You are on page 1of 20

What is Leadership? "Leaders are people who do the right thing; managers are people who do things right.

" Professor Warren G. Bennis "Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it." Dwight D. Eisenhower

The word "leadership" can bring to mind a variety of images. For example: An army officer, charging forward to meet the enemy. An explorer, cutting a path through the jungle for the rest of his party to follow. An executive, developing her company's strategy to remain ahead of the competition. Leaders help themselves and others to do the right things. They set direction, build an inspiring vision, and create something new. Leadership is about mapping out where you need to go to "win" as a team or an organization. Leadership is dynamic, vibrant, and inspiring. Yet, while leaders set the direction, they must also use management skills to guide their team to the right destination in a smooth and efficient way. In this article, we'll focus on the process of leadership. In particular, we'll discuss the "transformational leadership" model, first proposed by James MacGregor Burns. This model highlights visionary thinking and bringing about change, instead of management processes that are only designed to maintain current performance. Note: Leadership means different things to different people around the world, and different things in different situations. For example, it could relate to community leadership, religious leadership, political leadership, and leadership of campaigning groups. This article focuses on the Western model of individual leadership, and relates to workplace leadership rather than to other types. Why are some leaders successful, while others fail? The truth is that there is no "magic combination" of characteristics that makes a leader successful, and different characteristics matter in different circumstances. This doesn't mean, however, that you can't learn to be an effective leader. You just need to understand the various approaches to leadership, so that you can use the right approach for your own situation. One way of doing this is to learn about the core leadership theories that provide the backbone of our current understanding of leadership. Since the early 20th century, four main groups of theories have emerged. We look at these core leadership theories in this article. Leadership Styles Choosing the Right Style for the Situation From Mahatma Gandhi and Winston Churchill to Martin Luther King and Steve Jobs, there can seem to be as many ways to lead people as there are leaders. Fortunately, business people and psychologists have developed useful, simple ways to describe the main styles of leadership. By understanding these styles and their impact, you can develop your own approach to leadership and become a more effective leader. We'll look at common leadership styles in this article, and we'll explore situations where these styles may be effective with your people. Adapting Your Approach to Leadership In business, a leadership style called "transformational leadership" is often the most effective approach to use. Transformational leaders have integrity, they inspire people with a shared vision of the future, they set clear goals and motivate people towards them, they manage delivery, and they communicate well with their teams. (You can find out more about transformational leadership at the end of this article.) However, leadership is not "one size fits all" thing; often, you must adapt your style to fit a situation or a specific group. This is why it's useful to gain a thorough understanding of other leadership styles; after all, the

more approaches you're familiar with, the more tools you'll be able to use to lead effectively. Let's take a deeper look at some of the leadership styles that you can use. 1. Transactional Leadership This leadership style starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their leader when they accept a job. The "transaction" usually involves the organization paying team members in return for their effort and compliance. The leader has a right to "punish" team members if their work doesn't meet an appropriate standard. Although this might sound controlling and paternalistic, transactional leadership offers some benefits. For one, this leadership style clarifies everyone's roles and responsibilities. Another benefit is that, because transactional leadership judges team members on performance, people who are ambitious or who are motivated by external rewards including compensation often thrive. The downside of this leadership style is that team members can do little to improve their job satisfaction. It can feel stifling, and it can lead to high staff turnover. Transactional leadership is really a type of management, not a true leadership style, because the focus is on short-term tasks. It has serious limitations for knowledge-based or creative work. However, it can be effective in other situations. 2. Autocratic Leadership Autocratic leadership is an extreme form of transactional leadership, where leaders have complete power over their people. Staff and team members have little opportunity to make suggestions, even if these would be in the team's or the organization's best interest. The benefit of autocratic leadership is that it's incredibly efficient. Decisions are made quickly, and work gets done. The downside is that most people resent being treated this way. Therefore, autocratic leadership often leads to high levels of absenteeism and high staff turnover. However, the style can be effective for some routine and unskilled jobs: in these situations, the advantages of control may outweigh the disadvantages. Autocratic leadership is often best used in crises, when decisions must be made quickly and without dissent. For instance, the military often uses an autocratic leadership style; top commanders are responsible for quickly making complex decisions, which allows troops to focus their attention and energy on performing their allotted tasks and missions. 3. Bureaucratic Leadership Bureaucratic leaders work "by the book." They follow rules rigorously, and ensure that their people follow procedures precisely. This is an appropriate leadership style for work involving serious safety risks (such as working with machinery, with toxic substances, or at dangerous heights) or where large sums of money are involved. Bureaucratic leadership is also useful in organizations where employees do routine tasks (as in manufacturing). The downside of this leadership style is that it's ineffective in teams and organizations that rely on flexibility, creativity, or innovation. Much of the time, bureaucratic leaders achieve their position because of their ability to conform to and uphold rules, not because of their qualifications or expertise. This can cause resentment when team members don't value their expertise or advice. 4. Charismatic Leadership A charismatic leadership style can resemble transformational leadership because these leaders inspire enthusiasm in their teams and are energetic in motivating others to move forward. This excitement and commitment from teams is an enormous benefit. The difference between charismatic leaders and transformational leaders lies in their intention. Transformational leaders want to transform their teams and organizations. Charismatic leaders are often focused on themselves, and may not want to change anything. The downside to charismatic leaders is that they can believe more in themselves than in their teams. This can create the risk that a project or even an entire organization might collapse if the leader leaves. A charismatic leader might believe that she can do no wrong, even when others are warning her about the path she's on; this feeling of invincibility can ruin a team or an organization. Also, in the followers' eyes, success is directly connected to the presence of the charismatic leader. As such, charismatic leadership carries great responsibility, and it needs a long-term commitment from the leader. 5. Democratic/Participative Leadership Democratic leaders make the final decisions, but they include team members in the decision-making process. They encourage creativity, and team members are often highly engaged in projects and decisions.

