Leadership is defined as the ability to influence people toward the accomplishment of goals.

It is associated with the determination of the goals, a vision for the future and the process of change to reach the goals and the future. Chester Barnard viewed leadership as the quality of behavior of individuals whereby they guide people or their activities in organizing efforts. A leader interprets the objectives of the people working under him and guides them towards the achievement of those objectives. He also creates and sustains enthusiasm among them for achieving organizational objectives. In the words of Louis A. Allen, A leader is one who guides and directs other people. A leader gives the effort of his followers a direction and purpose by influencing their behavior. James Gibbin views leadership as a process of influencing on a group in a particular situation at a given point of time and in a specific set of circumstances that stimulates people to strive willingly to attain organizational objectives, giving them the experience of helping attain the common objectives and satisfaction with the type of leadership provided. NATURE OF LEADERSHIP Leadership is the process of influencing the activities of an individual or a group for goal achievement in a particular situation. Leadership has got the following features: 1. Leadership means certain personal qualities of the leader such as intelligence, imagination, good personality, maturity, human relations orientation, etc. 2. By exercising leadership, a leader attempts to influence the behavior of individuals to achieve certain objectives. Thus, it is a process of influencing the behavior of others in a particular way. 3. Leadership is a continuous process of influencing behaviour. It does not end anywhere. A leadership provides guidance to his followers, whenever necessary, or asked for. 4. Leadership is related to a situation. The style of leadership required is determined by the set of circumstances prevailing. Thus, there is no style of leadership which can be applied in all situations. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT 1. Management operates in a formal structure of organization. There is no concept of informal manager. 2. Management is a wider term. Leadership is only a part of the managers job. Thus, a manager is more than a leader. He has to plan, organize, direct (lead) and control the various organizational activities. 3. A manager makes use of formal (official) authority to direct the subordinates. IMPORTANCE OF LEADERSHIP Leadership is an important factor for making any type of organizations successful. Without a good leader, organization cannot function effectively and efficiently. Since the organization is basically a LEADERSHIP 1. Leadership operates in both organized and unorganized groups. Formal and informal leaders can coexist in an organization. 2. Leadership is a part of management. It is merely concerned with influencing the subordinates to contribute towards organizational goals. 3. A leader exercises his influence over the followers through the use of informal authority or power.

deliberate creation of human beings for certain specified objectives, the activities of its members need to be directed in a certain way. Any departure from this way will lead to inefficiency in the organization. The importance of good leadership can be seen as follows: 1. MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES: as discussed earlier, motivating is necessary for work performance. Higher the motivation better would be the performance. A good leader, by exercising his leadership, motivates the employees for higher performance. Good leadership in the organization itself is a motivating factor for the individuals. 2. CREATING CONFIDENCE: a good leader may create confidence in his followers by directing them, giving them advice and getting through them good results. Once an individual with the help of a leader, puts high efficiency, he tries to maintain it as he acquires certain level of confidence towards his capacity. Sometimes, individuals fail to recognize their qualities and capabilities to work in the absence of good direction. 3. BUILDING MORALE: morale is expressed as attitudes of employees towards organization, management and voluntary cooperation to offer their ability to the organization. High morale leads to high productivity and organizational stability. Through providing good leadership in the organization, employees morale can be raised high ensuring high productivity and stability in the organization. THEORETICAL APPROACH TO LEADERSHIP 1 . TRAIT THEORY : The trait theory rests on the traditional approach which describes leadership in terms of certain physical and other special characteristics which are considered inherited. This theory emphasizes that leaders are born and not made and leadership is a function of such inborn traits as intelligence, high motivation, perception, socio-economic status, maturity and so on. Socio-economic status refers to leaders being born into families of higher socio-economic status. In the earlier studies, the existence of these traits became a measure of leadership. It was believe that only those persons who had these traits would be considered as potential leaders. A number of traits have been identified by various researchers to distinguish successful leaders from unsuccessful one or followers. A successful leader is supposed to have the following traits: 1. Good personality, 2. Tirelessness, 3. Ability to make quick decision, 4. Courage, 5. Persuasion Weakness of Trait theory These traits and skills are not universally accepted as characteristics of all successful leaders and they do not apply to leadership situations. Some of these traits can be acquired by training and thus may not be inherited. This theory also fails to explain as to why some of the followers with similar traits could not become leaders. This theory does not consider the situational factors for leadership which influence the leaders more than their inner traits. Traits come to light only when situations arise and they are helpful in facing particular situation but without a situation traits are useless. MAJOR TRAITS OF LEADERS Trait theory views leadership as a large set of different traits or qualities. Whereas trait theory holds that traits are not always inborn but can be acquired through education, training and experience. Trait theory holds that leadership is largely a matter of personality, a function of specific traits. It suggests that there are certain unique qualities or traits clearly identifiable in a leader. The greater the degree if such traits possessed by a person, the better and more successful will be proved as a leader. It further suggests that leaders differ from followers with respect to certain key traits and these traits remain unchanged across time. The trait theory attempts to isolate the attributes of successful and unsuccessful leader and using such a list of traits, it predicts the success or failures of persons as leaders. It is to be noted that these traits are not measurable.

