CHAPTER TWO LEADERSHIP

STYLES AND THEORIES

Leadership style
Leadership style is the manner and approach of

providing direction, implementing plans, and

motivating people. Kurt Lewin (1939) led a group
of researchers to identify different styles of
leadership. This early study has been very
influential and established three major leadership
styles. The three major styles of leadership are
Authoritarian or autocratic
Participative or democratic
Declarative or Free Reign or Laissez - fair
One dimension has to do with control and one's
perception of how much control one should
give to people

The Autocratic Leadership Style- I Approach

This

style is used when leaders tell their

employees what they want done and how they
want it accomplished, without getting the advice of
their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions
to use it are when you have all the information to
solve the problem, you are short on time, and your
employees are well motivated.
Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle
for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading
by threats and abusing their power. This is not the
authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive,
unprofessional style called bossing people
around. It has no place in a leader's repertoire.

Cont.
Autocratic

leadership is an extreme form of

transactional leadership, where a leader exerts
high levels of power over his or her employees or
team members. People within the team are given
few opportunities for making suggestions, even if
these would be in the team's or organizations
interest.
It is a dictatorial method of leading
low concern for followers and high emphasis on task
- typically reinforced with threat, punishment, and
often ruthless exploitation of workers, who have
little or no freedom to resist or desert.

It is a feature of a strongly dictatorial application of

the transactional leadership style
Leader makes decisions without reference to anyone

else
High degree of dependency on the leader
Can create de-motivation and alienation of staff
May be valuable in some types of business where
decisions need to be made quickly and decisively
Strong control, directive
Downward and task directed

Advantages
Though authoritarian leadership style is tyrannical, it
has proved to be very efficient during certain situations
and conditions. Authoritarian leadership works positively
during emergency and stressful situations. When such
situations arise in a company or organization, most
people are confused and are not able to reach a
common solution. During such times, having such a
leader would be great as he would take the reins in his
hand and would direct the workers or employees to
move forward
Another situation where the authoritarian leadership
style proves appropriate is while doing group projects.
Many group projects tend to fail because group
members depend on each other to make decisions

Disadvantages:
Authoritarian leadership may have its benefits;
however, in most cases it is seen as something that is
undesirable. Authoritarian leadership style promotes a
one sided conversation and due to this the creative
and leadership skills of the employees become
restrictive. As the leader would have all the authority,
there is a chance that he would exploit his employees.
There have been cases where an authoritative
employer has fired employees because they showed
the courage of disagreeing with him. It is also said
that having an bossy leader hinders workplace
communication and socialization. It is very important to
have a cordial work environment, where everyone is
friendly. It can also give rise to disagreements and
conflicts, if a group or company is led by a bossy
leader

The
Democratic/Participative
Leadership
Style-We Approach
Let's work together to solve this. . .
This style involves the leader including one or more
employees in the decision making process
(determining what to do and how to do it).
However, the leader maintains the final decision
making authority. Using this style is not a sign of
weakness; rather it is a sign of strength that your
employees will respect.
This is normally used when you have part of the
information, and your employees have other parts.
Note that a leader is not expected to know
everything

this
is
why
you
employknowledgeableandskillfulemployees.

Using this style is of mutual benefit

it allows them to become part of the team and allows

you to make better decisions.

Encourages decision making from different perspectives
leadership may be emphasised throughout the
organisation
Consultative: process of consultation before decisions are

taken
Persuasive: Leader takes decision and seeks to persuade
others that the decision
is correct
May help motivation and involvement
Workers feel ownership of the firm and its ideas
Improves the sharing of ideas and experiences within the
business
Subordinates involved in decision-making
Lengthy process, communications flow up and down
Can delay decision making

Pros and Cons of the Democratic

Leadership Style
Pros of the Democratic Leadership Style
Since employees or followers have an equal
say in the decision-making process, they are
more committed to the desired outcome. The
collaborative environment created by this
style often results in more thorough solutions
to problems.
This creates an ideal environment for
collaborative problem-solving in addition to
decision-making. However, this democratic
process has its drawbacks.

Cons of the Democratic Leadership Style

The democratic leader depends on the

knowledge of his followers or employees. If

the workforce is inexperienced, this style is
not very effective. You simply need a fair
amount of experience to make good decisions.
The other drawback of the democratic style is
that the collaborative effort takes time. When
you ask people for their opinions, it takes time
for them to explain what they think and for
others to understand what they are saying. If
the business need is urgent, then the
democratic leader needs to switch styles.