There are many benefits of democratic leadership. Team members tend to have high job satisfaction and are productive because they're more involved in decisions. This style also helps develop people's skills. Team members feel in control of their destiny, so they're motivated to work hard by more than just a financial reward. Because participation takes time, this approach can slow decision-making, but the result is often good. The approach can be most suitable when working as a team is essential, and when quality is more important than efficiency or productivity. The downside of democratic leadership is that it can often hinder situations where speed or efficiency is essential. For instance, during a crisis, a team can waste valuable time gathering people's input. Another downside is that some team members might not have the knowledge or expertise to provide high quality input. 6. Laissez-Faire Leadership This French phrase means "leave it be," and it describes leaders who allow their people to work on their own. This type of leadership can also occur naturally, when managers don't have sufficient control over their work and their people. Laissez-faire leaders may give their teams complete freedom to do their work and set their own deadlines. They provide team support with resources and advice, if needed, but otherwise don't get involved. This leadership style can be effective if the leader monitors performance and gives feedback to team members regularly. It is most likely to be effective when individual team members are experienced, skilled, self-starters. The main benefit of laissez-faire leadership is that giving team members so much autonomy can lead to high job satisfaction and increased productivity. The downside is that it can be damaging if team members don't manage their time well or if they don't have the knowledge, skills, or motivation to do their work effectively. 7. Task-Oriented Leadership Task-oriented leaders focus only on getting the job done and can be autocratic. They actively define the work and the roles required, put structures in place, and plan, organize, and monitor work. These leaders also perform other key tasks, such as creating and maintaining standards for performance. The benefit of task-oriented leadership is that it ensures that deadlines are met, and it's especially useful for team members who don't manage their time well. However, because task-oriented leaders don't tend to think much about their team's well-being, this approach can suffer many of the flaws of autocratic leadership, including causing motivation and retention problems. 8. People-Oriented/Relations-Oriented Leadership With people-oriented leadership, leaders are totally focused on organizing, supporting, and developing the people on their teams. This is a participatory style and tends to encourage good teamwork and creative collaboration. This is the opposite of task-oriented leadership. People-oriented leaders treat everyone on the team equally. They're friendly and approachable, they pay attention to the welfare of everyone in the group, and they make themselves available whenever team members need help or advice. The benefit of this leadership style is that people-oriented leaders create teams that everyone wants to be part of. Team members are often more productive and willing to take risks, because they know that the leader will provide support if they need it. The downside is that some leaders can take this approach too far; they may put the development of their team above tasks or project directives. 9. Servant Leadership This term, created by Robert Greenleaf in the 1970s, describes a leader often not formally recognized as such. When someone at any level within an organization leads simply by meeting the needs of the team, he or she can be described as a "servant leader." Servant leaders often lead by example. They have high integrity and lead with generosity. In many ways, servant leadership is a form of democratic leadership because the whole team tends to be involved in decision making. However, servant leaders often "lead from behind," preferring to stay out of the limelight and letting their team accept recognition for their hard work. Supporters of the servant leadership model suggest that it's a good way to move ahead in a world where values are increasingly important, and where servant leaders can achieve power because of their values, ideals, and ethics. This is an approach that can help to create a positive corporate culture and can lead to high morale among team members. However, other people believe that in competitive leadership situations, people who practice servant leadership can find themselves left behind by leaders using other leadership styles. This leadership style also

takes time to apply correctly: it's ill-suited in situations where you have to make quick decisions or meet tight deadlines. Although you can use servant leadership in many situations, it's often most practical in politics, or in positions where leaders are elected to serve a team, committee, organization, or community. 10. Transformational Leadership As we discussed earlier in this article, transformation leadership is often the best leadership style to use in business situations. Transformational leaders are inspiring because they expect the best from everyone on their team as well as themselves. This leads to high productivity and engagement from everyone in their team. The downside of transformational leadership is that while the leader's enthusiasm is passed onto the team, he or she can need to be supported by "detail people." That's why, in many organizations, both transactional and transformational leadership styles are useful. Transactional leaders (or managers) ensure that routine work is done reliably, while transformational leaders look after initiatives that add new value. It's also important to use other leadership styles when necessary this will depend on the people you're leading and the situation that you're in. Key Points In business, transformational leadership is often the best leadership style to use. However, no one style of leadership fits all situations, so it helps to have an understanding of other styles. The main leadership styles include: 1. Transactional leadership. 2. Autocratic leadership. 3. Bureaucratic leadership. 4. Charismatic leadership. 5. Democratic/participative leadership. 6. Laissez-faire leadership. 7. Task-oriented leadership. 8. People/relations-oriented leadership. 9. Servant leadership. 10. Transformational leadership. By learning about the pros and cons of each style, you can adapt your approach to your situation The Four Core Theory Groups Let's look at each of the four core groups of theory, and explore some of the tools and models that apply with each. (Keep in mind that there are many other theories out there.) 1. Trait Theories What Type of Person Makes a Good Leader? Trait theories argue that effective leaders share a number of common personality characteristics, or "traits." Early trait theories said that leadership is an innate, instinctive quality that you do or don't have. Thankfully, we've moved on from this idea, and we're learning more about what we can do to develop leadership qualities within ourselves and others. Trait theories help us identify traits and qualities (for example, integrity, empathy, assertiveness, good decision-making skills, and likability) that are helpful when leading others. However, none of these traits, nor any specific combination of them, will guarantee success as a leader. Traits are external behaviors that emerge from the things going on within our minds and it's these internal beliefs and processes that are important for effective leadership. We explore some of the traits and skills that you need to be a good leader in our articles What a Real Leader Knows, Level 5 Leadership, and What is Leadership? Level 5 Leadership Achieving "Greatness" as a Leader What makes great leaders? Is it their courage? Their business acumen? Their expert knowledge? Their ability to organize? Truly great leaders have a specific blend of skills. But they also possess something else; certain characteristics which are harder to define. If you're in a leadership role, then you've likely wondered how you can move to that "next level," going from good to great leadership.

In this article, we'll examine "Level 5 Leadership" a key idea that explains this. We'll explore what it takes to achieve greatness as a leader, and we'll discuss strategies that you can use to move up to this top level of leadership. Introducing Level 5 Leadership The concept of Level 5 Leadership was created by business consultant, Jim Collins. He wrote about it in a 2001 Harvard Business Review article, and published his research in his well-respected book, "From Good to Great." The concept came about during a study that began in 1996, when Collins began researching what makes a great company. He started by looking at 1,435 companies, and ended up choosing 11 truly great ones. These 11 companies were all headed by what Collins called "Level 5 Leaders." He found that these leaders have humility, and they don't seek success for their own glory; rather, success is necessary so that the team and organization can thrive. They tend to share credit for success, and they're the first to accept blame for mistakes. Collins also says that they're often shy, but fearless when it comes to making decisions, especially ones that most other people consider risky. Level 5 Leaders also possess qualities found in four other levels of leadership that Collins identified. Although you don't have to pass sequentially through each individual level before you become a Level 5 Leader, you must have the skills and capabilities found in each level of the hierarchy. Let's look at each of the five levels in more detail: Level 1: Highly Capable Individual At this level, you make high quality contributions with your work. You possess useful levels of knowledge; and you have the talent and skills needed to do a good job. Level 2: Contributing Team Member At Level 2, you use your knowledge and skills to help your team succeed. You work effectively, productively and successfully with other people in your group. Level 3: Competent Manager Here, you're able to organize a group effectively to achieve specific goals and objectives. Level 4: Effective Leader Level 4 is the category that most top leaders fall into. Here, you're able to galvanize a department or organization to meet performance objectives and achieve a vision. Level 5: Great Leader At Level 5, you have all of the abilities needed for the other four levels, plus you have the unique blend of humility and will that's required for true greatness. How to Become a Level 5 Leader It takes time and effort to become a Level 5 Leader. But the good news is that it can be done, especially if you have the passion to try. Again, it's important to realize that you don't have to progress through each level in turn in order to get to Level 5. But you do need the capabilities found in each level in order to achieve Level 5 status. Here are some strategies that will help you grow emotionally and professionally, so that you can develop the qualities of a Level 5 Leader: Develop Humility Level 5 Leaders are humble people. So, learn why humility is important, and make sure that you understand at a deep, emotional level why arrogance is so destructive. Then ensure that you behave in a humble way for example, whenever your team has success, make sure that credit goes to them for their hard work. Conversely, as a leader, you're responsible for your team's efforts, even when things go wrong. Tip The 2007-2008 financial crisis showed many examples of how arrogant, self-glorifying, self-obsessed leaders led their organizations to ruin. Much of this chaos could have been averted if appointment committees had recruited Level 5 leaders. Humility matters, including when it comes to recruitment. Ask for Help Level 5 Leaders are sometimes mistakenly thought of as "weak," because they ask for help when they need it. However, learning how to ask for help is a genuine strength, because it lets you call upon the expertise of someone stronger in an area than you are. The result? The entire team or organization wins; not just you.