Early studies of leadership focused on the great man theory that leaders were born, not made. These studies focused on the personal traits of leaders and attempted to identify a set of individual characteristics or traits that distinguished (1) leaders from followers and (2) unsuccessful leaders from successful leaders. The comparison from leaders with other leaders and followers by various physical, intellectual, personality and other traits has been a popular or controversial approach to leadership by researchers and practitioners. Researchers, surveyed more than 5,000 leadership studies and concluded that there are no consistent patterns of traits that characterize leaders in all situations. However he did research some general conclusions in the following five areas, which are valuable for study and thought: 1. Intelligence and Scholarship: Studies indicated that leaders are somewhat more intelligent, perform better at academic tasks, and possess superior judgement and decisionmaking abilities than followers. However, if there is too much of an intellectual gap between leader and follower, there can be problems in cooperation and coordination of performance. A leader who is much smarter than group members may have difficulty empathizing and communicating with followers, which results in impatience and potential conflict from both parties. 2. Physical traits: Results were extremely contradictory in relating height, weight, age, strength and attractiveness to effective leadership style. Some people apparently still believe that male leaders are tall, dark and handsome and female leaders are slender and beautiful. One need only think of Napoleon, Hitler or Indira Gandhi to discredit those false notions. 3. Personality: Many leaders appear to have personality which is characterized by selfconfidence, honesty, integrity, creativity and initiative. This is certainly not consistent across the board, but most of the findings suggest that leaders possess a distinguishable personality that is influential and important in leadership capability. 4. Social Status and Experience: Leaders appear to possess good personal interaction skills and are able to inspire and motivate team effort. In attempting to link education, socioeconomic status with leader effectiveness, studies have suggested that leaders are more educated today and that higher socio-economic status can be an advantage to leadership status. 5. Task Orientation: Leaders appear to be characterized by a high need for assuming responsibility and achieving specific tasks, they are highly motivated to set goals and reach them consistently. This was a more uniform finding than any of the other trait relationships reviewed by Stogdill. In all the others, there were substantial inconsistencies to prevent any concrete conclusions concerning the identification of universal leadership traits. Personal Traits: Researchers have conducted extensive research on the relationship between personality and motivational traits and leadership effectiveness. He studied over 300 managers from 90 different companies and his findings suggest that the following personality traits range from being very important to unimportant in relation to leadership success. (a) Very Important: 1. Decisiveness 2. Intellectual capacity 3. Job achievement orientation 4. Self-actualization feelings 5. Self-confidence 6. Management ability- team builder. (b) Moderate important 1. Affinity for working class