The Laissez Faire Leadership

Style-They Approach
You all take care of the problem while I go. . .
Laissez-faire leaders allow followers to have complete

freedom to make decisions concerning the completion

of their work. It allows followers a high degree of
autonomy andself-rule, while at the same time offering
guidance and support when requested.
The laissez-faire leader using guided freedom provides
the followers with all materials necessary to accomplish
their goals, but does not directly participate in decision
making unless the followers request their assistance
NOTE: This is also known as laissez faire (or laisser
faire), which is the noninterference in the affairs of
others. [French: laissez, second person, imperative of
laisser, to let, allow + faire, to do.]

Cont
The style is largely a "hands off" view that tends to

minimize the amount of direction and face to face

time required. Works well if you have highly trained
and highly motivated direct reports.
Let it be the leadership responsibilities are shared by all
Can be very useful in businesses where creative ideas are

important
Can be highly motivational, as people have control over
their working life
Relies on good team work and good interpersonal relations
Maximum freedom for individuals-delegating approach
Can make coordination and decision making timeconsuming and lacking in overall direction (little or no
direction)

Cont
This is an effective style to use when:
Followers are highly skilled, experienced, and

educated.
Followers have pride in their work and the
drive to do it successfully on their own.
Outside experts, such as staff specialists or
consultants are being used.
Followers are trustworthy and experienced.
This style should NOT be used when:
Followers feel insecure at the unavailability of
a leader.
The leader cannot or will not provide regular

LEADERSHIP THEORIES
Great man theory
Are Leaders Born Or Made?
Assumptions
Leaders are born and not made.
Great leaders will arise when there is a great need.
"The person who exhibits leadership is ... someone
that makes things happen that would not happen
otherwise
According to the contemporary theorists, leaders
are not like other people. They do not need to be
intellectually genius or omniscient prophets to
succeed, but they definitely should have the right
stuff which is not equally present in all people. This

LEADERSHIP THEORIES
Are some people born to lead? If we look at

the great leaders of the past such as

Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar,
Napoleon, Queen Elizabeth I, and Abraham
Lincoln, we will find that they do seem to
differ from ordinary human beings in several
aspects.
The same applies to the contemporary
leaders like George W. Bush, Obama and
Mahatma Gandhi. They definitely possess
high levels of ambition coupled with clear
visions of precisely where they want to go.
These leaders are cited as naturally great

LEADERSHIP THEORIES
The three general types of theories that
emerged were
(1) trait theories, which propose leaders have
a particular set of traits that makes them
different from nonleaders;
(2) behavioral theories, which propose that
particular behaviors' make for better leaders;
and
(3) contingency theories, which propose the
situation has an effect on leaders

Trait Theory: Are Leaders Different from Others?

Trait theories of leadership emerged in the

hope that if it were possible to identify the traits of

leaders, it would be easier to select people to fill
leadership roles.
Assumptions
People are born with inherited traits.
Some traits are particularly suited to leadership.
People who make good leaders have the right (or
sufficient) combination of traits.
Traits are inborn and inherent personal qualities of
individuals. This theory believes leaders possess
certain specific inborn traits, which are inherited
rather than acquired. It has a root from "the great

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

Behavioral Theories: Do Leaders Behave in

Particular Ways?
Behavioral theories of leadership are based upon the

belief that great leaders are made, not born. Rooted

in behaviorism, this leadership theory focuses on the
actions of leaders not on mental qualities or internal
states. According to this theory, people can learn to
become leaders through teaching and observation.
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?

Cont
The three most best-known behavioral

theories of leadership are the Ohio State

University studies that were conducted
starting in the late 1940s, the University of
Michigan studies conducted at about the
same time, and Blake and Moutons
Leadership Grid, which reflects the
behavioural definitions of both the Ohio and
Michigan studies.
All three approaches consider two main
dimensions by which managers can be
characterized: attention to production and
attention to people

The Ohio State Studies

In the Ohio State studies,

these two
dimensions are known as initiating structure
and consideration.
Initiating structure refers to the extent to
which a leader is likely to define and
structure his or her role and the roles of
employees in order to attain goals; it includes
behaviour that tries to organize work, work
relationships, and goals. For instance, leaders
using this style may develop specific output
goals or deadlines for employees.

Cont
Consideration is defined as the extent

to which a leader is likely to have job

relationships characterized by mutual
trust, respect for employees ideas, and
regard for their feelings. A leader who is
high in consideration shows concern for
followers comfort, well-being, status, and
satisfaction. For instance, leaders using this
style may create more flexible hours, or
flextime, to make it easier for employees to
manage family issues during work hours

The Michigan Studies

Researchers at the University of Michigan, whose work

is referred to as the Michigan studies, also developed

two dimensions of leadership behaviour that they
labelled employee-oriented and production-oriented.
Employee-oriented
leaders
emphasize
interpersonal relations. They take a personal interest in
the needs of their subordinates and accept individual
differences among members.
Production-oriented leaders, in contrast, tend to
emphasize the technical or task aspects of the job.
They are mainly concerned with making sure the group
accomplishes its tasks, and the group members are
simply a means to that end.

