The Rant's mission is to offer information that is useful in business administration, economics, finance, accounting, and everyday life. The mission of the People of God is to be salt of the earth and light of the world. This people is "a most sure seed of unity, hope, and salvation for the whole human race." Its destiny "is the Kingdom of God which has been begun by God himself on earth and which must be further extended until it has been brought to perfection by him at the end of time."
Goals are universal motivators. So are the processes of reinforcement described in this section. In 1911, psychologist Edward Thorndike formulated the law of effect: Behavior that is followed by positive consequences probably will be repeated. This powerful law of behavior laid the foundation for countless investigations into the effects of the positive consequences, called reinforcers, that motivate behavior: Organizational behavior modification attempts to influence people's behavior and improve performance, by systematically managing work conditions and the consequences of people's actions.
Four key consequences of behavior either encourage or discourage people's behavior (See Figure 1).
FIGURE 1 The Consequences of Behavior
Positive reinforcement---applying a consequence that increases the likelihood that the person will repeat the behavior that led to it. Examples of positive reinforcers include compliments, letters of recommendation, favorable performance evaluations, and pay raises. It is important to remember that feedback and social reinforcers, including recognition for a job well done, are as powerful as monetary reinforcers (Kouzes and Posner, The Leadership Challenge (1987)).
Negative reinforcement---removing or withholding an undesirable consequence. For example, a manager takes an employee (or a school takes a student) off probation because of improved performance.
Punishment---administering an aversive consequence. Examples include criticizing or shouting at an employee, assigning an unappealing task, and sending a worker home without pay. Negative reinforcement can involve the threat of punishment, but not delivering it when employees perform satisfactorily. Punishment is the actual delivery of the aversive consequence. Managers use punishment when they think it is warranted or when they believe others expect them to, and they usually concern themselves with following company policy and procedure.
Extinction---withdrawing or failing to provide a reinforcement consequence. When this occurs, motivation is reduced and the behavior is extinguished, or eliminated. Examples include not giving a compliment for a job well done, forgetting to say thanks for a favor, and setting impossible performance goals so that the person never experiences a success.
The first two consequences, positive and negative reinforcement, are positive for the person receiving them---the person either gains something or avoids something negative. Therefore, the person who experiences these consequences will be motivated to behave in the ways that led to the reinforcements. The last two consequences, punishment and extinction, are negative outcomes for the person receiving them: Motivation to repeat the behavior that led to the undesirable results will be reduced.
Sometimes organizations and managers reinforce the wrong behaviors. Whereas executive stock options were intended to motivate executives to care more about the company's stock price, they have motivated executives to engage in inappropriate behaviors to manipulate the stock price rather than create real value. The company that bases performance reviews on short-term results is reinforcing a short-run perspective in decision-making. At the same time, it is discouraging behaviors that will pay off in the long run.
Managers must identify which kinds of behaviors they reinforce and which they discourage. The reward system has to support the firm's strategic intent, defining performance in terms of the pursuit of strategic objectives. Reward employees for developing themselves in strategically important ways for building new skills that are critical to strengthening core competencies and creating value.
Managers should be creative in their use of reinforcers. Innovative managers use non-monetary rewards, including intellectual challenge, greater responsibility, autonomy, recognition, flexible benefits, and greater influence over decisions. These and other rewards for high-performing employees, when creatively devised and applied, can continue to motivate when pay and promotions are scarce.
*SOURCE: MANAGEMENT:: THE NEW COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE, THOMAS S. BATEMAN & SCOTT A. SNELL, PGS. 400-402*
The reward of a thing well done is to have done it.
---Ralph Waldo Emmerson
How can a manager motivate people to work hard and perform at their best levels?
Motivating for Performance
Understanding why people do the things they do on the job is not an easy task for the manager. Predicting their response to management’s latest productivity program is harder yet. Fortunately, enough is known about motivation to give the thoughtful manager practical, effective techniques for increasing people’s effort and performance.
Motivation refers to forces that energize, direct, and sustain a person's efforts. All behavior, except involuntary reflexes like eye blinks, is motivated. A highly motivated person will work hard toward achieving performance goals. With adequate ability and understanding of the job, such a person will be highly productive.
To be effective motivators, managers must know what behaviors they want to motivate people to exhibit. Although productive people appear to do a seemingly limitless number of things, most of the important activities can be grouped into five general categories. The company must motivate people to (1) join the organization; (2) remain in the organization; and (3) come to work regularly. On these points, you should reject the common recent notion that loyalty is dead, and accept the challenge of creating an environment that will attract and energize people so they commit to the organization.
