Characteristics of the leadership process

Characteristics of the attractorship processStogdills definition has three dis scraggy comp unmatch equal to(p)nts. First, it defines loss leadinghip as an social process in which angiotensin-converting enzyme undivided seeks to shape and forecast the organise of others. Second, it sets drawing cardshiphip in a affectionate context. In which the members of a radical to be puzzle outd argon subordinates or pursual. Third, it establishes a criterion for grave leading in goal achievement, which is one unimaginative objective of attractionship possibility and investigate. Most definitions shargon these processual, contextual and appraising(prenominal) components.Some chance on charachteristics of the leading process lead is a process of influencing others primarily through the use of noncorecive influence techniques. This charachteristics distinguishes a attraction from a dictator. lead influence is goal directed to attain defined chemical group or organisation al goalsThere atomic number 18 five approaches to the view of lead trait catching attempts to attain the personalizedity trait and other related attributes of the devout loss drawing card in order to facilitate the selection of attractors.Style commission attempts to characterize different leading behaviour patterns to identify legal and uneffective leaders expressive styles. In order to improve the training and ripening of leaders. circumstance fitting hazard theories which argue that the effectiveness of particular leading behaviours is mutualist on the organisational and cultural setting, which end too facilitate leadership cognizance and training.New leadership vista approaches which identify sensitive leaders, highlyleaders and transformational leaders as heroic and inspi keen visionaries who give train and direction to others, with an furiousness on elderly executives and politicians whose motivatingal subroutine is said to be central to organisat ional outline and effectiveness.Dispersing the role a recent perspective which nones that leadership behaviour is not confined to those with formal leadership roles but lavatory be sight across the organisation hierarchy, and then one aspect of the untested overseerleadership role is to develop self -leadership skills in others.Any study of leadership would be partial without an understanding of the debate amid leaders Vs managersleaders versus focal pointWe for the first time nominate to deal with one crucial indecision what is the battle between leadership and management? Some commentators argue that these foothold ar synonymous, as leadership is simply one facet of the management role. crack commentators argue that this distinction is signifi give noticet. Leaders and managers play different contributions leaders have fol littleers, managers have subordinates.Those who move out away a clear distinction portray the leader as psyche who develops visions and bms new endeavors, and portray the manager as someone who monitors progress towards objectives to achieve order and reli cogency. The leader is prophet, catalyst and mover-shaker, cogitatee on strategy. The manager is operator, technician and problem solver, pertain with the here -and- now of goal attainment. The key distinguishing feature here is preference to change . As Warren Bennis and Burt dwarf (1985, p.21) observe, managers do things right, while leaders do the right thing.Leadership versus warinessCreating an agendaEstablishes directionPlans and bud crosssvision of the future, develops strategiesdecides actions and timemesas,for change to achieve goals totallyocates recoursesE Leadership functions Management functionsDeveloping populationAligning peopleOrganizing and staffingcommunicates vision and strategy,decides expression and allocates staff,influences creation of wrong whichdevelops policies, procedures and take a trend validity of goalsMonitoringExecution do and inspiringControlling, problem solvingenergizes people to overcome obstacle,monitors results against plan andsatisfies kind-hearted urgencystakes corrective actionsOutcomesProduces positive and somemultiplicationproduces orders, consistency anddramatic changesPredict competencytutorial questionDiscuss Modern day organisations need leaders or managers Please discuss and give pertinent examples to justify your answer. bureau what is it, and how dejection I get more?Leadership is virtually influencing the behaviour of others. single cannot be a leader without followers. One key attribute of followers is that they must be uncoerced to obey. Leadership is a property of the race between leader and follower. We need to know why people are willing to let themselves be influenced by some individuals and not by others. We thus need to understand the nature of form.Leadership and mogulPower is a useful concept with which to explain the social process of interpersonal influence. Powe r is a critical property of leadership, and the two term are a great deal used with the same or similar meanings a leader is someone with power, powerful individuals are leaders.We can thus define power in much the same way that we have defined leadership-as the ability of an individual to control or influence others, or to get some-one else to do something that they would perhaps not do.There are different sources of power to chance upon a a some(prenominal) information power, affiliation power expert power, all these power shews are interrelated. The exercise of one power base whitethorn affect a leaders ability to use another. The leader who resorts to irresponsible power may for example lose referent power. The leader may be commensurate to use legitimate power to enhance two referent