Leadership Theories
Leadership is a crucial ingredient of organisational effectiveness. Numerous efforts have been made by social scientists to analyse the phenomenon of leadership. Broadly we could classify these contributions into four theories, namely:
- The Great Man theory
- The Trait theory
- The Behavioural theory
- The Situational theory
The Great Man Theory
The Great Man theory of leadership is perhaps the oldest of all possible theories. It suggests that a successful administrator is an innately competent leader who is “born rather than made”. Implied in this theory is the belief that the basis for the success of a leader cannot be identified by studying him or his methods. Those who play faith in this approach tend to emphasise executive selection and not executive development in their personnel programmes.
The Trait Theory
In contrast to the Great Man theory, the trait theory postulates that successful leadership is correlated with the personality characteristics of the appointed leader and these can be systematically studied.
Early writers of the trait theory postulated that leadership is largely a matter of personality, a function of specific traits. Trait theorists suggest that leaders differ from followers for a small number of key traits and these traits remain unchanged across time. The trait theory attempts to isolate the attributes of successful and unsuccessful leaders and, using this list of traits, predict the success or failure of potential leaders. If traits can be measured in some way, most organizations can easily select for leadership only persons well suited by their personality or temperament for such roles.
According to Keith Davis, the major traits that have an impact on successful organisations are:
Intelligence
Research generally shows that leaders have higher intelligence than the average intelligence of their followers. Interestingly, however, leaders cannot be exceedingly much more intelligent than their followers.
Social Maturity And Breadth
Leaders tend to be emotionally stable and mature and to have broad interests and activities, they have an assured, respectful self-concept. Inner motivation and achievement drive: Leaders have relatively intense motivational drives of the achievement type. They strive for intrinsic rather than extrinsic rewards.
Human Relations Attitudes
Successful leaders recognize the worth and dignity of their followers and can empathize with them.
The Trait theory suffers from serious lacunae. Attempts by various social scientists to determine exactly the Traits of a leader have resulted in a complete failure. “Fifty years of study have failed to produce one personality trait or a set of qualities that can be used to discriminate leaders and non-leaders”.
Empirical studies suggest that leadership is a dynamic process, varying from situation to situation the changes in leaders, followers and situations. These studies gave an impetus for the behavioural and situational theories of leadership.
The Behavioural Theory
The Behavioural theories attempt to describe leadership in terms of what leaders do. According to this approach, leadership is effective role behaviour. Leadership is shown by a person’s actions.
According to this theory, the followers depend upon those leaders who satisfy their needs. They extend support and cooperation as long as the leaders satisfy their needs and motivate them to achieve the objectives and goals of the organisation. Hollander and Julian have emphasised this point when they said. “the person in the role of a leader who fulfils expectations and achieves group goals provides rewards for others which are reciprocated in the form of status, esteem, and heightened influence. Because leadership embodies a two-way influence relationship, recipients of influence assertions may respond by asserting influence in turn …The very sustenance of the relationship depends upon some yielding to influence on both sides”.
Numerous studies have been conducted by Behavioural researchers in Industrial situations: The most important among them are:
a) Michigan studies
After studying numerous industrial situations, the Michigan researchers identified two leadership styles-Employee-centered and Production-centered influencing employee performance and productivity.
The Michigan studies prescribe the employee-oriented style of leadership to increase productivity. They postulated that the supervisory control and production centred leadership frustrate the employees and have a detrimental effect on their morale.
The Michigan studies were compatible with the prevailing system in post-Hawthorne America and as such became very popular. Researchers were able to identify the specific behaviour that influenced employee behaviour and postulated that people-oriented leadership should take precedence before work-oriented leadership. Their efforts led to a widespread belief in the 1950s that an employee orientéd leadership type was always superior.
b) The Ohio State University Studies
Based on an analysis of actual leadership behaviour in a wide variety of situations, the Ohio state leadership studies identify two leadership behaviours Viz. Focus on structure D Focus on people.
A leader who focussed on people emphasised the needs of the people. His main function is to facilitate cooperative goal attainment among followers while providing opportunities for their personal growth and development. His main focus is on the needs of the people – the overall goal being the integration of individual and organisational goals.
While the Michigan studies plotted leader behaviour in a single continuum (focus on work/ structure…… focus on people) the Ohio studies postulated that the behaviour of a leader could be a mix of both dimensions (viz. a mix of focus on work/ structure and focus on people).