Of course, companies also want people to (4) perform---that is, once employees are at work, they should work hard to achieve high output productivity and high-quality. Finally, managers want employees to (5) exhibit good citizenship. Good citizens of the organization are committed, satisfied employees who perform above and beyond the call of duty by doing extra things that can help the company. The importance of citizenship behaviors may be less obvious than productivity, but these behaviors help the organization function smoothly. They also make managers lives easier.
Many ideas have been proposed to help managers motivate people to engage in these constructive behaviors. The most useful of these ideas are described in the following parts of this analysis. We start with the most fundamental processes that influence the motivation of all people. These processes---described by goal-setting, reinforcements, and expectancy theories---suggest basic and powerful actions for managers to take. Then we discuss the content of what people want and need from work, how individuals differ from one another, and how understanding people's needs leads to powerful prescriptions about designing motivating jobs and empowering people to perform at the highest possible levels. Finally, we discuss the most important beliefs and perceptions about fairness that people hold toward work, and the implications for managers.
Setting Goals
Providing work-related goals for people is an extremely effective way to stimulate motivation. In fact, it is perhaps the most important, valid, and useful single approach to motivating performance. Therefore, we discuss it first.
Goal setting theory states that people have conscious goals that energize them and direct their thoughts and behaviors toward a particular end. With the principle that goals matter in mind, managers set goals for employees. For example, a cable TV company might set goals for increasing the number of new subscribers, or the number of current subscribers who pay for premium channels, or the timeliness of responses to customer inquiries.
Goals that Motivate
What kinds of goals most effectively motivate people? How can managers set motivating goals for the people who report to them?
First, goals should be acceptable to employees. This means, among other things, that they should not conflict with people's personal values and that people have reasons to pursue the goals. Allowing people to participate in setting their work goals---as opposed to having the boss set goals for them---is often a great way to generate goals that people accept and pursue willingly.
Second, acceptable, maximally motivating goals are challenging but attainable. In other words they should be high enough to inspire better performance but not so high that people can never reach them.
Third, goals should be specific, quantifiable, and measurable.
Limitations of Goal Setting
Goal setting is an extraordinarily powerful management technique. But like anything else, even specific, challenging, attainable goals work better under some conditions than others. Individual performance goals can be dysfunctional if people work in a group and cooperation among team members is central to team performance. Individualized goals can create competition and reduce cooperation. If cooperation is important, performance goals should be established for the team.
It is important not to establish a single productivity goal if there are other important dimensions of performance. For instance, productivity goals will likely enhance productivity, but they may also cause employees to neglect other things like tackling new projects or developing creative solutions to job-related problems. The manager who wants to motivate creativity should establish creativity goals along with productivity goals.
*SOURCE: MANAGEMENT: THE NEW COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE, 6TH ED., 2004, THOMAS S. BATEMAN & SCOTT A. SNELLPGS. 396-399*
So far, you have learned of the major classic approaches to understanding leadership. Now we will discuss a number of more recent developments that are revolutionizing our understanding of this important aspect of management. These developments include charismatic leadership, transformational leadership, and post heroic-leadership.
Charismatic Leadership
What is charisma and how does anyone acquire it? Charisma packs an emotional wallop for followers above and beyond ordinary esteem, affection, admiration, and trust. The charismatic is an idolized hero, a messiah and a savior. Many people value charisma in their leaders. But some people do not like the term charisma; it can be associated with the negative charisma of evil leaders whom people follow blindly.
Charismatic leaders are dominant and exceptionally self-confident and have a strong conviction in the moral righteousness of their beliefs. They strive to create an aura of competence and success and communicate high expectations for and confidence in followers.
The charismatic leader articulates ideological goals and makes sacrifices in pursuit of those goals. The charismatic leader also arouses a sense of excitement and adventure. He or she is an eloquent speaker who exhibits superior verbal skills, which helps communicate the vision and motivate followers.
Leaders who possess these characteristics or do these things inspire in their followers trust, confidence, acceptance, obedience, emotional involvement, affection, admiration, and higher performance. Evidence for the positive effects of charismatic leadership has been found in a wide variety of groups, organizations, and management levels, and in countries including India, Singapore, the Netherlands, China, Japan, and Canada (House and Aditya, "The Social Scientific Study of Leadership.")
Charisma has been shown to improve corporate financial performance, particularly under conditions of uncertainty---that is, in risky circumstances when people have difficulty understanding what they should do when environments are changing. Uncertainty is stressful, and makes organizations more receptive to the ideas and actions of charismatic leaders (D.A. Waldman, G.G. Ramirez, R.J. House, and P. Purnam, (2001). Academy of Management Journal, 44, 134-143).
