LEADERSHIP IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS – VAN WART
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
Although the serious study of leadership is only about a hundred years old, interest in leaders and
leadership dates back thousands of years. In addition to the enormous power that leaders have had
over their people leaders often attained godlike status themselves.
Ultimately, there are two major reasons for the enduring human interest in the topic of leadership.
First, the effect of leaders on our lives is omnipresent. Leaders affect us on a grand scale in that they
determine the success or failure of our societies, countries, and localities. Hitler destroyed Germany,
while Churchill saved Great Britain. Leaders affect us just as much in our daily settings. A bad
supervisor sends us scurrying for a new job. A good team leader makes a difficult assignment seem
easy because of good organization and encouragement. Second, we are compulsively fascinated by
people in leadership positions, or those who assume the roles of leaders.
Major types of leaders
Eras of leadership theory and research
1. Great man: tot 1900
a. Nadruk op de opkomst van een nog steeds groot figuur, zoals Napoleon, die
aanzienlijk effect op de samenleving heeft
b. Tijdperk beïnvloed door noties van rationele sociale verandering door uniek
getalenteerde en inzichtelijke individuen
2. Trait theories: 1900-1948
a. Resurgence of recognition of importance of natural talents
b. Emphasis on the individual traits and skills that leaders bring to all leadership tasks
c. Era influenced by scientific methodologies in general and scientific management in
particular
3. Contingency theories: 1948-1980
a. Continuous as basis of most rigorous models but with vastly expanded situational
repertoire
b. Emphasis on the situational variables with which leaders must deal, especially
performance and follower variables. Shift from traits and skills to behaviors.
Dominated by bimodal models in its heyday
c. Era influenced by its rise of human relations theory, behavioral science and the use
of small-group experimental designs in psychology
4. Transformational theories: 1978-present
, a. Emphasis on leaders who create change in deep structures, major processes, or
overall culture. Leader mechanisms may be compelling vision, brilliant technical
insight, and/or charismatic quality
b. Era influenced by the loss of American dominance in business, finance and science,
and the need to reenergize various industries that had slipped into complacency.
5. Servant theories: 1979-present
a. Emphasis on ethical responsibilities to followers, stakeholders, and society. Business
theorists tend to emphasize service to followers; political theorists emphasize
citizens; public administration analysts tend to emphasize legal compliance and/or
citizens
6. Multifaceted theories: 1990-present
a. Emphasis on integrating the major schools, distributed and horizontal leadership,
postmodern perspectives emphasizing process and groups.
b. Era affected by the need to provide a more sophisticated and holistic framework for
leadership, more democratic models, and theories relevant to contemporary notions
of a diverse and rapidly evolving society.
Possible definitions of leadership in an administrative context
Leadership can focus strictly on the ends and the means by which things get done or it can
concentrate on aligning the organization with external needs and opportunities. A definition of
leadership can also emphasize the spirit with which leadership is conducted. In the public sector this
is invariably a public service commitment. Of course, generally, definitions are a blend of several of
these elements but with different emphases. One’s definition tends to vary based on normative
preferences and one’s concrete situation and experience.
- Administrative leadership is the process of providing the results required by authorized
systems in an efficient, effective, and legal manner
- Administrative leadership is the process of developing/supporting followers who provide the
results
- Administrative leadership is the process of aligning the organization with its environment,
especially the necessary macrolevel changes, and realigning the culture as appropriate.
- The key element to administrative leadership is its service focus
- Leadership is a composite of providing technical performance, internal direction to
followers, and external organizational direction
Levels of Leadership Analysis
One of the most important distinctions has to do with the level of analysis used for leadership
actions, which varies from specific activities to overarching classifications used to simplify the vast
array of leader responsibilities. The narrowest level of analysis is tasks, which are the discrete
functions common to many jobs. Examples are ‘conduct briefings or other meetings’ or ‘serve as
agency representative in outside meetings or activities’. Behaviours, traits, and skills are at the next
level of analysis. Behaviours are observable patterns of leader activities, primarily used to link
related tasks. All leader behaviour is typically broken down into ten to thirty behaviours, which,
according to most theories, are the elemental building blocks. The next level of analysis is style. A
style is a moderate-sized cluster of leader behaviours, primarily used to describe or prescribe actual
or ideal leader patterns. The highest level of analysis is meta categories. A meta category is a very
large cluster of behaviours used to analyse the universe of leader functions.
