Chapter 11 | Ethical leadership ______________________________________________________ 21
Chapter 12 | Diversity and leadership ________________________________________________ 25
Chapter 13 | Power, influence and authority ___________________________________________ 29
Chapter 15 | Leadership and change _________________________________________________ 32
1
,Chapter 2 | Trait theory – description, analysis and use
Important topics
1. Understand the evolution of trait theory and how the relative importance of theory trait has
changed over the past hundred years.
2. Be able to appraise the theory critically – understand what it proposes, why this view
developed and what critics consider to be its weakness.
3. Begin to formulate your own perspective on your leadership approach and the implications
of adopting this as a framework for understanding ‘leaders’.
Trait theory
The theory is an attempt to link an individual’s
personality with leadership behaviour and suggest
that leaders are born rather than ‘made’. People are
born with certain character traits that makes them
qualified to be a leader. Important in this chapter is
the historical evolution of this theory, its strengths and
weaknesses, and asks if it still has a place in the
development of leadership studies.
Since certain traits are associated with
proficient leadership, it assumes that people can be
identified as people with leadership potential if they
possess the ‘correct’ traits. According to trait theorist,
traits are relatively stable over time, differ among
individuals and influence behaviour.
Another perspective is the type-based view. Figure 1: The OCEAN / CANOE / Big Five Model
This view suggest that humans are characterized by
personality types. Type theorist have a much more dichotomous view of personality with an individual
being attributed with being either an introvert or an extrovert whereas trait theorist suggest there is a
continuum and an individual can as such be more or less than another person in terms of these
descriptors. More about this in chapter 9.
More confusing is the debate about the traits that make up the ‘core’ of human personality.
There is disagreement between the advocates of the trait theory. However, recently the Big Five
Model has emerged and tries to distil the various ideas into one usable framework (see figure 1). The
central theme, the continuum, is important to notice here because for every trait exists an hypothetical
scale.
Decline of the trait theory
Around 1940 many researchers investigating the nature of leadership ran out of team because they
could not agree, or find a consistent set of traits that differentiated leaders from ‘non-leaders’. More
recent studies suggest that circumstances and institutional structures contribute as much to success
as any inherited personality condition. The trait theory received a lot of critique, recent studies also
could not agree and there was a discussion about gender, and began to wane as an influential
framework after that.
Not all researchers dismissed the trait theory, they took a slightly different perspective. McCall
and Lombardo (1983) searched for traits that would prevent those with potential to become a leader.
They looked for traits that disabled leadership. Their study found 5 traits that ‘derailed’ leadership:
2
,emotional instability, defensiveness, lack of integrity, absence of social skills and an over reliance on
technical skills. Hogan tried to expand this approach. Other writers have attempt to explain leadership
failure why hinting at a broader set of concerns that may include changing circumstance and external
environment.
Trait theory and organizations
Before discarding the trait theory as an approach that can help organizations, it is worth reviewing
it’s strengths.
1. The approach is consistent with a philosophy that defines leadership as being a ‘person’ rather
than a ‘role’ or hierarchical position. This enables organizations to select individuals that will
be able to perform leadership tasks by developing pre-existing attributes regardless of
circumstance. This is important nowadays because organisation’s environment changes
quickly all the time. Selecting leaders on the basis of personality is a likely predictor of future
leadership success.
2. Trait theory could help organizations with its ‘derailer’ approach by identifying those
individuals with poor interpersonal skills and by developing an intervention strategy designed
to help them develop behaviours that are more in keeping with the organizations’ value set.
3. Researchers found a significant positive correlation with leadership effectiveness and
extraversion, conscientiousness and openness of the Big Five Model.
4. Trait theory offers organizations and individuals the chance to operate on a level playing field
in terms of recruitment and promotion because leadership traits are not exclusive to either
sex, race, social class etc. Individuals can be selected and moved through the organization
based on their innate abilities rather than being from a particular caste.
3
,Chapter 3 | Behavioural models
Important topics
1. Understand how behaviour and skills became important in the study of leadership.
2. Grasp the challenges using this approach to analyse leaders.
3. Begin to formulate your own thoughts by using the case studies and questionnaire.
Foundations principles
Because of World War II they needed to train men quickly from a wide range of different background
to leader soldiers, sailors and airmen into battle. Their quest evolved into the behavioural and skill
theories examined in this chapter. Behavioural models are, just as the trait theory, very focused on the
person. This means that the approach placed the individual at the centre of any study and has a
premise that leadership is about understanding the person rather than the situation or context.