They postulated that leader behaviour could vary in the following four dimensions:
- The leader accords high priority to people and low priority to the structure.
- The leader accords high priority to structure and low priority to people.
- The leader accords low priority to structure and low priority to people.
- The leader accords high priority to structure and high priority to people.
The Blake & Mouton Managerial Grid
Robert R.Blake and Janę S.Mouton have developed a managerial grid that encompasses five different styles of leadership. These leadership styles are based on the variables of concern for structure (task/production) and concern for people (relationships).
They define concern for production and concern for people as follows :
Concern for production:
This is not limited to things only. Production may be assessed through the number of creative ideas that applied research turns into useful products, procedures or processes: quality, and thoroughness of staff services, workload and efficiency and measurements as well as units of output.
the concern of people:
It is not confined to narrow considerations of interpersonal warmth and Inendliness. It covers a variety of concerns which can include concern for the degree of Personal commitment to completing a job for which one is responsible; accountability based on trust rather than force: self-esteem the desire for a sense of security in work with co-workers leading to a healthy working climate.
According to Blake and Mouton, the two concerns i.e. concern for production and concern 101 people are two sides of the same coin and should be utilised with maximum and integrated concern to achieve the objectives of the organisation. They postulated that people and production are complementary rather than mutually exclusive. The leadership style of the leader could be a combination of both with a difference of degree. Blake and Mouton have visualised five leadership styles and have positioned them in the form of a Managerial Grid.
The Managerial Grid of Blake and Moutan
Ebben Blake and Moutan have described the five styles as follows:
1. Impoverished leadership style:
This style implies exertion of minimum effort on part of the leader to get the required work done. In effect, the leader exerts himself only to that extent as is appropriate to sustain organisation relationships. The leader, therefore, according low priority to both production and people.
2. Country club leadership style :
This leadership style implies that the leader accords high priority to people and low priority to production. The leader accords thoughtful attention to the needs of the people as he believes that satisfying relationships lead to a comfortable and friendly organisational atmosphere and work tempo.
3. Middle road style :
This leadership style implies that the leader accords a balanced priority to both production and people. The leader employing the middle road style believes that adequate organisation performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get the work done while maintaining the employee morale at a satisfactory level. The middle road leader, therefore, accords moderate but equal priority to production and people
4. Task leadership style :
This leadership style implies that the leader accords a high priority to tasks and a low priority to people. The task-oriented leader believes that efficiency in operation results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements. non interfere to a minimum degree.
5. Team leadership style:
This leadership style implies that a leader accords equal and high priority to production and people. A leader employing the Team leadership style believes that work accomplishment from committed people: and interdependence through a common state in the organisation purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect.
The Managerial Grid is based on massive practical research into behavioural sciences in the industrial setting. The managerial grid is more than just a theory in human behaviour. It is a tested science of management theory employing systematic principles which can be taught and which may then be applied in the day to day situations. The exciting aspect of the managerial grid is its effectiveness in improving people’s attitudes and behaviour throughout an entire organization to the benefit of the organization. It promises to turn the art of managing into a ‘science’. It has been successfully applied in the industry and has contributed greatly to increased profits and union-management relations.
Situational Theory
Both Trait and Behavioural approaches to leadership prove to fall short of a comprehensive and adequate theory of leadership styles. Each of the theories attempted to isolate a broad dimension of leadership behaviour and indulged profusely in oversimplification. The theories failed to link leadership with important performance indicators such as production, efficiency and satisfaction. Due to these lacunae, they were not of much use to practising managers.
The Situational theories have attempted to overcome these lacunae. The Situational theories take the position that leadership is a complex social and interpersonal process and to understand it fully we need to comprehend the situation in which a leader operates. Therefore the Situational theories postulated that the variables in each situation must be analysed before optimum leadership styles can be selected.
The Important Situational Theories are
- Fielder’s contingency model
- House’s path-goal model
- Life Cycle Theory Of Leadership
Fielder’s Contingency Model
Fred E.Fiedler postulates that there is no best style of leadership. According to Fiedler, there can only be a most effective style of leadership in any given situation. The crux of Fiedler’s theory is that a leadership style may be effective or ineffective depending upon the important elements of the situation.