and expert power. A leader can operate from triune sources of power and few leaders may be able to believe on a single power base.Please see table Sources of powerp+ are positive sourc es of powerp- are proscribe sources of powerPOWER BASEEXPLANATIONPERCEIVED AS rejoinremuneration, award, compliment, symbolicp+gestures of praiseCoercionphysical or psychological injury, symbolic gesturesof disdain, demotion, un demanded transfer,withholding resourcesp-AuthorityManagement right to control, province of othersp-to obey, playing the chieftain and abusing leaveexercise of leadership in times of crisis or needp+Referentidentification based on personal characteristics,sometimes on perception of charisma or bilateralidentification based on friendship, association,sharing information, common interests, valuesand preferencesp+ExpertPossession of specialized knowledge valued byOthers, used to help others, given freely when solicited.p+Unsolicited expertise creates barriers expertiseOffered patronisingly is coercive withholdingexpertise in times of needp-Informationaccess to information that is not public knowledge,because of position or connections can exist atall organ izational levels secretaries and personalassistants to executives often have informationpower, and can control information flowsp-Affiliationborrowed from an potence source-executiveSecretaries and assistants act as surrogates for theirSuperiorsp+acting on their own self-centeredness using negativeaffiliation powerby applying accounting andpersonal policies rigidlyp-Groupcollective problem solving, conflict resolution,creative cerebrate group resolution greaterThan the individual contribution.p+a few individual dominating the proceedings,groupthinkp-tutorial questionDiscuss Which power base or which combination of power bases would you expect to be most effective for an organisation leader in current times?Five approaches to LeadershipResearch on leadership shows five main approaches in the study of leadership and that leadership theories have evolved gradually starting from the Trait speckle approach to New Leadership theoriesTrait spotting the explore for constitution marker sFor the first four decades of the twentieth century, researches assumed that they could identify the personality traits of leaders It would then be possible to select individuals who possessed those traits and to promote them into leadership position.This search for the qualities of good leaders was influenced by great man theory, which claims that (predominantly male) leaders are born as such, and emerge to take power, regardless of the social, organisational or historical context.Great man theory is a historical perspective based on the premises that the fate of societies, and organizations, is in the hands of key, powerful, single (male) individuals who by force of personality reach positions of influence from which they can direct and dominate the lives of others.Typical list of qualitiesStrong drive for obligation tenseness on completing the proletariatVigour and persistence in hunting of goalsVenturesomeness and originality in problem solvingDrive to exercise initiative i n social settingsSelf- federal agencySense of personal identityWillingness to accept consequences of decisions and actionsReadiness to absorb interpersonal stressWillingness to tolerate frustration and resistAbility to influence the behaviour of othersCapacity to structure social systems to the purpose in hand.Rosemay Stewart (1963) cites a study in which American executives were asked to identify subjective leadership qualities. They came up with the following fifteen traitsjudgementinitiative lawfulnessforesightenergydriveHuman relations skill conclusionDependabilityemotional stabilityfairnessambitiondedicationobjectivityCo-operationLimitations of the trait spotting theoryIt is difficult to challenge the list of qualities cited by each Stogdill or Stewart. Can we say that effective leaders should neglect judgement, be low in energy, be undependable, lack drive, ambition, creativity and integrity and have little foresight? What happens when we compare Stewart with Stogdill? Bot h identify drive as a key trait. However, Stogdill lists venturesomeness, self-confidence, stress tolerance and system structuring as traits which Stewarts omits. Stewart identifies foresight, fairness, integrity, fairness and co-operation, which are missing from Stogdills list.Traits spotting presents several difficulties. First, there are more attributes here than personality traits. Second, these attributes are vague. Third, many of the items on these lists happen upon skills and behaviour patterns which have to be observed, rather than personality traits that can be assessed by questionnaires or interview persistence in pursuit of goals, ability to influence others. It is difficult to see how trait spotting can be used effectively in leadership selection context, as originally intended.A further problem lies with the honoring that one list of good leadership qualities is as good as another. Stogdills review revealed some carrefour between research findings, but it is also re vealed disagreement and inconsistency. This line of research has been unable to establish a consistent set of leadership traits of attributes. Leadership is about power and influence, the chemistry of which it is difficult to analyse in terms of personality traits.Style counselling the search for effective behaviour patternsdisillusionment with the traits approach meant that leadership, management and supervisory style became a major focus for research. Attention switched from selecting leaders on personality traits to training and developing leaders in appropriate