Managing for Competitive Advantage (part 13)

Leadership (part B)

by

Charles Lamson

Traditional Approaches to Understanding Leadership

Three traditional approaches to studying leadership are the trait approach, the behavioral approach, and the situational approach.

Leader Traits

The trait approach is the oldest leadership perspective and was dominant for several decades. This approach seems logical for studying leadership because it focuses on individual leaders and attempts to determine the personal characteristic traits that great leaders share. What set Winston Churchill, Alexander the Great, Gandhi, Napoleon, and Martin Luther King apart from the crowd? The trait approach assumes the existence of a leadership personality and assumes that leaders are born, not made.

From 1904 to 1948, over 100 leadership trait studies were conducted. At the end of that period, management scholars concluded that no particular set of traits is necessary for a person to become a successful leader. Enthusiasm for the trait approach diminished, but some research on traits continued. By the mid-1970s, a more balanced view emerged although no traits ensure leadership success, certain characteristics are potentially useful. The current perspective is that some personality characteristics---many of which a person need not be born with but can strive to acquire---do distinguish effective leaders from other people.

1. Drive. Drive refers to a set of characteristics that reflect a high level of effort. Drive includes high need for achievement, constant striving for improvement, ambition, energy, tenacity persistence in the face of obstacles, and initiative. In several countries, the achievement needs of top executives have been shown to be related to the growth rates of their organizations. But the need to achieve can be a drawback if leaders focus on personal achievement and get so personally involved with the work that they do not delegate authority and responsibility. And whereas need for achievement has been shown to predict organizational effectiveness in entrepreneurial firms, it does not predict success for division heads in larger and more bureaucratic firms.

2. Leadership motivation. Great leaders not only have drive; they want to lead. They have a high need for power, preferring to be in leadership rather than follower positions. A high power need induces people to attempt to influence others, and sustains interest and satisfaction in the process of leadership. When the power need is exercised in moral and socially constructive ways, rather than to the detriment of others, leaders Inspire more trust, respect, and commitment to their vision.

3. Integrity. Integrity is the correspondence between actions and words. Honesty and credibility, in addition to being desirable characteristics in their own right, are especially important for leaders because these traits inspire trust in others.

4. Self confidence. Self confidence is important for a number of reasons. The leadership role is challenging, and setbacks are inevitable. Self-confidence allows a leader to overcome obstacles, make decisions despite uncertainty, and instill confidence in others. 

5. Knowledge of the business. Effective leaders have a high level of knowledge about their industries, companies, and technical matters. Leaders must have the intelligence to interpret vast quantities of information. Advanced degrees are useful in a career, but ultimately less important than acquired expertise and matters relevant to the organization. 

 Finally, there is one personal skill that may be the most important: the ability to perceive the needs and goals of others and to adjust one's personal leadership approach accordingly. Effective leaders do not rely on one leadership style, rather, they are capable of using different styles as the situation warrants. This quality is the cornerstone of the situational approaches to leadership, which we will discuss shortly.

Leader Behaviors

The behavioral approach to leadership attempts to identify what good leaders do. Should leaders focus on getting the job done or in keeping their followers happy? Should they make decisions autocratically or democratically? In the behavioral approach, personal characteristics are considered less important than the actual behaviors leaders exhibit.

Three General categories of leadership behavior have received particular attention: behaviors related to task performance, group maintenance, and employee participation in decision-making.

Task Performance Leadership requires getting the job done. Task performance behaviors are the leaders efforts to ensure that the work unit or organization reaches its goals. This dimension is variously referred to as concern for production, directive leadership, initiating structure, or closeness of supervision. It includes focus on work, quality and accuracy, quantity of output, and following the rules.

Group Maintenance In exhibiting group maintenance behaviors, leaders take action to ensure the satisfaction of group members, develop and maintain harmonious work relationships, and preserve the social stability of the group. This dimension is sometimes referred to as concern for people, supportive leadership, or consideration. It includes a focus on people's feelings and comfort, appreciation of them, and stress reduction.

 

One theory of leadership, Leader Member Exchange (LMX) theory, highlights the importance of leader behaviors not just toward the group as a whole but toward individuals on a personal basis. The focus is primarily on the leader behaviors historically considered group maintenance. According to LMX theory, and as supported by research evidence, maintenance behaviors such as trust, open communication, mutual respect, mutual obligation, and mutual loyalty form the cornerstone of relationships that are satisfying and perhaps more productive.