2. Drive and initiative 3. Need for a lot of money 4. Need for job security 5. Personal maturity (c) Utmost no important Masculinity versus femininity. Again, the problem with Ghisellis research is that several of the traits are interdependent and there is no indication of how much of any trait a person should have to be an effective leader. Overall, the trait approach to the study of leadership is interesting, but it leaves many unexplained variables and observations. If one chooses to adhere to the trait approach, a compiled stereotypic description of the personal characteristics of a typical leader would come to us. Recently Reserachers have identified the following key leadership traits: 1. Drive: including achievement, motivation, energy, ambition, initiative, and tenacity (i.e. firmness). 2. Leadership motivation: the aspiration to lead but not to seek power as such. 3. Honesty and integrity. 4. Cognitive ability: the ability of knowing, including consciousness of things and judgement about them. 5. Self-confidence: including emotional stability. 6. An understanding of the business: According to them, less clear is the impact of creativity, flexibility and charisma (i.e. strong personal charm to attract and influence) on the leadership effectiveness. In general, the study of leaders traits has not been very fruitful approach to explaining effectiveness of leadership. Not all leaders possess all the traits, and many followers (non-leaders) may also possess most or all of them. Further, the trait theory does not indicate as to how much of any trait a person should have to be an effective leader. Also, most of these so-called traits are really patterns of behaviour. Furthermore, the list of traits is not uniform. BEHAVIOURAL APPROACHES TO LEADERSHIP

Theories propose that specific behaviors differentiate leaders from non leaders.It postulates that there are different styles that effective leaders use consistently . The behavior approach studies leadership by looking at leaders in terms of what they do. This is in contrast to the trait theory which seeks to explain leadership in terms of what they are. Thus, according to behaviour theory, leadership is shown by a persons acts more than by his traits. It is a function of leader-subordinate interaction and outcome. Notable among research studies in this area are the ones conducted at Ohio State University and University of Michigan. The Ohio State and Michigan Studies These studies defined two independent dimensions of leader behavior. These two dimensions are: Consideration It refers to the extent to which there is a rapport between the leader and the group, a mutual warmth and trust, a concern for the needs and of the members of the work group, an attitude that encourages democratic and participative style management, open two-way communication and respect for the feedback of the followers. Initiating structure It refers to the extent to which a leader is task oriented, his efforts to get things organized and get the job done and his ability in utilizing resources and personnel at optimum level. It involves

creating a work environment in such a way that the work of the group is well organized and coordinated. These two dimensions lead to four leadership styles, shown as following : High Low structure High consideration Consideration Low Low structure Low consideration High structure Low consideration High structure High consideration

Low Structure

High

Thus, a manager with high structure and high consideration and high structure rates high in directing and controlling his subordinates and has a high level of concern and warmth towards them. Such managers have subordinates who are more satisfied, fewer grievances and stay longer with the organization. An important discovery made by these studies was that the leader does not necessarily have to rate high both on consideration as well as structure elements. He could be high on one and low on the other and still lead the group successfully. SITUATIONAL AND CONTINGENCY APPROACHES The contingency or situational approach defines leadership in terms of the leaders ability to handle a given situation and is based upon the leaders skill in that particular area that is pertinent to the situation. The focus is on the situation and not on the leader. Different types of situations demand different characteristics and behaviors because each type of leader faces different situations. FIEDLERS CONTINGENCY THEORY Fred Fiedler proposed a theoretical explanation for interaction of three situational variables which effect the leaders effectiveness. These variables determine the extent of the situational control that the leader has: Leader-member relations This relationship reflects the extent to which the followers have confidence and trust in their leader as to his leadership ability. A situation, in which the leader-member relationships are relatively good with mutual trust and open communication is much easier to manage than a situation where such relations are strained. Task structure It measures the extent to which the tasks performed by subordinates are specified and structured. It involves clarity of goals as well as clearly established and defined number of steps required to complete the task. When the tasks are well structured and the rules, policies and procedures are clearly written and understood, then there is little ambiguity as to how the job is to be accomplished and hence the job situation is pretty much under control. Position power