The behavioural theory suggests that leaders can be made and are not necessarily born. The
focus of this set of theories is around the knowledge, skills and associated behaviours needed for
leadership. Behavioural psychology is a theory of learning based upon the idea that all behaviours are
acquired through conditioning. There are two major types of conditioning:
1. classic conditioning: a naturally occurring stimulus is paired with a response. Next, a previously
neutral stimulus is paired with the naturally occurring stimulus. Eventually, the previously
neutral stimulus comes to evoke the response without the presence of the naturally occurring
stimulus (Pavlov’s experiment).
2. Operant conditioning: method of learning that occurs through rewards and punishments for
behaviour. An association is made between behaviour and a consequence for that behaviour.
What are leadership behaviours?
What activities, functions, roles and jobs do
organizations need their leaders to be effective at? In
addition, Katz proposed that at different levels within
an organizations, managers needed a different
emphasis in terms of their skills (see figure 2).
Figure 2: Katz model
POSDCORB
Luther Gulick (1936) developed the acronym POSDCORB to describe the activities of a chief executive.
1. Planning
2. Organizing: establishing the formal structure of authority through which work subdivisions are
arranged, defined an coordinated for the defined objective set via planning.
3. Staffing: designing and running the HR functions of bringing in and training staff, and
maintaining favourable working conditions.
4. Directing: the continuous task of making decisions and embodying them in specific and general
orders and instructions, and serving as the leader of the enterprise.
5. Coordinating: relating the various parts of the work.
6. Reporting
7. Budgeting
4
,Taxonomy of managerial roles
In exploring this, Mintzberg tested if modern executives still carry out their role in this matter. He
developed a taxonomy of managerial roles that divided the manager’s activities into 10 main activities
within 3 broad roles.
1. Interpersonal roles
a. Figurehead: mainly symbolic role where the leader performs ceremonial duties. The
organization can be associated with the leader via this role.
b. Leader: define organizational culture as well as providing guidance and role modelling for
subordinates, being responsible for the conditions of work, integrating the various
functions of the organization and motivating the workforce.
c. Liaison: develop and maintain a web of contacts outside the enterprise. Purpose is to find
and secure new opportunities to increase influence.
1. Information-processing role
a. Monitor: understanding what is going on within the organization and it’s environment.
b. Disseminator: passing the gathered information down to subordinates.
c. Spokesperson: transmitting information about the organization to its external
stakeholders but this can also be internal to the board.
2. Decision-making role
a. Entrepreneur: control and manage change within the organization in order to take
advantage of the opportunities identified via the monitoring and networking role.
b. Disturbance handler: ‘firefighting’ role where the manager will seek to resolve unforeseen
disturbances in the organization.
c. Resource allocator: managers needs to oversee three essential elements of resource
allocation: schedule individual employees’ time, program work and authorize expenditure.
By doing so he can maintain control over the strategic decision made in his role as leader.
d. Negotiator: negotiate during conflicts between subordinates and other stakeholders.
Leadership Grid
Blake and Mouton (1964) identified
two fundamental drivers of
managerial behaviour:
1. Task-focused approach:
concern for getting the job
done.
2. Relationship approach:
concern for the people doing
the work.
They argue that only a task-focused
approach leads to conflict which
adversely affects the performance, but
on the other hand too much focus on
relationship approach is detrimental to
the achievement of goals. They made
an framework known as the
Managerial / Leadership Grid (figure
3). The 5 positions represent differing Figure 3: Managerial / Leadership Grid
managerial behaviour patterns.
In subsequent development of the grid Blake and Mouton suggested that more complex
approach was needed. They suggest two different approaches that they identified as paternalism /
maternalism and opportunism. With these approaches leaders treat you well as you do as expected
5
,of you. Failure will lead to punishment and ostracization from the group. The opportunistic style seeks
to ensure that the leaders gains maximum advantage by using the grid position that will give him most
benefit.
Action-centred leadership
Adair developed action-centred leadership. He believed that leadership was a transferable skills and
divides the leadership ‘function’ into 3 distinct crucially interrelated areas: task, team and individual.