Remember the Guy Kawasaki quote that "A players recruit A+ players, while B players recruit C players". If you're recruiting A+ players, why wouldn't you take full advantage of their skills? (The truth is that if you can recruit A+ people successfully and get the best from them, then you've become an A+ manager.) Take Responsibility A top attribute of Level 5 Leaders is taking responsibility for your team's mistakes or failings. So make sure that you take responsibility for your (and your team's) actions. Develop Discipline Level 5 Leaders are incredibly disciplined in their work. When they're sure of a course of action, no matter how difficult it is, they stick to their resolve. If you know in your heart that you're right, then don't let naysayers dissuade you from a course of action. It's always important to listen to differing opinions, of course, but don't let fear be your driving motivator when you make, or change, a decision. Find the Right People Level 5 Leaders depend on the people around them. They spend time finding the right people, and helping them to reach their full potential. If you're a leader or manager already, then you probably know without thinking who your best people are. However, you sometimes have to challenge these assumptions. Lead with Passion Level 5 Leaders are passionate about what they do, and they're not afraid to show it. When you demonstrate to your team members that you love and believe in what you're doing, they will too. If you're having a hard time finding passion in your work, then you need to search for the human element in what you're doing. Tip: Use common sense in the way that you apply this idea. In some environments that is, in high-trust, properly-managed workplaces Level 5 Leadership is something to aspire to, demonstrate and apply. In low-trust or dysfunctional environments, however, you may need to use Level 5 Leadership more cautiously. Definitely apply the approach, but make sure that you're alert to the "corporate politics" going on around you. Key Points Level 5 Leadership is a concept developed by Jim Collins. After several years of research, Collins discovered that all of the great organizations that he studied were headed by what he called "Level 5 Leaders." These Leaders have a unique combination of fierce resolve and humility. They were the first to own up to mistakes, and the last to take credit for success. You can work on developing the following skills and characteristics to become a Level 5 Leader: Develop humility. Ask for help. Take responsibility. Develop discipline. Find the right people. Lead with passion 2. Behavioral Theories What Does a Good Leader Do? Behavioral theories focus on how leaders behave. For instance, do leaders dictate what needs to be done and expect cooperation? Or do they involve their teams in decision-making to encourage acceptance and support? In the 1930s, Kurt Lewin developed a framework based on a leader's behavior. He argued that there are three types of leaders: 1. Autocratic leaders make decisions without consulting their teams. This style of leadership is considered appropriate when decisions need to be made quickly, when there's no need for input, and when team agreement isn't necessary for a successful outcome. 2. Democratic leaders allow the team to provide input before making a decision, although the degree of input can vary from leader to leader. This style is important when team agreement matters, but it can be difficult to manage when there are lots of different perspectives and ideas.

3. Laissez-faire leaders don't interfere; they allow people within the team to make many of the decisions. This works well when the team is highly capable, is motivated, and doesn't need close supervision. However, this behavior can arise because the leader is lazy or distracted. This is where this approach can fail. Clearly, how leaders behave affects their performance. Researchers have realized, though, that many of these leadership behaviors are appropriate at different times. The best leaders are those who can use many different behavioral styles, and choose the right style for each situation. The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid Balancing Task- and People-Oriented Leadership When your boss puts you in charge of organizing the company Christmas party, what do you do first? Do you develop a time line and start assigning tasks or do you think about who would prefer to do what and try to schedule around their needs? When the planning starts to fall behind schedule, what is your first reaction? Do you chase everyone to get back on track, or do you ease off a bit recognizing that everyone is busy just doing his/her job, let alone the extra tasks youve assigned? Your answers to these types of questions can reveal a great deal about your personal leadership style. Some leaders are very task-oriented; they simply want to get things done. Others are very people-oriented; they want people to be happy. And others are a combination of the two. If you prefer to lead by setting and enforcing tight schedules, you tend to be more production-oriented (or task-oriented). If you make people your priority and try to accommodate employee needs, then youre more people-oriented. Neither preference is right or wrong, just as no one type of leadership style is best for all situations. However, it's useful to understand what your natural leadership tendencies are, so that you can then begin working on developing skills that you may be missing. A popular framework for thinking about a leaders task versus person orientation was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in the early 1960s. Called the Managerial Grid, or Leadership Grid, it plots the degree of task-centeredness versus person-centeredness and identifies five combinations as distinct leadership styles. Understanding the Model The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions: Concern for People This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team members, their interests, and areas of personal development when deciding how best to accomplish a task. Concern for Production This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes concrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a task. Using the axis to plot leadership concerns for production versus concerns for people, Blake and Mouton defined the following five leadership styles:

Country Club Leadership High People/Low Production This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of his/her team. These people operate under the assumption that as long as team members are happy and secure then they will work hard. What tends to result is a work environment that is very relaxed and fun but where production suffers due to lack of direction and control. Produce or Perish Leadership High Production/Low People Also known as Authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, people in this category believe that employees are simply a means to an end. Employee needs are always secondary to the need for efficient and productive workplaces. This type of leader is very autocratic, has strict work rules, policies, and procedures, and views punishment as the most effective means to motivate employees. (See also our article on Theory X/Theory Y.) Impoverished Leadership Low Production/Low People This leader is mostly ineffective. He/she has neither a high regard for creating systems for getting the job done, nor for creating a work environment that is satisfying and motivating. The result is a place of disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony. Middle-of-the-Road Leadership Medium Production/Medium People This style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns. It may at first appear to be an ideal compromise. Therein lies the problem, though: When you compromise, you necessarily give away a bit of each concern so that neither production nor people needs are fully met. Leaders who use this style settle for average performance and often believe that this is the most anyone can expect. Team Leadership High Production/High People According to the Blake Mouton model, this is the pinnacle of managerial style. These leaders stress production needs and the needs of the people equally highly. The premise here is that employees are involved in understanding organizational purpose and determining production needs. When employees are committed to, and have a stake in the organizations success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates a team environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production. Applying the Blake Mouton Managerial Grid Being aware of the various approaches is the first step in understanding and improving how well you perform as a manager. It is important to understand how you currently operate, so that you can then identify ways of becoming competent in both realms.