It refers to the legitimate power inherent in the leaders organizational position. It refers to the degree to which a leader can make decisions about allocation of resources, rewards and sanctions. Low position power indicates limited authority. A high position power gives the leader the right to take charge and control the situation as it develops. The most favorable situation for the leader would be when the leader-group relations are positive, the task is highly structured and the leader has substantial power and authority to exert influence on the subordinates. HERSEY-BLANCHARD SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP MODEL This model suggests that successful leaders do adjust their styles. And they do so based on the maturity of the followers, indicated by their readiness to perform in a given situation. Readiness in this sense, is based on how able and willing followers are to perform required tasks. The possible leadership styles that result from different combinations of task-oriented and relationship-oriented behaviors are as follows : Delegating Allowing the group to take responsibility for task decisions; a low-task; low relationship style. Participating Emphasizing shared ideas and participative decisions on task directions; a low-task, high relationship style. Selling Explaining task directions in a supportive and persuasive way; a high task, high relationship style. Telling Giving specific task directions and closely supervising work; a high-task, low relationship style. The delegating style works best in high readiness situations of able and willing or confident followers; the telling style works best at the other extreme of low readiness, where followers are unwilling and unable or insecure. The participating style is recommended for low to moderate readiness (followers able but unwilling) and the selling style for moderate to high readiness (followers unable but willing or confident). Weaknesses: 1. It overemphasizes the situational aspect of leadership. Situation may affect the decision of leader in a particular situation but it is not everything. 2. It completely overlook the traits and behaviour of a leader which play an important role in the emergence of a particular leader. The head and heart of a leader definitely plays a decision role in every situation.

THE LEADERSHIP GRID This study was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. In general behavioural scientists have separated the two primary concerns in organizations, namely, the concern for production and concern for people. They believed that a high concern for production necessarily meant low concern for people, and high consideration for workers meant tolerance for low production. However, the leadership grid model emphasized that both concerns should be integrated to achieve the objectives of the organization. It assumes that people and production factors are complementary to each other, rather than mutually exclusive. The leadership grid is built on two axis, one representing the people and other representing the task. Both the horizontal as well as vertical axis are calibrated on a scale from 1 to 9 where 1 represents the least involvement and 9 represents the most involvement so that coordinates (1,1)

would indicate minimum standards for worker involvement and task design and coordinates (9,9) would indicate maximum dedication of the workers and highly structured operations. Such an involvement would reflect upon the managerial orientation towards tasks and towards workers who are expected to perform such tasks. Blake and Mouton have identified five such coordinates that reflect various styles of leader behavior. The leadership grid figure and these styles are shown as follow:

The leadership grid diagram as shown above can be interpreted as follows : Co-ordinates (1,1) Impoverished Management. The manager makes minimum efforts to get the required work accomplished. Minimum standards of performance and minimum work dedication. Co-ordinates (9,1) Authority Compliance. Excellent work design. Efficiency in operations. Well established procedures. Orderly performance. Human element interference to a minimum degree. Co-ordinates (1,9) Country Club Management. Thoughtful attention to the needs of people. Personal and meaningful relationship with workers. Friendly atmosphere and high morale. Loosely structured work design. Primary concern for people. Co-ordinates (9,9) Team Management. Ultimate in managerial efficiency. Work accomplishment from thoroughly committed people. Trustworthy and respectful atmosphere. Highly organized task performances. Interdependence of relationships through a common stake in organizational purpose. Co-ordinates (5,5) Middle-of-the-Road management. This leadership style is concerned with balancing the necessity to get the work done while maintaining worker morale at a satisfactory level. Moderate concern for both production and people.

PATH-GOAL THEORY Robert House gave this theory and suggested that an effective leader is one who clarifies paths through which followers can achieve both task related and personal goals. The best leaders raise motivation and help followers move along these paths. Path-goal theorists believe leaders should be flexible and move back and forth among 4 leadership styles to create positive path-goal linkages. Directive leadership Letting subordinates know what is expected; giving directions on what to do and how; scheduling work to be done; maintaining definite standards of performance; clarifying the leaders role in the group. Supportive leadership Doing things to make work more pleasant; treating group members as equals; being friendly and approachable; showing concern for the well-being of the subordinates. Achievement-oriented leadership Setting challenging goals; expecting the highest levels of performance; emphasizing continuous improvement in performance; displaying confidence in meeting high standards. Participative leadership Involving subordinates in decision-making; consulting with subordinates; asking for suggestions from subordinates; using these suggestions when making a decision. This theory advices managers to use leadership styles that fit situational needs. This means that the leader adds value by contributing things that are missing from the situation or that need strengthening.