The Leadership Grid

Blake

and Mouton developed a graphic

portrayal of a two-dimensional view of
leadership style.
They proposed a Leadership Grid based
on the styles of concern for people and
concern for production, which essentially
represent the Ohio State dimensions of
consideration and initiating structure, or the
Michigan dimensions of employee orientation
and production orientation.

Team management
9,9
Work
accomplishment
is
from
committed people who have
a common stake in the
organization's purpose. This
leads to relationships of trust
and respect.

Country club management

1,9
Thoughtful attention to
the needs of people for
satisfying relationships
leads to a comfortable,
friendly
organization
atmosphere
and
work
tempo.

9high
8
7
6

Middle-of-the-road
management
5,5
Adequate organizational
performance is possible
through balancing the
necessity to get out work
with maintaining morale
of
people
at
a
satisfactory level.

5
4
3
2

Authority-obedience
9,1
Efficiency in operations
results
from
arranging
conditions of work in such
a
way
that
human
elements interfere to a
minimum degree.

Impoverished
management
1,1
Exertion of minimum effort
to get required work done
is appropriate to sustain
organization membership.

low

4
5
6
concern for production

high

The research also provides some insights into when

leaders should be production oriented and when they

should be people oriented:
When subordinates experience a lot of pressure because
of deadlines or unclear tasks, leaders who are people
oriented will increase employee satisfaction and
performance.
When the task is interesting or satisfying, there is less
need for leaders to be people oriented.
When its clear how to perform the task and what the
goals are, leaders who are people oriented will increase
employee satisfaction, while those who are task
oriented will increase dissatisfaction.
When people dont know what to do or individuals dont
have the knowledge or skills to do the job, its more
important for leaders to be production oriented than
people oriented

Contingency Theories: Does the Situation Matter?

Situational,

or contingency, theories of
leadership try to isolate critical situational
factors that affect leadership effectiveness. The
theories consider the degree of structure in the
task being performed, the quality of leadermember relations, the leaders position power,
group norms, information availability, employee
acceptance of leaders decisions, employee
maturity, and the clarity of the employees role
situational, or contingency, theories
propose that leadership effectiveness depends
on the situation.
There are four situational theories and these are

Fiedler Contingency Model

Fiedler contingency model proposes that effective group

performance depends on the proper match between the

leaders style and the degree to which the situation gives
control to the leader
Fiedler identified three contingency dimensions that together
define the situation a leader faces:
Leader-member relations. The degree of confidence, trust,
and respect members have in their leader.
Task structure. The degree to which the job assignments are
procedurized (that is, structured or unstructured).
Position power. The degree of influence a leader has over
power variables such as hiring, firing, discipline,
promotions, and salary increases.

Hersey and Blanchards Situational

Leadership Theory
situational leadership theory (SLT) A theory that proposes

that effective leaders adapt their leadership style according to

how willing and able a follower is to perform tasks.
If a follower is unable and willing, the leader needs to display
high task orientation to compensate for the followers lack of
ability, and high relationship orientation to get the follower to
buy into the leaders desires (in other words, sell the task).
If the follower is able and unwilling, the leader needs to
adopt a supportive and participative style.
Finally, if the employee is both able and willing, the leader
does not need to do much (in other words, a laissez-faire
approach will work)

Path-Goal Theory
The essence of the theory is that it is the leaders job to assist

followers attain their goals and to provide the necessary

direction and/or support to ensure that their individual goals
are compatible with the overall goals of the group or
organization
According to this theory, leaders should follow three guidelines
to be effective:
Determine the outcomes subordinates want. These might
include good pay, job security, interesting work, and the
autonomy to do ones job.
Reward individuals with their desired outcomes when they
perform well.
Let individuals know what they need to do to receive rewards
(that is, the path to the goal), remove any barriers that would
prevent high performance, and express confidence that
individuals have the ability to perform well

Path-goal theory identifies four leadership behaviours that

might be used in different situations to motivate

individuals:
The directive leader lets followers know what is expected
of them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific
guidance as to how to accomplish tasks.
The supportive leader is friendly and shows concern for
the needs of followers.
The participative leader consults with followers and uses
their suggestions before making a decision
The achievement-oriented leader sets challenging goals
and expects followers to perform at their highest level.
This behaviour works well with individuals who like
challenges and are highly motivated

Transformational, Transactional and Servant Leaders.