Step One: Identify your leadership style Think of some recent situations where you were the leader. For each of these situations, place yourself in the grid according to where you believe you fit. Step Two: Identify areas of improvement and develop your leadership skills Look at your current leadership method and critically analyze its effectiveness. Look at ways you can improve. Are you settling for middle of the road because it is easier than reaching for more? Identify ways to get the skills you need to reach the Team Leadership position. These may include involving others in problem solving or improving how you communicate with them, if you feel you are too task-oriented. Or it may mean becoming clearer about scheduling or monitoring project progress if you tend to focus too much on people. Continually monitor your performance and watch for situations when you slip back into bad old habits. Step Three: Put the Grid in Context It is important to recognize that the Team Leadership style isnt always the most effective approach in every situation. While the benefits of democratic and participative management are universally accepted, there are times that call for more attention in one area than another. If your company is in the midst of a merger or some other significant change, it is often acceptable to place a higher emphasis on people than on production. Likewise, when faced with an economic hardship or physical risk, people concerns may be placed on the back burner, for the short-term at least, to achieve high productivity and efficiency.

Note Theories of leadership have moved on a certain amount since the Blake Mouton Grid was originally proposed. In particular, the context in which leadership occurs is now seen as an important driver of the leadership style used. And in many situations, the "Team Leader" as an ideal has moved to the ideal of the "Transformational Leader": Someone who, according to leadership researcher Bernard Bass: Is a model of integrity and fairness. Sets clear goals. Has high expectations. Encourages. Provides support and recognition. Stirs people's emotions. Gets people to look beyond their self-interest. Inspires people to reach for the improbable. So use Blake Mouton as a helpful model, but don't treat it as an "eternal truth".

Key Points The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid is a practical and useful framework that helps you think about your leadership style. By plotting concern for production against concern for people, the grid highlights how placing too much emphasis in one area at the expense of the other leads to low overall productivity. The model proposes that when both people and production concerns are high, employee engagement and productivity increases accordingly. This is often true, and it follows the ideas of Theories X and Y, and other participative management theories. While the grid does not entirely address the complexity of Which leadership style is best?, it certainly provides an excellent starting place to critically analyze your own performance and improve your general leadership skills. Theory X and Theory Y Understanding Team Member Motivation What motivates employees to go to work each morning? Many people get great satisfaction from their work and take great pride in it; Others may view it as a burden, and simply work to survive. This question of motivation has been studied by management theorists and social psychologists for decades, in attempts to identify successful approaches to management. Social psychologist Douglas McGregor of MIT expounded two contrasting theories on human motivation and management in the 1960s: The X Theory and the Y Theory. McGregor promoted Theory Y as the basis of good management practice, pioneering the argument that workers are not merely cogs in the company machinery, as Theory X-Type organizations seemed to believe. The theories look at how a manager's perceptions of what motivates his or her team members affects the way he or she behaves. By understanding how your assumptions about employees motivation can influence your management style, you can adapt your approach appropriately, and so manage people more effectively. Understanding the Theories Your management style is strongly influenced by your beliefs and assumptions about what motivates members of your team: If you believe that team members dislike work, you will tend towards an authoritarian style of management; On the other hand, if you assume that employees take pride in doing a good job, you will tend to adopt a more participative style. Theory X Theory X assumes that employees are naturally unmotivated and dislike working, and this encourages an authoritarian style of management. According to this view, management must actively intervene to get things done. This style of management assumes that workers: Dislike working. Avoid responsibility and need to be directed. Have to be controlled, forced, and threatened to deliver what's needed. Need to be supervised at every step, with controls put in place. Need to be enticed to produce results; otherwise they have no ambition or incentive to work.

X-Type organizations tend to be top heavy, with managers and supervisors required at every step to control workers. There is little delegation of authority and control remains firmly centralized. McGregor recognized that X-Type workers are in fact usually the minority, and yet in mass organizations, such as large scale production environment, X Theory management may be required and can be unavoidable. Theory Y Theory Y expounds a participative style of management that is de-centralized. It assumes that employees are happy to work, are self-motivated and creative, and enjoy working with greater responsibility. It assumes that workers: Take responsibility and are motivated to fulfill the goals they are given. Seek and accept responsibility and do not need much direction. Consider work as a natural part of life and solve work problems imaginatively. This more participative management style tends to be more widely applicable. In Y-Type organizations, people at lower levels of the organization are involved in decision making and have more responsibility. Comparing Theory X and Theory Y Motivation Theory X assumes that people dislike work; they want to avoid it and do not want to take responsibility. Theory Y assumes that people are self-motivated, and thrive on responsibility. Management Style and Control In a Theory X organization, management is authoritarian, and centralized control is retained, whilst in Theory Y, the management style is participative: Management involves employees in decision making, but retains power to implement decisions. Work Organization Theory X employees tend to have specialized and often repetitive work. In Theory Y, the work tends to be organized around wider areas of skill or knowledge; Employees are also encouraged to develop expertise and make suggestions and improvements. Rewards and Appraisals Theory X organizations work on a carrot and stick basis, and performance appraisal is part of the overall mechanisms of control and remuneration. In Theory Y organizations, appraisal is also regular and important, but is usually a separate mechanism from organizational controls. Theory Y organizations also give employees frequent opportunities for promotion. Application Although Theory X management style is widely accepted as inferior to others, it has its place in large scale production operation and unskilled production-line work. Many of the principles of Theory Y are widely adopted by types of organization that value and encourage participation. Theory Y-style management is suited to knowledge work and professional services. Professional service organizations naturally evolve Theory Y-type practices by the nature of their work; Even highly structure knowledge work, such as call center operations, can benefits from Theory Y principles to encourage knowledge sharing and continuous improvement. Tip 1: Enough theory. Which approach do you prefer? Do you work most effectively when your boss controls every part of everything you do? Or would this drive you mad, so that you'd just do what he or she wanted (and nothing more), look for another job, and then leave? Or would you prefer a boss who helps you to do your best, increasingly trusts your judgment, allows you to use your creativity, and step-by-step gives you more control over your job? Would you work more effectively for a Theory X or Theory Y manager? Learn from this! As it is for you, it will be for many of the members of your team! Tip 2: That said, different members of your own team may have different attitudes. Many may thrive on Theory Y management, while others may need Theory X management. Still others may benefit from an altogether different approach. Mix and match appropriately 3. Contingency Theories How Does the Situation Influence Good Leadership? The realization that there is no one correct type of leader led to theories that the best leadership style depends on the situation. These theories try to predict which style is best in which circumstance.