Transformational Leadership
Charisma contributes to transformational leadership. Transformational leaders get people to transcend their personal interests for the sake of the larger community. They generate excitement and revitalize organizations.
The transformational process moves beyond the more traditional transactional approach to leadership. Transactional leaders view management as a series of transactions in which they use their legitimate, reward, and coercive powers to give commands and exchange rewards for services rendered. Unlike transformational leadership, transactional leadership is dispassionate; it does not excite, transform, empower, or inspire people to focus on the interest of the group or organization. However, transactional approaches may be more effective for individualist than for collectivists.
Generating Excitement Transformational leaders generate excitement in three primary ways. First, they are charismatic, as described earlier. Second, they give their followers individualized attention. Transformational leaders delegate challenging work to deserving people, keep lines of communication open, and provide one-on-one mentoring to develop their people. They do not treat everyone alike, because not everyone is alike.
Third, transformational leaders are intellectually stimulating. They arouse their followers an awareness of problems and potential solutions. They articulate the organization's opportunity, threats, strengths, and weaknesses. They stir the imagination and generate insight. therefore, problems are recognized and high-quality solutions are identified and implemented with the full commitment of followers.
Skills and Strategies At least four skills or strategies contribute to transformational leadership. First, transformational leaders have a vision---a goal, an agenda, or a results-orientation that grabs people's attention. Second, they communicate their vision; through words, manner, or symbolism, they relate a compelling image of the ultimate goal. Third, transformational leaders build trust by being consistent, dependable, and persistent. They position themselves clearly by choosing a direction and staying with it, thus projecting integrity. Finally, they have a positive self-regard. They are not self-important or complacent; rather, they recognize their personal strengths, compensate for their weaknesses, nurture and continually develop their talents, and know how to learn from failure. They strive for success rather than merely trying to avoid failure.
Post Heroic Leadership
A common view of leaders is that they are heroes. Phenomenally talented, they step forward in difficult times and save the day. But in these complex times, it is foolhardy to assume that a great top executive can solve all problems by himself or herself.
Effective leadership must permeate the organization, not reside in one or two superstars at the top. The leaders job becomes one of spreading leadership ability throughout the firm. Make people responsible for their own performance. Create an environment in which each person can figure out what needs to be done and then do it well. Make the way and clear the path so that people can succeed. Give them the credit they deserve. Make heroes out of them.
Thus, what is now required of leaders is less the efficient management of resources, and more the effective unleashing of intellectual capital and human resources. In other words, you should capitalize on all the brains and talent in your organization.
Key roles personifying post heroic leadership in the 21st century include:
Using vision to motivate and inspire. It is important that people in an organization have something to be proud of. Employees like to see a purpose that goes beyond numbers. It is important that a company can be perceived as changing the world in a positive way.
Empowering employees at all levels. You best lead by serving the needs of your people. You don't do their job for them; you enable them to learn and progress on the job. Most people want to expand their own knowledge, feel involved in their organization, and contribute to its success.
Challenging the status quo and enabling creativity. The new competitive landscape is swarming with opportunities that are best addressed via innovation and creativity.
*SOURCE: MANAGEMENT: THE NEW COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE, 6TH ED., 2004, THOMAS S. BATEMAN & SCOTT A. SNELL, PGS. 282-286*
1st half: Alfred Marshall's Principles of Economics
2nd half: Timely top stories in the world of finance, featuring interviews with Andreesen Horowitz and Meltem Demiror
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*
People get excited about the topic of leadership. They want to know: What makes a great leader? Executives at all levels in all Industries are interested in this question. They believe the answer will bring improved organizational performance and personal career success. They hope to acquire the skills that will transform an average manager into a true leader.
Fortunately, leadership can be taught and learned. Leadership seems to be the marshalling of skills possessed by a majority but used by a minority. However, it is something that can be learned by anyone, taught to everyone, denied to no one.
What is leadership? To start, a leader is one who influences others to attain goals. The greater the number of followers, the greater the influence. And the more successful the attainment of worthy goals, the more evident the leadership. But we must explore beyond this bare definition to capture the excitement and intrigue that devoted followers and students of leadership feel when they see a great leader in action.
Outstanding leaders formulate and implement strategies that produce results and sustainable competitive advantage. They may launch enterprises, build organization cultures, win wars, or otherwise change the course of events. They are strategists who sieze opportunities others overlook, but they are also passionately concerned with detail---all the small, fundamental realities that can make or mar the grandest of plans.