behaviour patterns. This research tradition argues that a unselfish, participative, republican and involving leadership style is more effective than an impersonal, autocratic and directive style. cardinal research projects, the Michigan and Ohio studies, in the 1940s and 1950s underpinned Employee- centred behaviour way on consanguinitys and employee unavoidablyemployee-centred behaviour focusing on relationships and employee needsjob-centred behaviour focusingConsideration is a pattern of leadership demeanor that demonstrates sensitivity to relationships and to the social needs of employees.Initiating structure is a pattern of leadership style that emphasizes runance of the treat in hand and the achievement of product and serve rise goals.Consistent with the Michigan studies, the Ohio results identified two categories of leadership behaviour, consideration and initiating structure. The considerate leader is needs- and the relationship- oriented. The leader who structures work for subordinates is lying-in-oriented.The considerate leader is interested in and listens to subordinates, allows participation in decision making, is friendly and approachable, helps subordinates with personal problems and is prepared to bridge over them if necessary. The leaders behaviour indicates genuine trust, respect, warmth and rapport. This enhances subordinates feeling of self-esteem and gains the grow th of dialogues and relationships in a work group. The researches first called this leadership dimension social sensitivity.The leader initiating structure plans ahead, decides how thing are going to get done, structures chores and assigns work, makes expectation clear, emphasizes deadlines and achievement, and expects subordinates to follow instructions. The leaders behaviour stresses production and the achievement of organisational goals. This caseful of behaviour can stimulate enthusiasm to achieve objectives as well as encouraging and helping subordinates to get the work done. This is the kind of emphasis that the scientific management school encouraged, except that here it is recognised that task orientation can have a positive motivating aspect. The researches first called this leadership dimension production emphasis.Consideration and structure are free lance behaviour patterns and do not represent the extremes of a continuum. A leader can emphasize one or both. Job sati sfaction is promising to be elevateder and grievances and labour turnover lower where the leader emphasizes consideration. occupation performances, on the other hand, is likely to be higher(prenominal) where the leader emphasizes the inductive reasoning of structure. Inconsiderate leaders typically have subordinates who complain and who are more likely to leave the organisation, but can have comparatively reproductive work groups if they are high on initiating structure.Initiating structure mellow low eminent performance low performanceHigh few grievances few grievancesLow turnover low turnoverConsiderationLow High performance low performanceMany grievances many grievancesHigh turnover high turnoverFigure 1 The Ohio State leadership theory predictionsThe influential work of another University of Michigan researcher, Rensis Likert(1961), reinforced the benefits of considerate performance-oriented leadership. He found that supervisors in highly productive sections were more like ly to sop up general as opposed to close supervision from their superior guide general as opposed to close supervision to their subordinatesEnjoy their responsibility and authoritySpend more time on supervisionBe employee- rather than production-orientedSupervisors in sections where productivity was low were production-oriented and concentrated on charge their subordinates busy on achieving targets on time. The effective supervisors were not just concerned with employee needs. They were seen as subordinates as emphasizing high performance and had a patrimonial enthusiasm for achieving goals. Likert and his team identified four main styles or systems of leadershipSystem 1 Exploitative autocratic, in which the leaderHas no confidence and trust in subordinatesImposes decisions, never delegatesMotivates by threatHas little communication and team work.System 2 Benevolent authoritative, in which the leaderHas superficial, condescending trust in subordinatesImposes decisions, never dele gatesMotivates by compensateSometimes involves subordinates in solving problems.System 3 Participative, in which the leaderHas some incomplete confidence and trust in subordinatesListens to subordinates but controls decision makingMotivates by reward and some involvementUses ideas and opinions of subordinates constructively.System 4 Democratic, in which the leaderHas complete confidence and trust in subordinatesAllows subordinates to make decisions for themselvesMotivates by reward for achieving goals set by participationShares ideas and opinion.Likerts research showed that effective supervisors were those who adopted either system 3 or system 4 leadership, what Likert called and alternative organisational lifestyle.Tutorial question The style counselling leadership approach is extremely relevant in current times Discuss this statement.Context fitting the development of contingency theoriesThe Michigan and Ohio perspectives offer leaders one trump out way to handle followers, by a dopting the high-consideration, high-structure ideal. This advice is supported by the fact that most people like their leaders to be considerate, even when they are performance- oriented as well. The main criticism of this perspective lies with the observation that one leadership style may not be effective in all circumstances.Departing from one