For instance, when you need to make quick decisions, which style is best? When you need the full support of your team, is there a more effective way to lead? Should a leader be more people-oriented or taskoriented? These are all questions that contingency leadership theories try to address. The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory is a popular contingency-based leadership framework, which links leadership style with the maturity of individual members of the leader's team. Other contingency-based models include House's Path-Goal Theory and Fiedler's Contingency Model. You can also use the Leadership Process Model to understand how your situation affects other factors that are important for effective leadership, and how, in turn, these affect your leadership. The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory Choosing the Right Leadership Style for the Right People You've just finished training the newest member of your team. Now that he's ready to start working, you give him the data that you need him to enter into the company's database, and then you hurry off to a meeting. When you return later that afternoon, you're disappointed to find that he hasn't done anything. He didn't know what to do, and he didn't have the confidence to ask for help. As a result, hours have been lost, and now you have to rush to enter the data on time. Although you may want to blame the worker, the truth is that you're as much to blame as he is. How can you avoid situations like this? Management experts Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard argue that these things happen because leaders don't match their style of leadership to the maturity of the person or group they're leading. When style and maturity aren't matched, failure is the result. In this article, we'll review the Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory, and we'll explain how it's used in different leadership situations. Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory was created by Dr Paul Hersey, a professor and author of "The Situational Leader," and Ken Blanchard, author of the best selling "The One-Minute Manager," among others. The theory states that instead of using just one style, successful leaders should change their leadership styles based on the maturity of the people they're leading and the details of the task. Using this theory, leaders should be able to place more or less emphasis on the task, and more or less emphasis on the relationships with the people they're leading, depending on what's needed to get the job done successfully. Leadership Styles According to Hersey and Blanchard, there are four main leadership styles: Telling (S1) Leaders tell their people exactly what to do, and how to do it. Selling (S2) Leaders still provide information and direction, but there's more communication with followers. Leaders "sell" their message to get the team on board. Participating (S3) Leaders focus more on the relationship and less on direction. The leader works with the team, and shares decision-making responsibilities. Delegating (S4) Leaders pass most of the responsibility onto the follower or group. The leaders still monitor progress, but they're less involved in decisions. As you can see, styles S1 and S2 are focused on getting the task done. Styles S3 and S4 are more concerned with developing team members' abilities to work independently. Maturity Levels According to Hersey and Blanchard, knowing when to use each style is largely dependent on the maturity of the person or group you're leading. They break maturity down into four different levels: M1 People at this level of maturity are at the bottom level of the scale. They lack the knowledge, skills, or confidence to work on their own, and they often need to be pushed to take the task on. M2 At this level, followers might be willing to work on the task, but they still don't have the skills to do it successfully. M3 Here, followers are ready and willing to help with the task. They have more skills than the M2 group, but they're still not confident in their abilities. M4 These followers are able to work on their own. They have high confidence and strong skills, and they're committed to the task.

The Hersey-Blanchard model maps each leadership style to each maturity level, as shown below. Maturity Most Appropriate Leadership Style M1: Low maturity M2: Medium maturity, limited skills M3: Medium maturity, higher skills but lacking confidence S1: Telling/directing S2: Selling/coaching S3: Participating/supporting

M4: High maturity S4: Delegating To use this model, reflect on the maturity of individuals within your team. The table above then shows which leadership style Hersey and Blanchard consider the most effective for people with that level of maturity. Leadership Style Examples 1. You're about to leave for an extended holiday, and your tasks will be handled by an experienced colleague. He's very familiar with your responsibilities, and he's excited to do the job. 2. Instead of trusting his knowledge and skills to do the work, you spend hours creating a detailed list of tasks for which he'll be responsible, and instructions on how to do them. 3. The result? Your work gets done, but you've damaged the relationship with your colleague by your lack of trust. He was an M4 in maturity, and yet you used an S1 leadership style instead of an S4, which would have been more appropriate. 2. You've just been put in charge of leading a new team. It's your first time working with these people. As far as you can tell, they have some of the necessary skills to reach the department's goals, but not all of them. The good news is that they're excited and willing to do the work. 3. You estimate they're at an M3 maturity level, so you use the matching S3 leadership style. You coach them through the project's goals, pushing and teaching where necessary, but largely leaving them to make their own decisions. As a result, their relationship with you is strengthened, and the team's efforts are a success. Key Points All teams, and all team members, aren't created equal. Hersey and Blanchard argue that leaders are more effective when they use a leadership style based on the individuals or groups they're leading. Start by identifying whom you're leading. Are your followers knowledgeable about the task? Are they willing and excited to do the work? Rate them on the M1-M4 maturity scale, and then use the leadership style that's appropriate for that rating Fiedler's Contingency Model Matching Leadership Style to a Situation What is your natural leadership style? Do you focus on completing tasks, or on building relationships with your team? Have you considered that this natural leadership style might be more suited to some situations or environments than it is to others? In this article, we'll explore Fiedler's Contingency Model, and look at how it can highlight the most effective leadership style to use in different situations. Note: Keep in mind that Fielder isn't using the word "contingency" in the sense of contingency planning. Here, "contingency" is a situation or event that's dependent on someone, or something else. Understanding the Model The Fiedler Contingency Model was created in the mid-1960s by Fred Fiedler, a scientist who helped advance the study of personality and characteristics of leaders. The model states that there is no one best style of leadership. Instead, a leader's effectiveness is based on the situation. This is the result of two factors "leadership style" and "situational favorableness" (later called "situational control"). Leadership Style Identifying leadership style is the first step in using the model. Fiedler believed that leadership style is fixed, and it can be measured using a scale he developed called Least-Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale (see Figure 1). The scale asks you to think about the person who you've least enjoyed working with. This can be a person who you've worked with in your job, or in education or training.

You then rate each factor based on this person and add up your scores. If your total score is high, you're likely to be a relationship-orientated leader. If your total score is low, you're more likely to be taskorientated leader. Figure 1: Least-Preferred Co-Worker Scale Unfriendly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Unpleasant Rejecting Tense Cold Boring Backbiting Uncooperative Hostile Guarded Insincere Unkind Inconsiderate Untrustworthy Gloomy Quarrelsome 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Friendly Pleasant Accepting Relaxed Warm Interesting Loyal Cooperative Supportive Open Sincere Kind Considerate Trustworthy Cheerful Harmonious

The model says that task-oriented leaders usually view their LPCs more negatively, resulting in a lower score. Fiedler called these low LPC-leaders. He said that low LPCs are very effective at completing tasks. They're quick to organize a group to get tasks and projects done. Relationship-building is a low priority. However, relationship-oriented leaders usually view their LPCs more positively, giving them a higher score. These are high-LPC leaders. High LPCs focus more on personal connections, and they're good at avoiding and managing conflict. They're better able to make complex decisions. Situational Favorableness Next, you determine the "situational favorableness" of your particular situation. This depends on three distinct factors: Leader-Member Relations This is the level of trust and confidence that your team has in you. A leader who is more trusted and has more influence with the group is in a more favorable situation than a leader who is not trusted. Task Structure This refers to the type of task you're doing: clear and structured, or vague and unstructured. Unstructured tasks, or tasks where the team and leader have little knowledge of how to achieve them, are viewed unfavorably. Leader's Position Power This is the amount of power you have to direct the group, and provide reward or punishment. The more power you have, the more favorable your situation. Fiedler identifies power as being either strong or weak. Applying the Fiedler Contingency Model Step 1: Identify your leadership style Think about the person who you've least enjoyed working with, either now or in the past. Rate your experience with this person using the scale in Figure 1, above. According to this model, a higher score means that you're naturally relationship-focused, and a lower score means that you're naturally task-focused. Step 2: Identify your situation Answer the questions: Are leader-member relations good or poor?