Vision
The leader's job is to create a vision. Until a few decades ago, vision was not a word one heard managers utter. But today, having a vision for the future and communicating that vision to others are known to be essential components of great leadership. If there is no vision, there is no business. Leaders are painters of the vision and archetypes of the journey. A clear vision and communication of that vision leads to higher venture growth in entrepreneurial firms.
A vision is a mental image of a possible and desirable future state of the organization. It expresses the leader's ambitions for the organization. The best visions are both ideal and unique. If a vision conveys an ideal, it communicates a standard of excellence and a clear choice of positive values. If the vision is also unique, it communicates and inspires pride in being different from other organizations. The choice of language is important; the words should imply a combination of realism and optimism, an action orientation, and resolution and confidence that the vision will be attained.
Great leaders imagine an ideal future for their organization that goes beyond the ordinary and beyond what others may have thought possible. They strive to realize significant achievements that others have not. In short, leaders must be forward-looking and clarify the direction in which they want their organizations, and even entire industries, to move.
Visions can be small or large and can exist throughout all organizational levels as well as at the very top. The important points are that (1) a vision is necessary for effective leadership; (2) a person or team can develop a vision for any job, work unit, or organization; and (3) many people, including managers who do not develop into strong leaders, do not develop a clear vision---instead, they focus on performing or surviving on a day-to-day basis.
Put another way, leaders must know what they want. And other people must understand what that is. The leader must be able to articulate the vision, clearly and often. Other people throughout the organization should understand the vision and be able to state it clearly themselves. That's a start. But the vision means nothing until the leader and followers take action to turn the vision into reality.
Two metaphors reinforce the important concept of vision. The first is the jigsaw puzzle. It is much easier to put a puzzle together if you have the picture on the box cover in front of you. Without the picture, or vision, the lack of direction is likely to result in frustration and failure. The second metaphor is the slide projector. Imagine a projector that is out of focus. If you had to watch blurred images for a long period of time, you would get confused, and impatient, and disoriented. You would stop following the presentation and lose respect for the presenter. It is the leader's job to focus the projector. That is what communicating a vision is all about: making it clear where you are heading.
Not just any vision will do. Visions can be inappropriate and even fail for a variety of reasons. First, an inappropriate vision may reflect merely the leader's personal needs. Such a vision can be unethical, or may fail because of lack of acceptance by the market or by those who must implement it.
Second (and related to the first), an inappropriate vision may ignore stakeholder needs. Third, the leader must stay abreast of environmental changes. Although effective leaders maintain confidence and persevere despite obstacles, the time may come when the facts dictate that the vision must change. You will learn more about change and how to manage it later in this analysis.
Leading and Managing
Effective managers are not necessarily true leaders. Many administrators, supervisors, and even top executives execute their responsibility successfully without being great leaders. But these positions afford opportunity for leadership. The ability to lead effectively, then, will set the excellent managers apart from the average ones.
Whereas management must deal with the ongoing, day-to-day complexities of organizations, true leadership includes effectively orchestrating important change. While managing requires planning and budgeting routines, leading includes setting the direction (creating a vision) for the firm. Management requires structuring the organization, staffing it with capable people, and monitoring activities. Leadership goes beyond these functions by inspiring people to attain the vision. Great leaders keep people focused on moving the organization toward its ideal future, motivating them to overcome whatever obstacles lie in the way.
Many observers decry the rarity of strong leadership. While many managers focus on superficial activities and worry about short-term profits and stock prices, too few have emerged as leaders who foster innovation and the attainment of long-term goals. And whereas many managers are overly concerned with fitting in and not rocking the boat, those who emerge as leaders are more concerned with making important decisions that may break with tradition but are humane, moral, and right. The leader puts a premium on substance rather than on style.
It is important to be clear here about several things. First, management and leadership are both vitally important. To highlight the need for more leadership is not to minimize the importance of management for managers. It is to say that leadership involves unique processes that are distinguishable from basic management processes. Moreover, just because they involve different processes does not mean that they require different, separate people. The same individual can exemplify effective managerial processes, leadership processes, both, or neither.
Some people will dislike the idea of distinguishing between management and leadership, maintaining it is artificial or derogatory toward the managers and management processes that make organizations run. Perhaps a better or more useful distinction is between supervisory and strategic leadership. Supervisory leadership is behavior that provides guidance, support, and coercive feedback for the day-to-day activities of work unit members. Strategic leadership gives purpose and meaning to organizations. Strategic leadership involves anticipating and envisioning a viable future for the organization, and working with others to initiate changes that create such a future.
*SOURCE: MANAGEMENT: THE NEW COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE, 6TH ED., 2004, THOMAS S. BATEMAN & SCOTT A. SNELL, PGS. 366-368*