Remember though, the potential for cross-cultural differences. Maintenance behaviors are important everywhere, but the specific behaviors can differ from one culture to another. For example, in the United States, maintenance behaviors include dealing with people's face-to-face; in Japan, written memos are preferred over giving directions face-to-face; thus avoiding confrontation and permitting face-saving in the events of disagreement.

Participation in Decision-Making How should a leader make decisions? More specifically, to what extent should leaders involve their people in making decisions? The participation in decision-making dimension of leadership behavior can range from autocratic to democratic. Autocratic leadership makes decisions and then announces them to the group. Democratic Leadership solicits input from others. Democratic leadership seeks information, opinions, and preferences, sometimes to the point of meeting with the group, leading discussions, and using consensus or majority vote to make the final choice.

The Effects of Leader Behavior How the leader behaves influences people's attitudes and performance. Studies of these effects focus on autocratic versus democratic decision styles or on performance- versus maintenance-oriented behaviors.

Decision Styles The classic study comparing autocratic and democratic styles found that a democratic approach resulted in the most positive attitudes, whereas an autocratic approach resulted in somewhat higher performance. A laissez-faire style, in which the leader essentially made no decision, led to more negative attitudes and lower performance. These results seem logical and probably represent the prevalent beliefs among managers about the general effects of these decision-making approaches.

Democratic styles, appealing though they may seem, are not always the most appropriate. When speed is of the essence, democratic decision-making may be too slow, or people may demand decisiveness from the leader. Whether a decision should be made autocratically or democratically depends on the characteristics of the leader, the followers, and the situation. Thus, a situational approach to leader decision styles, discussed later in this post, is appropriate.

Performance and Maintenance Behaviors The performance and maintenance dimensions of leadership are independent of each other. In other words, a leader can behave in ways that emphasize one, both, or neither of these dimensions. Some Research indicates that the ideal combination is to engage in both types of leader behaviors.

In the well-known Ohio State studies, a team of the Ohio State University researchers investigated the effects of leader behaviors in a truck manufacturing plant of International Harvester. Generally, supervisors who were high on maintenance behaviors (which the researchers termed consideration) had fewer grievances and less turnover in their work units than supervisors who were low on this dimension. The opposite held for task performance behaviors (which the team called initiating structure). Supervisors high on this dimension had more grievances and higher turnover rates (E. Fleischman and E. Harris, "Patterns of Leadership Behavior Related to Employee Grievances and Turnover," Personal Psychology 15 (1962), pp. 43-56).

When maintenance and performance leadership behaviors were considered together, the results were more complex. But one conclusion was clear: When a leader must be high on performance-oriented behaviors, he or she should also be maintenance oriented. Otherwise the leader will have employees with high rates of turnover and grievances.

At about the same time the Ohio Studies were being conducted, an equally famous research program at the University of Michigan was studying the impact of the same leader behaviors on groups' job performance. Among other things, the researchers concluded that the most effective managers engaged in what they called task-oriented behavior: planning, scheduling, coordinating, providing resources, and setting performance goals. Effective managers also exhibited more relationship-oriented: behavior demonstrating trust and confidence, being friendly and considerate, showing appreciation, keeping people informed, and so on. These dimensions of leader Behavior are essentially the task performance and group maintenance dimensions. (R. Likert, The Human Organization: Its Management and Value (1967)). 

A wide range of effective leadership styles exist. Organizations that understand the need for diverse leadership styles will have a competitive advantage in the modern business environment over those that believe there is only one best way.

Situational Approaches to Leadership

According to proponents of the situational approach to leadership, universally important traits and behaviors do not exist. They believe effective leader behaviors vary from situation to situation. The leaders should first analyze the situation and then decide what to do. In other words, look before you leap. 

The first situational model of leadership was proposed in 1958 by Tannenbaum and Schmidt. In their classic Harvard Business Review article, these authors describe how managers should consider three factors before deciding how to lead: forces in the manager, forces in the subordinate, and forces in the situation. Forces in the subordinate include the employee's knowledge and experience, readiness to assume responsibility for decision-making, interest in the task or problem, and understanding and acceptance of the organization's goals. Forces in the situation include the type of leadership style the organization values, the degree to which the group works effectively as a unit, the problem itself and the type of information needed to solve it, and the amount of time the leader has to make the decision (Tannenbaum & Schmidt, "How to Choose a Leadership Pattern").