Is the task you're doing structured, or is it more unstructured, or do you have little experience of solving similar problems? Do you have strong or weak power over your team? Step 3: Determine the most effective leadership style Figure 2 shows a breakdown of all of the factors we've covered: Leader-Member Relations, Task Structure, and Leader's Position Power. The final column identifies the type of leader that Fiedler believed would be most effective in each situation. Figure 2: Breakdown of Most Effective Leader Style Leader-Member Relations Task Structure Leader's Position Power Most Effective Leader Good Good Good Good Poor Poor Poor Structured Structured Unstructured Unstructured Structured Structured Unstructured Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Low LPC Low LPC Low LPC High LPC High LPC High LPC High LPC

Poor Unstructured Weak Low LPC For instance, imagine that you've just started working at a new company, replacing a much-loved leader who recently retired. You're leading a team who views you with distrust (so your Leader-Member Relations are poor). The task you're all doing together is well defined (structured), and your position of power is high because you're the boss, and you're able to offer reward or punishment to the group. The most effective leader in this situation would be high LPC that is, a leader who can focus on building relationships first. Or, imagine that you're leading a team who likes and respects you (so your Leader-Member relations are good). The project you're working on together is highly creative (unstructured) and your position of power is high since, again, you're in a management position of strength. In this situation a task-focused leadership style would be most effective. Criticisms of the Model There are some criticisms of the Fiedler Contingency Model. One of the biggest is lack of flexibility. Fiedler believed that because our natural leadership style is fixed, the most effective way to handle situations is to change the leader. He didn't allow for flexibility in leaders. For instance, if a low-LPC leader is in charge of a group with good relations and doing unstructured tasks, and she has a weak position (the fourth situation), then, according to the model, the best solution is to replace her with a high-LPC leader instead of asking her to use a different leadership style. There is also an issue with the Least-Preferred Co-Worker Scale if you fall near the middle of the scoring range, then it could be unclear which style of leader you are. Note At Mind Tools, we believe that transformational leadership is the best leadership style in most situations, however, we believe that other leadership styles are sometimes necessary. In our opinion, the Fiedler Contingency Model is unhelpful in many 21st Century workplaces. It may occasionally be a useful tool for analyzing a situation and determining whether or not to focus on tasks or relationships, but be cautious about applying any style simply because the model says you should. Use your own judgment when analyzing situations. Key Points The Fiedler Contingency Model asks you to think about your natural leadership style, and the situations in which it will be most effective. The model says that leaders are either task-focused, or relationship-focused. Once you understand your style, it says that you can match it to situations in which that style is most effective. However, the model has some disadvantages. It doesn't allow for leadership flexibility, and the LPC score might give an inaccurate picture of your leadership style. As with all models and theories, use your best judgment when applying the Fiedler Contingency Model to your own situation.

Dunham and Pierce's Leadership Process Model Taking an Intelligent, Long-Term Approach to Leadership Leadership is about setting direction and helping people do the right things. However, it can involve so much more than this! In particular, leadership is a long-term process in which - in a very real and practical way - all actions have consequences, and "what goes around comes around." Dunham and Pierce's Leadership Process Model helps you think about this, and understand why it's important to adopt a positive and long-term approach to leadership. We'll look at the model in this article, and we'll explore why it's so important to understand it. We'll also look at how you can apply the model's lessons to your own situation. What is the Leadership Process Model? The Leadership Process Model was developed by Randall B. Dunham and Jon Pierce, and was published in their 1989 book "Managing." You can see our interpretation of the model in figure 1, below. Figure 1 The Leadership Process

1. 2. 3.

4.

The model shows the relationship between four key factors that contribute to leadership success or failure. These are: The Leader: This is the person who takes charge, and directs the group's performance. Followers: These are the people who follow the leader's directions on tasks and projects. The Context: This is the situation in which the work is performed. For instance, it may be a regular workday, an emergency project, or a challenging, long-term assignment. Context can also cover the physical environment, resources available, and events in the wider organization. Outcomes: These are the results of the process. Outcomes could be reaching a particular goal, developing a high-quality product, or resolving a customer service issue. They can also include things like improved trust and respect between the leader and followers, or higher team morale. Most importantly, the model highlights that leadership is a dynamic and ongoing process. Therefore, it's important to be flexible depending on the context and outcomes, and to invest continually in your relationship with your followers. Essentially, everything affects everything else. In a very real way, negative actions feed back to negatively affect future performance, and positive actions feed back to improve future performance. How to Apply the Model Pierce and John W. Newstrom highlighted several ways that you can apply the insights from this framework to your own development as a leader, and to the development of your people: 1. Provide Regular Feedback Probably the most important thing that the Leadership Process Model highlights is how important it is to give good feedback, so that your team can grow and develop. When you give feedback to your team, it influences the context and helps to improve the outcome. This then cycles back to influence you and your team in a positive way. Regular feedback also helps you take your people in the right direction, as outcomes and the context change.