The leader needs to contribute to each area in order to be successful. The relative size of the area’s
may be larger or smaller than each other depending on the circumstance facing the leader.
Headline function Sub-tasks
Task Identify aims and vision for the group, purpose, and direction; identify
resources, people, processes, systems. Create the plan and establish
responsibilities, set standards, quality, time and reporting parameters.
Team Establish, agree, and communicate standards of performance and behaviour.
Anticipate and resolve group conflict, struggles or disagreements.
Individual Understanding the team members as individuals – personality, skills, strengths,
needs, aims, and fears. Give recognition and praise to individuals –
acknowledge effort and good work. Develop individua team members.
Adair also sets out core functions of leadership and suggests they are vital to the action-centred
leadership model:
1. Planning: seeking information, defining tasks, setting aims;
2. Initiating: briefing, task allocation, setting standards;
3. Controlling: maintaining standards, ensuring progresss, ongoing decision making;
4. Supporting: individuals’ contributions, encouraging, team spirit, reconciling, morale;
5. Informing: clarifying tasks and plans, updating, receiving feedback and interpreting;
6. Evaluating: feasibility of ideas, performance, enabling self-assessment.
Skills-based model
Mumford et al. (2000) brings the ‘skills debate’ forward
with their skills-based model (figure 4). Their argument
is that leadership is about solving complex social
problems. According to them first the problem needs
to be defined; second, the leader needs to deal with the
mass of info available for analysis of the problem;
finally experience needs to be used to solve novel and
unique problems.
With echoes from Adair’s model, effective
leadership is seen as the product of 3 separate but
related skills: problem solving skills, social judgement Figure 4: skills-based model
skills and social skills. They set these skills in a broader
framework, which includes environmental constrains and career or life experiences of the leader. They
state that leaders are not born nor made: their inherent potentials are shaped by experiences
enabling them to develop capabilities needed to solve significant social problems.
Organizational implications – strengths and weaknesses
Behavioural and skills models focus on the individual and largely attempt to analyse and create a
similar profile, albeit one based on externally observable phenomena rather than hidden personality
traits. It is also a largely descriptive approach in that each model describes a method that can be
6
,followed by a leader to deliver an organizational solution. Their skills in resolving the tension inherent
in developing an organization make the difference between success and failure. Individuals can learn
these skills, leadership is seen as a set of trainable skills.
Strenghts
This approach is very appealing for organizations because it gives them both a structure and
methodology for developing leaders and leadership within their context. If an organization can define
what skills they look for in a leader then individuals within the business have a template against which
they can be mapped an measured. Other activities, like assessments, will become inherently easier.
This model, combined with the latest, broader view that incorporates some environmental conditions
and the experience of the leader creates a view on leadership that is complex, rich, subtle and contrasts
with the earlier prescription of leadership as a simple function of personality.
Weaknesses
By adding dimensions such as experience and environmental constraints, a degree of complexity can
be reached at which it can be very difficult for organizations to grasp the concept as a developmental
tool. In addition, a couple of key aspects are not mentions in the models. The motivation of the leader
is also key: they must be willing to tackle difficult and challenging organizational problems, be able to
exercise influence over their followers and demonstrate social commitment. Finally, the causal link
between skill and effective outcomes for the leader is not made particularly explicit. The model does
not explain how an improvement in skill will lead to a corresponding improvement in performance.
Therefore the return on investment (ROI) in the skill is often not clear, ROI-models could be used for
this, but it is hard to make a link between sending a managers to an MBA course and measure an
increase in shareholder value for example.
7
,Chapter 4 | The style approach to leadership
Important topics
1. Understand how leadership theories evolved to include the style of the leader as a model for
a universal theory of leadership.
2. Explore the pressures on leaders that emerge from their environment.
3. Review different perspectives on the style approach critically.
Evolution of the style approach
Stogdill (1948) found no relationship between manager’s traits and success. Therefore he studied how
managers behaved in their role as leader at the university of Ohio. His team developed a two-
dimensional model of leadership behaviour. The two distinct and independent behaviours that evolve
as a consequence of the leader’s interactions with followers are:
1. Consideration: the extent to which a leader exhibits concern for the welfare of the members
of the group.