Path-Goal Theory Perhaps the most generally useful situational model of leadership effectiveness is path-goal theory. Developed by Robert house, Path-goal gets its name from its concern with how leaders influence followers perceptions of their work goals and the paths they follow toward goal attainment. (R.J. House, "A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness." Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (1971), pp. 321-39.)

The key situational factors in path-goal theory are (1) personal characteristics of followers, and (2) environmental pressures and demands with which followers must cope to attain their work goals. These factors determine which leadership behaviors are most appropriate.

The four pertinent leadership behaviors are: (1) directive leadership, a form of task performance-oriented behavior; (2) supportive leadership, a form of group maintenance-oriented behavior; participative leadership, or decision style; and (4) achievement-oriented leadership, or behaviors geared toward motivating people, such as setting challenging goals and rewarding good performance.

These situational factors and leader behaviors are merged in Figure 1. As you can see, appropriate leader behaviors---as determined by characteristics of followers and the work environment---lead to effective performance.

FIGURE 1 The Path-Goal Framework

The theory also specifies which follower and environmental characteristics are important. There are three key follower characteristics. Authoritarianism is the degree to which individuals respect, admire, and defer to Authority. Locus of control is the extent to which individuals see the environment as responsive to their own behavior. People with an internal locus of control believe that what happens to them is their own doing. People with an external locus of control believe that it is just luck or fate. Finally, abilities is people's beliefs about their own abilities to do their assigned jobs.

Path-goal theory states that these personal characteristics determine the appropriateness of various leadership styles. For example, the theory makes the following propositions:

• A directive leadership style is more appropriate for highly authoritarian people, because such people respect authority.
•  A participative leadership style is more appropriate for people who have an internal locus of control, because these individuals prefer to have more influence over their own lives.
•  A directive style is more appropriate when subordinates ability is low. The directive style helps people understand what has to be done.

Appropriate leadership style is also determined by three important environmental factors: people's tasks, the formal authority system of the organization, and the primary work group.

• Directive leadership is inappropriate if tasks already are well-structured.
•  If the task and the authority or rule system are dissatisfying, directive leadership will create greater dissatisfaction.
•  If the task or authority system is dissatisfying, supportive leadership is especially appropriate, because it offers one positive source of gratification in an otherwise negative situation.
•  If the primary work group provides social support to its members, supportive leadership is less important.

Path-goal Theory offers many more propositions. In general, the theory suggests that the functions of the leader are to (1) make the path to work goals easier to travel by providing coaching and direction; (2) reduce frustrating barriers to goal attainment; and (3) increase opportunities for personal satisfaction by increasing payoffs to people for achieving performance goals.

How best to do these things depends on your people and on the work situation. Again: Analyze, then adapt your style accordingly.

Substitutes for Leadership Sometimes leaders do not have to lead, or situations constrain their ability to lead effectively. The situation may be one in which leadership is unnecessary or has little impact. Substitutes for leadership can provide the same influence on people that leaders otherwise would have.

Certain follower, task, and organizational factors are substitutes for task performance-oriented and group maintenance-oriented leader behaviors. For example, group maintenance behaviors are less important and have less impact if people already have a close-knit group, they have a professional orientation, the job is intrinsically satisfying, or there is great physical distance between leader and followers. Physicians who are strongly concerned with professional conduct, enjoy their work, and work independently do not need social support from hospital administrators.

Task performance leadership is less important and will have less of a positive effect if people have a lot of experience and ability; feedback is supplied to them directly from the task or by computer, or the rules and procedures are rigid. If these factors are operating, the leader does not have to tell people what to do or how well they are performing.

The concept of substitutes for leadership does more than indicate when a leader's attempts at influence will and will not work. It provides useful and practical prescriptions for how to manage more efficiently. If the manager can develop the work situation to the point where a number of these substitutes for leadership are operating, less time will need to be spent in direct attempts to influence people. The leader will be free to spend more time on other important activities. 

*SOURCE: MANAGEMENT: THE NEW COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE, 6TH ED., 2004, THOMAS S. BATEMAN & SCOTT A. SNELL, PGS. 371-382*

end