2. Be Aware of Actions and Reactions The model makes it clear that, no matter what you do, your decisions, behavior, and actions directly affect your followers. Every action has a reaction. You, your followers, the context, and the outcome are all tied together in a dynamic relationship. As a leader, it's essential that you keep this in mind at all times. There will be consequences when you say something thoughtless, or lash out at a team member, even if you don't see them immediately. Those consequences might include diminished performance, reduced morale, increased absenteeism, and accelerated staff turnover. This is why it's important to develop self-mastery, both of your thoughts and of your actions. Also, learn how to control your emotions at work, and be a good role model. 3. Lead Honestly and Ethically The model also illustrates the relationships between leader and followers. If this relationship is built on mutual trust and respect, then the context and outcomes will get better and better. However, if the relationship is based on animosity, resentment, or even fear, the effect on context and outcomes will be negative. Your people need and deserve a leader who they can trust and look up to, which is why it's important to be an ethical leader. Of course, your people may have to follow your instructions. However, if you're a leader who they trust to do the right thing, they'll want to follow you, and they'll go above and beyond for you because the relationship is deeper. This makes the difference between an average team and a great team. Also, be authentic in your actions and communication, lead with integrity, and be humble. These qualities will inspire the trust of your people and strengthen the relationship you have with them. It's also important to build trust actively with your team members. Do your best to support their needs, and always keep your word with them. 4. Lead with the Right Style In business, Transformational Leadership is often the best leadership style to use. Transformational leaders have integrity, they set clear goals, they communicate well with their team members, and they inspire people with a shared vision of the future. However, you'll occasionally need to adopt different leadership approaches to fit a particular follower, outcome, or context. This is why it helps to be able to use other leadership styles when appropriate. 5. Consciously Assign Tasks Do your people get to use their skills and strengths on a regular basis? If you've been assigning tasks and projects in an ad-hoc way, then this answer might be "No". We're all happiest when we can use our strongest skills. Try to assign tasks that fit the unique skills of everyone on your team. Our articles on the Four Dimensions of Relational Work and Task Allocation have more on how to match tasks to your people's particular skills and situation. 6. Focus on Relationship Development As a leader, you often depend on your people more than they depend on you. Your working relationships should therefore be built on trust, respect, and transparency. The deeper your relationship with your team, the better a leader you'll be. Start by developing your emotional intelligence; this encompasses many of the traits that we've already mentioned. When you have high emotional intelligence, you are selfaware, you manage your emotions, and you act according to your ethics and values. You also need to show empathy with members of your team. When your people see you as an empathic leader, they feel that you're on their side, and that you can see things from their perspective. This deepens the relationship they have with you. Lastly, reward your people for the good work that they do: even a simple "thank you" will show your appreciation. Key Points The Leadership Process Model highlights the dynamic and long-term nature of leadership. It shows how your actions and behaviors influence your people, just as their actions and behaviors influence you. As well as having an awareness of the model, you can also apply lessons from it by doing the following: Providing regular feedback. Being aware of actions and reactions. Leading honestly and ethically. Leading with the right style. Assigning tasks consciously and intelligently.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. Focusing on relationship development. Overall, the Leadership Process Model helps you see the interdependent nature of leadership and its effects on situations and outcomes. Use this framework to be aware of your actions and to deepen the relationships you have with your people 4. Power and Influence Theories What is the Source of the Leader's Power? Power and influence theories of leadership take an entirely different approach these are based on the different ways that leaders use power and influence to get things done, and they look at the leadership styles that emerge as a result. Perhaps the most well-known of these theories is French and Raven's Five Forms of Power. This model highlights three types of positional power legitimate, reward, and coercive and two sources of personal power expert and referent (your personal appeal and charm). The model suggests that using personal power is the better alternative, and that you should work on building expert power (the power that comes with being a real expert in the job) because this is the most legitimate source of personal power. Another leadership style that uses power and influence is transactional leadership. This approach assumes that people do things for reward and for no other reason. Therefore, it focuses on designing tasks and reward structures. While this may not be the most appealing leadership strategy in terms of building relationships and developing a highly motivating work environment, it does work, and leaders in most organizations use it on a daily basis to get things done. Similarly, leading by example is another highly effective way of influencing your team. French and Raven's Five Forms of Power Understanding Where Power Comes From in the Workplace Leadership and power are closely linked. People tend to follow those who are powerful. And because others follow, the person with power leads. But leaders have power for different reasons. Some are powerful because they alone have the ability to give you a bonus or a raise. Others are powerful because they can fire you, or assign you tasks you don't like. Yet, while leaders of this type have formal, official power, their teams are unlikely to be enthusiastic about their approach to leadership, if these are all they rely on. On the more positive side, leaders may have power because they're experts in their fields, or because their team members admire them. People with these types of power don't necessarily have formal leadership roles, but they influence others effectively because of their skills and personal qualities. And when a leadership position opens up, they'll probably be the first to be considered for promotion. Do you recognize these types of power in those around you or in yourself? and how does power influence the way you work and live your life? Understanding Power One of the most notable studies on power was conducted by social psychologists John French and Bertram Raven in 1959. They identified five bases of power: Legitimate This comes from the belief that a person has the right to make demands, and expect compliance and obedience from others. Reward This results from one person's ability to compensate another for compliance. Expert This is based on a person's superior skill and knowledge. Referent This is the result of a person's perceived attractiveness, worthiness, and right to respect from others. Coercive This comes from the belief that a person can punish others for noncompliance. If you're aware of these sources of power, you can Better understand why you're influenced by someone, and decide whether you want to accept the base of power being used. Recognize your own sources of power. Build your leadership skills by using and developing your own sources of power, appropriately, and for best effect. The most effective leaders use mainly referent and expert power. To develop your leadership abilities, learn how to build these types of power, so that you can have a positive influence on your colleagues, your team, and your organization.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The Five Bases of Power Let's explore French and Raven's bases of power according to these sources. Positional Power Sources Legitimate Power A president, prime minister, or monarch has power. So does a CEO, a minister, or a fire chief. People holding these formal, official positions or job titles typically have power. Social hierarchies, cultural norms, and organizational structure all provide the basis for legitimate power. This type of power, however, can be unpredictable and unstable. If you lose the title or position, legitimate power can instantly disappear since others were influenced by the position, not by you. Also, your scope of power is limited to situations that others believe you have a right to control. If the fire chief tells people to stay away from a burning building, they'll probably listen. But if he tries to make people stay away from a street fight, people may well ignore him. Therefore, relying on legitimate power as your only way to influence others isn't enough. To be a leader, you need more than this in fact, you may not need legitimate power at all. Reward Power People in power are often able to give out rewards. Raises, promotions, desirable assignments, training opportunities, and even simple compliments these are all examples of rewards controlled by people "in power." If others expect that you'll reward them for doing what you want, there's a high probability that they'll do it. The problem with this basis of power is that you may not have as much control over rewards as you need. Supervisors probably don't have complete control over salary increases, and managers often can't control promotions all by themselves. And even a CEO needs permission from the board of directors for some actions. So when you use up available rewards, or the rewards don't have enough perceived value to others, your power weakens. (One of the frustrations of using rewards is that they often need to be bigger each time if they're to have the same motivational impact. Even then, if rewards are given frequently, people can become satiated by the reward, such that it loses its effectiveness.) Coercive Power This source of power is also problematic, and can be subject to abuse. What's more, it can cause unhealthy behavior and dissatisfaction in the workplace. Threats and punishment are common tools of coercion. Implying or threatening that someone will be fired, demoted, denied privileges, or given undesirable assignments these are examples of using coercive power. While your position may give you the capability to coerce others, it doesn't automatically mean that you have the will or the justification to do so. As a last resort, you may sometimes need to punish people. However, extensive use of coercive power is rarely appropriate in an organizational setting. Clearly, relying on these forms of power alone will result in a very cold, technocratic, impoverished style of leadership. To be a true leader, you need a more robust source of power than can be supplied by a title, an ability to reward, or an ability to punish. Personal Power Sources Expert Power When you have knowledge and skills that enable you to understand a situation, suggest solutions, use solid judgment, and generally outperform others, people will probably listen to you. When you demonstrate expertise, people tend to trust you and respect what you say. As a subject matter expert, your ideas will have more value, and others will look to you for leadership in that area. What's more, you can take your confidence, decisiveness, and reputation for rational thinking and expand them to other subjects and issues. This is a good way to build and maintain expert power. It doesn't require positional power, so you can use it to go beyond that. This is one of the best ways to improve your leadership skills. Referent Power This is sometimes thought of as charisma, charm, admiration, or appeal. Referent power comes from one person liking and respecting another, and strongly identifying with that person in some way. Celebrities have referent power, which is why they can influence everything from what people buy to whom they elect to