2. Initiating structures: the leader defining the leader and group member roles, initiating actions,
organizing group activities, and defining how tasks are to be accomplished by the group.
Meanwhile, Likert and his Michigan University team were pursuing a different strategy but with a
similar methodology. They also developed a two-dimensional leadership approach model:
1. Employee orientation: focus on developing strong human relationships.
2. Production orientation: focus on delivering results for the organization.
Both findings were very similar to the Ohio studies but there was a fundamental difference in how
these two institutions initially conceptualized their findings. Whereas Stogdill and the Ohio team used
a two-dimensional model which meant that, like Blake and Mouton, a leader could demonstrate both
human and task orientation, Likert and Michigan team placed their dimensions at either end of a
continuum. This meant that managers could be either human- or task-oriented, but not both.
Additional research has been done but results have been inconclusive.
Organizational culture
Elaborating his early work, Likert developed a ‘management system’: a complex model that tried to
define the relationship, involvement and roles of managers and subordinates in industrial setting. He
sees leadership and the decision-making approach of the leader and the culture of organizations as
mutually dependent, this is fundamental to Likert’s thinking. Because of his ‘either-or’ model, he could
only offer a limited range of alternatives.
Management system Explanation
Exploitative Decisions made only by management. Subordinates need to obey those rules. Coercive
authoritative system power with punishment as consequence of not obeying the rules. Exclusive focus on task
achievement and gaining profit.
Benevolent Similar to exploitative system but incentives and rewards are offered for compliance and
authoritative system effort. There may be a flow of info from bottom to top of the organization, but most likely to
please the leadership.
Consultative system Limited degree of involvement by subordinates in decision-making process, but it’s clear that
ultimately decisions will be made by management and the information collected may not be
used. Consequently there is a flow up, down and across the business but this flow often is
limited in quality and quantity of the information.
Participative (group) Leadership has complete trust in subordinates. Clear and plentiful flow of communication
system and subordinates are fully involved in decision making process. Mostly teamwork. Linking
pins are unique, they are persons that belong to more than one team and can exercise a
degree of coordination across the organization. Employees feel responsible for goals and are
therefore motivated.
8
, Widening the choice
Tannenbaum and Schmidt wrote an
influential article called ‘How to Choose
a Leadership Pattern’ (1958). They
identified 7 different styles. These styles
arise as a function of the degree of
legitimate authority wielded by the
leader in pursuit of the organizational
goals and the amount of freedom
accorded to followers. The diagonal line
does not run from corner to corner
because neither extreme is absolute.
Manager makes and announces the
decision
Leader has all the information for
defining and solving the problem. The legitimate power is used to the full limit of organization’s
constraints. Coercive threat may be used when instructions not followed.
Manager ‘sells’ the decision
Leader makes decision by himself but presents it to his subordinates. Explicit in this approach is the
assumption that he is now considering the impact on his followers and that they may react to his
decision. This reaction can be negative, therefore he needs to apply conflict resolution techniques,
influences his subordinates or use rewards and incentivize his followers to follow instructions.
Manager makes the decision and invites comments from team
Again, leader makes decision but he knows that his subordinates must buy into his thinking to perform
his instructions and understand the implications of their actions more fully. This way both parties
understand more about each other and how the decision will affect their own positions. Subordinates
are able to ask questions but can not change the decision.
Manager presents tentative decision that could be subject to changes
Managers identifies problem and diagnoses possible solutions, subordinates have limited input to this
process. The manager will encourage feedback and is open to new ideas but he will still reserve the
right to attempt his solution despite this input.
Manager only identifies the problem
Manager presents his diagnoses of the problem to the team asking them to come up with possible
solutions. From these options the manager will select what he considers to be the solution most likely
to be successful. The purpose of the team is to increase the manager’s repertory of possible solutions,
they do not not have any role in making the ultimate decision.
Manager states the limits and the group makes decision
Decision making is passed from the manager to the group, although the manager may still be part of
this group and has defined the problem. Manager has set boundaries within which the proposed
solution must fit. The team may also have the capacity to implement the solution.
The group makes the decision
Decision making lies exclusively within the control of the team. The only constrains are those imposed
by the organization’s wider limitations. Manager is seen as equal participant who will act on behalf of
the team.
9