STYLES OF LEADERSHIP Leadership styles are the patterns of behavior which a leader adopts in influencing the behavior of his (subordinates in the organizational context). These patterns emerge in the leader as he begins to respond in the same fashion under similar conditions, he develops habits of actions that become somewhat predicable to those who work with him. Various researchers have proposed different leadership styles. These styles are either based on behavior approach or situational approach of leadership. Some of the important theories /models prescribing leadership styles are given below: Based on Behavior Approach: 1. Power orientation 2. Leadership as a continuum 3. Employee production orientation 4. Likerts management system 5. Managerial grid 6. Tri dimensional grid Based on situational approach: 1. Fielders contingency model 2. Hersey and Blanchards situation model 3. Path goal model Such a classification does not necessarily mean that a particular theory/model grouped under one particular approach of leadership does not consider the tenets of the other approach, it may consider. However, such a consideration is secondary and the theory has not been built on such a consideration. The success of a business enterprise depends upon the type and style of leadership which a leader follows, Styles described how a leader behaves with his group or how leadership is applied in practice. The following leadership styles have been developed:

1. Motivational styles- Positive and negative leadership Motivation of followers (workers in a business enterprise) is the main function of a leader. Motivational styles cover two main approaches, which are generally followed by a leader: 1) Positive Approach or leadership: When a leader motivates the people to work hard by offering them various rewards monetary or otherwise the approach or leadership is said to be positive. The more is the reward, the higher is the efficiency. Positive leadership promotes industrial peace. For example encashment of leave will certainly reduce the absenteeism in the organization because it increases workers real wages. 2) Negative approach or leadership: Where the leader (manager) induces the followers (workers) to work hard and threatens them to penalize if work is not up to the work, it is said to be a negative approach or negative leadership. It means, in a negative leadership, emphasis is laid on penalties for the shortcomings. The stronger is the penalty, the more negative it is. For example, if manager imposes a salary cut for the absence from duty it is a negative approach to improve the absenteeism. Negative leadership gets acceptable performance in many situations, but it has high human costs. Negative leaders act domineering and superior with the people. In order to get the work done, they impose the penalties like loss of job, reprimand before others. Leave without pay, etc. The display their authority with the false belief that it frightens everyone into productivity. They are bosses more than leaders. Which of the two? Almost every manager uses both the styles off and on but the predominant style sets the tone within the group. When of the two styles is the best? The answer is that it depends on the situation of the case, and the organization behavior model. A manager in a case may follow the positive approach but he may be a supporter of negative approach next time in similar case. The reason may be change in situation. So a modern manager uses both the styles according to the circumstance of the case. The organizational behavior model also sets the tone. The autocratic model tends to cause a negative style, the custodial model follows somewhat positive or somewhat negative or a mix of both the styles and supportive model is clearly positive. Positive leadership achieves higher productivity to the organization and higher job satisfaction to subordinates. 2. Power Style-Autocratic, Democratic and Free-Rein Leaders A. Autocratic or authoritarian leadership: Under this style, power or authority and decision making are centralized in the leaders. They create work situation and environment for their subordinates and subordinates in turn, do whatever they are told nothing less or nothing more. The leaders enjoy full authority and assume full responsibility. They are always power loving and never like to be devoid of them. Subordinates or followers are not aware of the organizational goals; they are insecure and afraid of the leads authority. In this way leadership is negative. Leadership may be positive under this style if leader uses his power in the best interest of the group and disburses rewards to motivate them. Such Autocratic leaders having positive motivational style are known a benevolent autocrat. The benevolent autocrat gets productivity and full satisfaction because followers are habituated to such culture of many authorities in the society such as teachers, parents, government bureaucrats etc. They feel satisfied and secured under autocratic leader. They respond well to action. Such benevolent autocrat leaders are more successful than the democratic leaders. Advantage of Autocratic leadership: Autocratic leadership enjoys following advantages: I. It provides strong motivation and reward for the leader. II. Quick decision making is guaranteed because single person decides for the whole group.