office. In a workplace, a person with charm often makes everyone feel good, so he or she tends to have a lot of influence. Referent power can be a big responsibility, because you don't necessarily have to do anything to earn it. Therefore, it can be abused quite easily. Someone who is likable, but lacks integrity and honesty, may rise to power and use that power to hurt and alienate people as well as gain personal advantage. Relying on referent power alone is not a good strategy for a leader who wants longevity and respect. When combined with other sources of power, however, it can help you achieve great success.. Key Points Anyone is capable of holding power and influencing others: you don't need to have an important job title or a big office. But if you recognize the different forms of power, you can avoid being influenced by those who use the less effective types of power and you can focus on developing expert and referent power for yourself. This will help you become an influential and positive leader. Leading by Example Making sure you "walk the talk" There's the boss who tells everyone to stay late, and then leaves promptly at 5:00pm to go golfing. There's the supervisor who criticizes everyone for spending time on the Internet, but is discovered buying groceries online in the middle of the afternoon. And the CFO who recommends layoffs to stop "unnecessary spending," but then buys herself brand-new luxury office furniture. Do you know any of these people? There's hardly anything worse for company morale than leaders who practice the "Do as I say, not as I do" philosophy. When this happens, you can almost see the loss of enthusiasm and goodwill among the staff. It's like watching the air go out of a balloon and cynicism and disappointment usually take its place. No matter what the situation is, double standards witnessing people say one thing, and then doing another always feel like betrayals. They can be very destructive. If this ever happened to you, you can probably remember that sense of disappointment and letdown. If you're in a leadership position, then you know that you have a responsibility to your team. They look to you for guidance and strength; that's part of what being a leader is. And a big part of your responsibility is to lead them with your own actions . So why is it so important to lead by example; and what happens when you don't? Why It Matters There's an old saying about the difference between a manager and a leader: "Managers do things right. Leaders do the right things." (It's best to be both a manager and a leader they're just different processes.) As a leader, part of your job is to inspire the people around you to push themselves and, in turn, the company to greatness. To do this, you must show them the way by doing it yourself. Stop and think about the inspiring people who have changed the world with their examples. Consider what Mahatma Gandhi accomplished through his actions: He spent most of his adult life living what he preached to others. He was committed to nonviolent resistance to protest injustice, and people followed in his footsteps. He led them, and India, to independence because his life proved, by example, that it could be done. Although Gandhi's situation is very different from yours, the principle is the same. When you lead by example, you create a picture of what's possible. People can look at you and say, "Well, if he can do it, I can do it." When you lead by example, you make it easy for others to follow you. Look at legendary businessman, Jack Welch of General Electric. Welch knew that to push GE to new heights, he had to turn everything upside down. So that's just what he did. He developed the whole idea of a "boundaryless organization." This means that everyone is free to brainstorm and think of ideas instead of waiting for someone "higher up" in the bureaucracy to think of them first. He wanted his team "turned loose," and he promised to listen to ideas from anyone in the company. And he did. Everyone from the lowest line workers to senior managers got his attention if they had something to say or a new idea that might make the company better. It wasn't just "talk," and it didn't take his team long to figure that out. Welch stayed true to his passions and what he knew was right. As a result, GE became an incredibly successful company under his management. His team was always willing to follow his lead, because the people within it knew that he always kept his word. What does this mean for you? If you give yourself to your team and show them the way, then, most likely, they'll follow you anywhere. When You Don't Lead by Example We've seen just how powerful it can be to lead by example. But what happens when you don't follow this rule? How does your team feel when you tell them to do one thing, and then you do the exact opposite?

As we said earlier, if this ever happened to you, then it shouldn't be hard to remember how angry and disappointed you were. When leaders don't "practice what they preach," it can be almost impossible for a team to work together successfully. How can anyone trust a leader who talks about one thing, but does another? Consider what might have happened if Gandhi had, even one time, been in a physical fight with his opposition. His important message of nonviolent protest would probably have been much harder to believe after that. His followers would have looked at him with suspicion and distrust. The chances of them getting into physical arguments or committing acts of violence probably would have increased dramatically. Do you think that Alexander the Great's soldiers would have fought so hard for him if he had sat on top of a hill, safe from the battle? Probably not. He would have been just another average general in our history books, instead of the example of a successful leader that we know today. And so it is with your team. If you say one thing and do another, they likely won't follow you enthusiastically. Why should they? Everything you tell them after that may meet with suspicion and doubt. They may not trust that you're doing the right thing, or that you know what you're talking about. They may no longer believe in you. Good leaders push their people forward with excitement, inspiration, trust, and vision. If you lead a team that doesn't trust you, productivity will drop. Enthusiasm may disappear. The vision you're trying so hard to make happen may lose its appeal, all because your team doesn't trust you anymore. Key Points Good leadership takes strength of character and a firm commitment to do the right thing, at the right time, for the right reason. This means doing what you say, when you say it. If your team can't trust you, you'll probably never lead them to greatness. Leading and living by example isn't as hard as it might sound. It's really the easiest path. If your team knows that you'll also do whatever you expect from them, they'll likely work hard to help you achieve your goal. Mahatma Gandhi and Alexander the Great helped change the world because they lived by example and, as a result, they accomplished great things.

Apply This to Your Life If you ask a co-worker to do something, make sure you'd be willing to do it yourself. If you implement new rules for the office, then follow those rules just as closely as you expect everyone else to follow them. For example, if the new rule is "no personal calls at work," then don't talk to your spouse at work. You'll be seen as dishonest, and your staff may become angry and start disobeying you. Look closely at your own behavior. If you criticize people for interrupting, but you constantly do it yourself, you need to fix this. Yes, you want people to pay attention to one another and listen to all viewpoints, so demonstrate this yourself. If, in the spirit of goodwill, you make a rule for everyone to leave the office at 5:00 p.m., then you need to do it too. If you stay late to get more work done, your team may feel guilty and start staying late too, which can destroy the whole purpose of the rule. The same is true for something like a lunch break if you want your team to take a full hour to rest and relax, then you need to do it too. Key Points Over time, several core theories about leadership have emerged. These theories fall into four main categories: Trait theories. Behavioral theories. Contingency theories. Power and influence theories. "Transformational leadership," is the most effective style top use in most business situations. However, you can become a more effective leader by learning about these core leadership theories, and understanding the tools and models associated with each one

1. 2. 3. 4.