,Level of Organizational Conceptualization
If the focus is between leaders and followers, it is called dyadic; that is, the leadership occurs
between two people-a dyad-in which one might consider the effects of the leader's behaviours on a
follower, or a follower's attributions of a leader. Often, all followers of a leader are conceptualized as
a single entity. Another increasingly common focus is the group level of analysis. How does
leadership emerge from an unstructured group? How do leaders transform low performing groups
into high-performing or self-managed teams? A still higher level of analysis is the organization. What
type of leadership does an organization need in a time of crisis as opposed to a time of effectively
implemented innovation? What are the competency differences between a frontline supervisor and
a chief executive officer?
Leadership versus management
This text will follow the convention common to leadership studies that leaders do many things,
including leading people, leading production, and leading change. The terms "leaders" and
"managers" will be used interchangeably in the sense that managers (at any level) rarely have the
luxury of focusing only on maintenance or change, or of focusing only on followers or tasks or
organizational alignment. One of the enormous challenges of great leadership is the seamless
blending of the more operational managerial dimensions with the visionary leadership functions.
Universal versus Contingency Approaches
A universal approach to leadership assumes that at some level there is an ideal pattern of leadership
behaviour that fits nearly all situations. A contingency approach to leadership assumes that the
situations in which leaders find themselves are crucial to determining the appropriate behaviour and
style.
Formal versus Informal Leadership
Formal leadership stems from occupying a defined position (legitimacy). Informal leaders, on the
other hand, have little or no position power and must rely nearly exclusively on personal power.
Vertical versus Horizontal
Leadership Vertical leadership is commonly expressed in hierarchical relationships when the bulk of
the power is with the formal leader. Horizontal leadership occurs when hierarchy is reduced or
eliminated. It emphasizes employee or follower empowerment and delegation as well as partnering
relationships.
An operational Definition of Leadership
- Leadership is a complex process involving numerous fundamentally different types of acts
- Leadership involves assessing one’s environment and one’s leadership constraints
- Leadership involves developing numerous leadership traits and skills
- Leaders must refine and modify their style for different situations
- Leaders achieve predetermined goals
- Leaders continually evaluate their own performance
, CHAPTER 2 - UNDERSTANDING THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP STYLES
Use of a Causal-Chain Model to Compare Approaches and Theories
The generic causal-chain model of leadership that is used here incorporates three different types of
factors: leader styles, contingency factors, and performance goals. Leader styles are at the beginning
of the causal chain because they are the first demonstrable action toward followers, organization,
environment, and so forth. From a social science perspective, leader styles include all the
behavioural variables exhibited by the leader. They also lead the chain in terms of practitioner
interest: what actions lead to what performance?
The next elements considered are the contingency factors, which can be of two types. Some
contingency factors affect which behaviour or style should be selected to enhance the desired
outcome. In other words, what are the ideal conditions for a specific leadership style to be used?
These factors are sometimes called intervening variables . Other contingency factors affect the
strength, quality, or success of a particular behaviour or style. They are sometimes thought of as
strategies for success, in lay terms, or moderating variables, in scientific terms. The most common
types of moderating variables have to do with leader expertise in executing the desired style. For
example, the ideal behaviour in a given situation may be supportive, but the leader may
demonstrate this behaviour in a clumsy fashion that makes followers feel as if the attention they
receive is micromanagement.
The third part of the causal-chain model is performance goals. Originally, performance was seen
almost exclusively from an organizational perspective as production efficiency or as organizational
effectiveness in dividing work and coordinating business activities. Over the years, this was
recognized as a narrow focus for the organization that wanted to be high performing in the long
term. Performance goals (or variables) can include production efficiency, follower satisfaction and
development, external alignment, and organizational change, among others. To review, how a
leader behaves directly affects performance. The behaviours or styles the leader uses affect how
much is accomplished, how followers feel, how well the organization adapts, and so forth. However,
important factors influence this relationship. Some contingency factors (intervening variables) are so
important that they determine what styles will work most effectively in a given situation
Contingency Factors
An immense number of factors affect the leader's preferred modes of action (exhibited as styles)
and the degree of effectiveness of those actions. What does the leader think the overall goals should
be? What are the task skills of the followers? What is subordinate effort like? How good is the
organization of the work and how does this align with performance strategies? What types of
constraints do leaders have to incorporate, including their own abilities, such as traits, skills, and
behavioral competencies?
Factors Commonly Included in Major Leadership Theories
1. A Leader characteristics:
a. Trait and skill characteristics
b. Behaviour characteristics
c. Leader attributions of followers
d. Leader power, influence, and negotiating
2. Task characteristics:
a. Role, task, and organizational clarity
b. Task clarity and complexity