best way, Robert Tannenbaum and Warren Schmidt (1958) presented the autocratic- democratic choice as a continuum, from boss centred leadership at one extreme to subordinate- centred leadership at the other. This is illustrated in figure of speechure 2Subordinate-centred leadershipBoss- centred leadershipThe contingency theory of leadership is a perspective which states that leaders to be effective must adjust their style in a manner consistent with aspects such as the work context, attributes of workers and the nature of the work to be doneUse of authority by the managerArea of freedom for subordinatesconductor Manager Manager Manager pres ents Manager presents Manager defines Manager permitsmakes decisions sells presents ideas tentative decision problem, gets limits asks group subordinates toand announces it. Decisions. and invites subject to change. suggestion, makes to make decision. function within limitsquestions. Decision. defined bysuperior.The Tannenbaum-Schmidt continuum of leadership behaviorThe steps in this continuum are represented as alternatives for the leader their bind was subtitled should the manager be democratic or autocratic- or something in between? Tannenbaum and Schmidt argue that the answer depends on three sets of forcesForces in the manager personality, values, preferences, beliefs aboutEmployee participation, confidence in subordinatesForces in the subordinates need for independence, tolerance of ambiguity acquaintance of the problem, expectations of involvementForces in the situation organizational norms, size and location of workGroups, effectiveness of teamworking, nature ofThe problemH aving concentrated on forces in the manager, having challenged the tactual sensation of one best way, to lead, research now considered aspects of the context in which the leader was operating the people being led, the nature of the work they were doing, and the wider organisational setting. This perspective suggests that leaders must be able to diagnose the context and be able to decide what behaviour will fit. As the best style is point on the situation, this approach is referred to as the contingency theory of leadership.Tutorial questionLeadership research and theory seems to be consistent in contestation that a considerate, employee- cantered, participative and democratic style is more effective.What factors in an organisational context would make an inconsiderate, goal- centred, impersonal and autocratic leadership style more effective? accident theory of leadership contdAnother influential contingency theory of leadership was developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard (1988 ). They believe that leaders can alter their style to fit the context.Hersey and Blanchard call their approach situational leadership, summarised in fig 3, which describe leader behaviour on two dimensions.The first dimension (horizontal axis) concerns task behaviour, or the amount of direction a leader gives to subordinates. This can vary from particular proposition instructions, at one extreme, to complete delegation, at the other. Hersey and Blanchard identify two intermediate positions, where leaders either facilitate subordinates decisions or take care to explain their own.Situational leadership is an approach to determining the most effective style of influencing, taking into accounts of direction and support the leader gives, the readiness and adulthood of followers to perform a particular task.The second dimension (vertical axis) concerns validatory behaviour and the amount of social backup a leader gives to subordinates. This can vary from limited communication, at one ex treme, to considerable listening, facilitating and supporting at the other.The model establishes four basic leadership styles, labelled S1 to S4S1 Telling High amounts of task behaviour, telling subordinates what to do, when to do it and how to do it, but with little leadership behaviour.S2 Selling High amounts of both task behaviour and relationship behaviour.S3 alive(p) Lots of relationship behaviour and support, but little direction of task behaviour.S4 Delegating Not much task behaviour or relationship behaviour.Share ideas and Explain decisions and provideFacilitate decision making. Opportunity for clarification. participating S3 S2 SELLINGDELAGATING TELLINGTurn over responsibility Provide specific instructionsFor decisions and and closely superviseImplementation performance.S4 S1(Supporting conduct/Relationship Behavior RRELATIONSHIP BEHAVIOURLow TASK BEHAVIOUR high(GUIDANCE)High Moderate lowR4 R3 R2 R1Able andwilling or surefootedFollower ReadinessAble but reluctantOr unsta bleUnable and unwillingOr insecureUnable but willingOr confidentFollower directed leader directedHersey and Blanchard also argue that the readiness of followers to perform a particular task is a key factor. This is explained by the lower portion of the figure in which follower readiness is drawn on a continuum, with insecure subordinates unwilling to act at one extreme to confident followers able and willing to perform at the other. Superimpose the readiness continuum on the make it half of the model and you have a basis for selecting an effective leadership style. It is compelling and consistent with other theories to suggest that insecure subordinates need telling while willing and confident groups can be left to do the job.Tutorial question Take an organisation of your choice and discuss the relevancy and significance of the Hersey and Blanchard situational leadership theory.Leadership in the ordinal century devil related trends in leadership thinking are now diaphanousRecogni tion of the role of heroic, powerful, charismatic, visionary leader.Recognition of