Transforming leadership/Transformational

leadership
Transformational leaders are those who transform
their followers into becoming leaders themselves.
"Transformational leadership is a leadership
approach that is defined as leadership that creates
valuable and positive change in the followers. A
transformational leader focuses on "transforming"
others to help each other, to look out for each
other, to be encouraging and harmonious, and to
look out for the organization as a whole. In this
leadership, the leader enhances the motivation,
morale and performance of his follower group

Transformational leaders sell the companys defined vision,

usually a radical vision that departs from the established one

by many ways, such as:
Charisma: Provides vision and sense of mission, instills
pride, gains respect trust.
Inspiration: Communicates high expectations, uses
symbols to focus efforts, expresses important purposes in
simple ways.
Intellectual Stimulations: Promotes intelligence,
rationality, and careful problem solving.
Individualized consideration: Gives personal attention,
treats each employee individually, coaches, and advises.
Articulating the vision and explaining how to attain the
vision in an appealing manner

Cont
Establishing high levels of personal integrity to

gain trust and inspire the members

Applying passion and energy at work, and
injecting such energy and enthusiasm to followers
Leading from the front to demonstrate attitudes
and actions for followers to emulate
Motivating and rallying followers by constantly
listening, soothing, and enthusing
Developing a shared vision and appealing to
peoples inborn desire to attain higher levels
related to love, learning, leaving a legacy, and the
like

Transactional leadership
Assumptions:
People are motivated by reward and punishment.
Social systems work best with a clear chain of command.
When people have agreed to do a job, a part of the deal is that

they cede all authority to their manager.

The prime purpose of a subordinate is to do what their
manager tells them to do.
Transactional refers to the traditional employer/employee
exchange typified by being paid to in return for doing work,
extending to other incentives offered by leadership in return
for extra efforts and inputs by followers

Transactional Leader
Contingent Reward: Contracts exchange of rewards for

effort, promises rewards for good performance,

recognizes accomplishment
Management by exception (active): Watches and
searches for deviations from rules and standards, takes
corrective action.
Management by exception (passive): Intervenes only if
standards are not met
Laissez faire: Abdicates responsibilities, avoids making
decisions
Focus on the management of the organisation
Focus on procedures and efficiency
Focus on working to rules and contracts
Managing current issues and problems

Transactional leadership is really just a way of

managing rather a true leadership style, as

the focus is on short-term tasks. It has
serious limitations for knowledge-based or
creative work, but remains a common style in
many organizations.

Servant Leadership
This term, coined by Robert Greenleaf in the

1970s, describes a leader who is often not

formally recognized as such. When someone,
at any level within an organization, leads
simply by virtue of meeting the needs of his
or her team, he or she is described as a
servant leader.
A servant-leader focuses primarily on the
growth and well-being of people and the
communities to which they belong

Ten Characteristics of a Servant-Leader

Listening: Servant leader must listen to verbal and

non-verbal signals and interpret what the others are

saying.
Empathy: "The most successful servant-leaders are
those who have become skilled empathetic listeners
Healing: "servant-leaders recognize that they have an
opportunity to help make whole those with whom they
come in contact
Awareness: Servant leaders should "view most
situations from a more integrated, holistic position.
Persuasion: The servant leader should rely "on
persuasion, rather than on one's positional authority, in
making decisions within an organization."

Cont.
Conceptualization: "The ability to look at a problem or an

organization from a conceptualizing perspective means that

one must think beyond day-to-day realities
Foresight: "a characteristic that enables the servant-leader
to understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the
present, and the likely consequence of a decision for the
future
Stewardship: "a commitment to serving the needs of others.
It also emphasizes the use of openness and persuasion,
rather than control
Commitment to the growth of people: "deeply committed
to the growth of each and every individual within his or her
organization.
Building community: A servant-leader should "seek to
identify some means for building community among those
who work within a given institution"

Differences between a Good and Bad Leader

Here are a few of my thoughts regarding good and bad

leaders
Good Leaders...
Need to have a vision that is different, but still able to be
accepted by the masses.
step outside of their comfort zones to make change happen
take risks, make sacrifices, and sometimes pay a cost to
achieve their vision
instill confidence in others because they themselves are
confident
build consensus
with charisma can change organizations
are encouragers
are positive

have the interests of others above their own

attract followers
bring new perspective to problem solving
are enablers
are an inspiration
Bad Leaders...
drive wedges in between people, teams, and

organizational structures
don't stand up for their peers or their subordinates
behave like children when they don't get their way
gossip and spread rumors
don't reward others for their accomplishments
use "techno babble" and jargon to confuse others
believe they are smarter than everybody else
are unaware (sometimes) that most people don't respect
them

dictate policy and doctrine almost exclusively via e-mail

or memo
are invisible to most of the organization
don't want rules, processes, or procedures... except for
others
prescribe before diagnosing
don't solicit input from others unless it is to validate what
they already believe
kill organizations through their arrogance and
unwillingness to listen
are silent when they should speak
speak when they should be silent
Bad leaders are hurting our organizations, our
governmental institutions, our local schools, churches,
and neighborhoods. Bad leaders poison many of those
around them, run organizations into the ground, and are
culture killers.