According to the leadership contingency model developed by Fiedler, three major situational variables seem to determine whether a given situation is favourable (Fiedler defines the favourableness of a situation as the degree to which the situation enables the leader to exert his influence over the group) to leaders :
The leader-member relations refers to the degree of confidence trust and respect followers have in the leader. It indicates the degree to which group members like the leader and are willing to accept the leader’s behaviour, as an influence on them. If followers are willing to follow because of charisma, expertise, competence, or mutual respect, the leader has little need to depend on task structure or position power. If, on the other hand, the too favourable.
Task structure :
It measures the extent to which the task performed by subordinates is routine or non-routine. Task structure refers to the degree to which the task requirements are clearly defined, (clarity of goal’s) the correctness of a decision can be easily verified (verifiability of decisions made) and there are alternative solutions to the task problem’s multiplicity of options to solve problems.
Leader position power :
The most obvious manner in which the leader secures power is by accepting and performing the leadership role. Position power in the contingency model refers to the power inherent in the leader’s organizational position.
It refers to the degree to which the leader has at his disposal various rewards and sanctions, his authority over the group’s members, and the degree to which this authority is supported by the organization.
The most favourable situation for leaders to influence their group is one in which they are well-liked by the members (good leader-member relations), have a powerful position (high position power);, and are directing a well-defined job (high task structure); for example, a well-liked general making inspection in an army camp. On the other hand, the most unfavourable situation for leaders is one in which they are disliked, have little position power, and face an unstructured task, such as an unpopular head of a voluntary hospital fund-raising committee.
Having developed this model for classifying group situations, Fiedler has attempted to determine what the most effective leadership style-task oriented or relationship-oriented — seems to be for each of the situations. In a re-examination of old leadership studies and an analysis of new studies, Fiedler has concluded that :
Relationship-oriented leaders tend to perform best in situations that are intermediate in favourableness.
Although Fiedler’s model is useful to a leader, he seems to be reverting to a single continuum of leader behaviour, suggesting that there are only two basic leader behaviour styles, task-oriented and relationship-oriented. Most evidence indicates that leader behaviour must be plotted on two separate axes rather than on a single continuum, thus, a leader who is high on-task behaviour is not necessarily high or low on relationship behaviour. Any combination of the two dimensions may occur.
House’s Path-Goal Model
The path-Goaltheory, proposed by Robert J. House, is an important landmark in the development of leadership theory. Like other situational theories, the path-goal model attempts to predict leadership effectiveness in different situations. According to this theory, leaders are effective because they influence followers motivation, ability to perform and satisfaction. The term path-goals is employed because the leader facilitates the path to work goals and provides rewards for achieving them. The path-goal model proposes that individuals are satisfied with their jobs if they believe it leads to desirable outcomes, and they work hard if they believe that this effort will result in desirable outcomes. Subordinates are motivated by the leader’s style to the extent it influences the goal paths and goal attractiveness.
The Main Propositions of the Path theory are
1. Leader behaviour is acceptable and satisfying to the extent that the subordinates perceive such behaviour as an immediate source of satisfaction, as instrumental to future satisfaction. Leader behaviour is motivational if such behaviour results in the satisfaction of subordinate’s needs and such behaviour complement the environment of workers by providing the guidance, clarity of direction and rewards necessary for effective performance,
2. According to the Path goal theory, leaders should motivate subordinates by clarifying the path to personal rewards that result from attaining work goals. The path is clarified by eliminating confusion or conflicting ideas that the subordinate may hold. The leader should also increase the number and kinds of rewards available to subordinates. He should provide guidance and counsel to clarify how these rewards can be obtained. In other words, it is the manager’s task to provide the subordinate with a better fix on the job, to help clarify realistic expectancies and reduce the barriers to the accomplishment of valued goals.
Leaders should, in a nutshell,
i) Clear Paths
ii) Clarify goals
iii) Provide support
iv) Provide rewards
v) Analyse the situation, task and employees’ needs
Leaders can perform these strategic functions, according to the path-goal model, by adopting the following styles of behaviour :
- Supportive: Leader is friendly and approachable to the employees; shows concern for status, well-being and needs of the employees, treats them as his equals. This is similar to what Ohio State researchers labelled consideration’.
- Directive: LThe leader here focuses on planning, organizing, and coordinating the activities of subordinates. He defines the standards of performance, lets subordinates know what is expected of them. It is similar to the Ohio State researchers initiating structure’.