Less competent sub managers can be used only to carry out the orders of the boss. They are not involved in decision making process. IV. Decision making, planning or organizing need no initiative. Disadvantages of Autocratic leadership: It suffers from the following drawbacks I. People dislike it especially if it is extreme and the motivational style is negative. II. Frustration, low morale, and conflict develop easily in Autocratic leadership because subordinates feel that they work as they have to do so and because of any motivation. They work half heatedly. III. Managers are poor motivators. B. Participative or democratic leaderships: it is just opposite to autocratic leadership. Under this style, power and authority decentralized and followers are consulted and thus they are fully aware of the path and goal of the organization. The leader and group work together as a social unit. Participative leaders exercise control mostly by using forces within the group while autocratic leaders control through authority vested in themselves. The leader delegates his authority to his subordinates to get the work accomplished towards goals of the organization. Generally, the present trend is towards wider use of the participative practices. Workers participation in management is getting popularity now days. Advantages: Under this style: I. Workers or subordinates are consulted or participate in the decision making process hence feel satisfied. II. Workers are aware of what is happening in the organization and thus they take interest in producing more and more. III. Subordinates get full opportunity to utilize their capabilities. Disadvantage: I. Power is not centralized in the leader. He can use it only in consultants with his subordinates. II. Decision making and implementation are delayed as compared to autocratic leadership because under this style more than one person are involved in decision making process. III. As authority is decentralized less competent executives cannot be used. C. Free rein leadership: under this style, leaders enjoy no power. The leadership is employee centered and the group of employees is free to establish its own goals and work out its own problems. The members of the group train themselves and provide own problems. The members of the group train themselves and provide own provides own motivation. The leader keeps contact with outsiders to bring the group the information and resources, the group need to fulfill its job. Free rein leadership ignores the leaders, contribution in the same way approximately that autocratic leadership ignores the group. It fails to provide to the group the benefits of leader inspired motivation. Sometimes it creates chaos. 3. Orientation style or supervisory style 1) Employee oriented leadership: employee oriented leaders are connected about the human needs of their employee and pay highest attention to their subordinates attitudes, interests, and necessities etc. they try to get more and more production and increased productivity by improving the working conditions and environment and solving the problems, if any, faced by them during the course of their action on the job. 2) Production or task oriented leadership: Production or task oriented leaders, on the other hand, believe that they are concerned mainly with the production and employees are not of much concern. They are of the opinion that they can attain results by planning better methods, keeping people constantly busy and using them to produce. They do not consider human aspect of the workers.

III.

Which one is better? Employee oriented and production oriented leadership styles seem to be both related and independent. They are not opposite to each other. A manager who is more employee oriented does not necessary become against production oriented or vice-versa. Each orientation is somewhat independent, so a manager may have both orientations in varying degrees. So, it is prudent that a manager must combine these two orientations. He must think in terms of higher production and not at the cost of human values. He must honour the initiatives and abilities of employees and try to satisfy their needs. SUITABILITY OF DIFFERENT STYLES We have discussed above the three main leadership styles and their types. Now the question is of choosing the most effective leadership style. The research findings suggest a universally accepted best style is very difficult rather impossible because of the modern complexities of modern organizations. If one considers a single style of leadership to be the best for every kind of organization at every level and with any kind of subordinates, one ignores important influencing factors like subordinates characteristics, task characteristics, group cohesiveness, cultural difference, customs, traditions, level of education, standard of living and the like. As a leaders style cannot operate in vacuum and influence others behaviour, these situational factors cannot be ignored. It is highly unrealistic to talk of a single best or normative style of leadership.