the role of information leadership, at all levels.These trends appear to be contradictory. We have the new leader, who is a rational figure motivating followers to superlative levels of achievement. However, we have also the super leader, who is able to lead other lead themselves .The super leader thus encourage, develops and co-exists with informal leadership outspread throughout the organisation hierarchy.The new leader is an indispensable and inspirational visionary, a coach, a facilitator concerned with building a shared sense of purpose and mission, with creating a culture which ensures that everyone is aligned with the organisations goals and is experient and empowered to go and achieve them.The super leader is a leader who is able to develop leadership capacity in other, developing and empowering them, cut their dependence on formal leaders, stimulating their motivation, commitment and creat ivity.The new leadership theory originates from the work of McGregor Burns (1978), who distinguished between transactional and transformational leaders.The transactional leader is a leader who treats relationship with followers in terms of an exchange, giving followers what they want in return for what the leader desires, following prescribed tasks to plight effected goals.Transactional leaders see their relationship with formers in term of trade, swaps or bargains. Transformational leaders are characterised as individuals who inspire and motivates others to go beyond contract, to perform at unexpected levels. Although Burns saw these two types of leadership it was lucky to see why some commentators equate transactional with management, and transformational with leadership.The transactional leader is a leader who treats relationship with followers in terms of an exchange, giving followers what they want in return for what the leader desires, following prescribed tasks to pursue e stablished goals.The transformational leader is a leader who treats relationships with followers in terms of motivation and commitment , influencing and inspiring followers to give more than mechanical conformity and to improve organisational performanceTransformational leadership occurs when leadersStimulates others to see what they are doing from new perspectivesArticulate the mission or vision of the organisationDevelop others to higher levels of ability andMotivates others to put organisational interest before self-interest.They achieve this, according to bass part and Avolio, by using one or more of Idealised influenceact as role models, attract admiration, respectand trust, put needs of others before personalinterest, take risks and demonstrate highstandards of ethical conductInspirational motivationmotivate and inspire by providing meaning andchallenge, finish up team spirit, show enthusiasmand optimism, communicate expectations,demonstrate commitment noetic stimulationque stion assumptions, reframe problems,approach old issues in new ways, encourageinnovation and creativity, avoid public criticismof mistakesIndividualised consideration name to individual needs for growth andachievement, act as coach or mentor, create newlearning opportunities, accept individualDifferences, avoid close monitoring.The transformational leader is a leader who threats relationship with followers in terms of motivation and commitment, influencing and inspiring followers to give more than mechanical compliance and to improve organizational performance. It is tempting to regard the profusion of new terms and the liberation in emphasis in leadership theory and research as a systematic development of earlier ideas. However, the identification of new, super, transformational leaders represent a simplification of the concept of leadership, returning to trait spotting (hunt the visionary) and overlooks what is known about the influences of a range of contextual factors on leader ship effectiveness.Tutorial questionConsidering senior business and political leaders with whom you are familiar, either directly or through the media, which come closest to these definitions of new leader, super leader and transformational leader?The new, super, transformational leader looks like a one best way approach. Does this vindicate trait spotting and discredit contingency perspectives?Dispersing the leadership roleIn the distinction between leadership and management, orientation to change is a defining characteristic, a distinctive mark of the leader. These results suggest, therefore, that leadership is a widespread phenomenon. Leadership behaviours are dispersed rather than concentrated in the hands of formally appointed managers. Leadership functions are best carried out by people who have the interest, knowledge, skills and motivation to perform them effectively. This observation is reinforced by the development of self-managing autonomous teams, which often have no lea ders, or have coach-facilitators whose role is to develop team skills. These coaching- facilitating are super leaders.Recognition of dispersed leadership does not imply a shift of focus away from formal, senior figures. It may be useful to separate notions of leadership from formal positions and prestige job titles. However, it is necessary to recognise that senior figures with prestige title continue to exercise leadership roles and functions as well.This twin-track approach, which combines acquaintance of visionary new leadership with the notion of a widely dispersed leadership decoupled from high office, is illustrated by Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus (1985). Their model of twenty-first century leadership (in which the new role of the leader is to be (leader of leaders) is summarised in table 4.