- Participative: LThe leader here consults the employees, solicits their suggestions, incorporates good decisions.
- Achievement-oriented: The leader adopting this style sets challenging goals; expects the workers to perform at their best, continuously seeks increments in their performance etc.
The Situational Factors
While exercising leadership styles, the leader must consider two groups of situational variables – characteristics of subordinates and work environment.
Characteristics of subordinates:
The style selected by the leader should be compatible with the abilities, needs and personalities of the followers. If the followers are high in their Totability, a supportive style would suffice; if they have low ability then a highly structured and directing style is necessary. Subordinates with high needs for affiliation will be satisfied with a considerate leader. But subordinates with a high need for achievement will probably prefer a task-oriented leader. Again, the personality of the subordinates is an important Od contingency variable in the path-goal model, Internally-oriented employees, (internals) who believe they can control their own behaviour, prefer leaders who demonstrate more supportive behaviour. On the other hand, externally-oriented (externals) employees who believe that fate controls their behaviour prefer directive leadership,
Work Environment :
The environmental variables include factors that are not within the control of the subordinate but which are significant to the satisfaction or to the ability to Ai perform effectively. These include the subordinate tasks, formal authority system of the organization and the primary workgroup. Any of these environmental factors can motivate or constrain the subordinate. For example, the subordinate could be motivated by the workgroup and gain satisfaction from coworker’s acceptance for sitting through the job according to the group norms. House asserts that if the subordinates are working on highly unstructured jobs characterized by a high degree of ambiguity in roles, leader directiveness is necessary. In other words, when the task is unstructured, the worker feels that his path to satisfaction is bumpy and prefers to be directed. Conversely, if the employees are working on structured and well-defined tasks, leader directiveness is redundant and a supportive style will do. The relationship between directive leadership and subordinate satisfaction with task structure as a contingency variable is depicted.
It reveals that for the structured task high level of directive behaviour is associated with low job satisfaction. It also makes clear that a high level of directiveness is associated with high job satisfaction for unstructured jobs. In the ultimate analysis, the path-goal theory proposes that leader behaviour will be motivational to the extent that it assists subordinates to cope with environmental uncertainties, a leader who can reduce the uncertainties of the job is considered to be a motivator because he increases the subordinate’s expectations that their efforts will lead to desirable rewards. The degree to which the subordinate sees certain job behaviours as leading to various rewards and the desirability of those rewards to the individual (preference) largely determine job satisfaction and performance. The path-goal model compels the leader to consider the individual subordinates as well as the situation.
Life Cycle Theory
The Life Cycle Theory has been propounded by Hersey and Blanchard. The theory proposes that the leader has to match his leadership style according to the needs of maturity of subordinates which moves in stages and has a cycle. (Therefore, this theory is also known as the life-cycle theory of leadership). There are two basic considerations in this model: leadership style and maturity of subordinates.
Leadership styles
Leadership styles may be classified into four categories based on the combination of two considerations :
- Relationship Behaviour
- Task Behaviour
Relationship behavioural is determined by socio-emotional support provided by the leader. Task behaviour is seen in terms of the amount of guidance and direction provided by the leader.
Maturity: Maturity in this model has been used in the context of the ability and willingness of people for directing their own behaviour. Ability refers to the knowledge and skills of an individual to do the job and is called job maturity. Willingness’ refers to psychological maturity and has much to do with the confidence and commitment of the individual. These variables of maturity should be considered only about a specific job to be performed. That is to say, an individual or a group is not mature or immature in any total sense. All persons tend to be more or less mature about a specific task, function, or objective that a leader is attempting to accomplish through their efforts. In addition to. assessing the level of maturity of individuals in the group, he has to assess the maturity level of the group as a whole, particularly if the group interacts frequently together in the same work area.
- Low ability and low willingness- low maturity
- Low ability and high willingness- low to moderate maturity
- High ability and low willingness- moderate to high maturity
- High ability and high willingness-high maturity
Combining leadership styles and maturity If we combine leadership styles and maturity, that is, the leadership style which is appropriate at a given level of maturity, we may arrive at the relationship between the two.
Thus, there are four leadership styles, each being appropriate to a specific level of maturity. : The four leadership styles are: telling, selling participating and delegating