Leadership Theories: the Absolutes of Leadership - Dissertation Example

Leadership Theories: the Absolutes of Leadership Introduction Leadership plays a very essential role in every organization. Leaders act as change agents within organizations. They motivate as well as build the trust and confidence of the people within the organization. This report aims at understanding the various approaches to leadership that have been developed over the past. The aim of this report is to gain a clear understanding of the traditional concepts and approaches to leadership. Also focus will be drawn to the development of the concept of charismatic leadership and how it fits in to the general theories on leadership. A focus will also be made on how the ‘new genre of leadership theory’ has been taken up and further developed since 1992 by House and other researchers. The next section will detail the traditional theories that have been set down in the past. Leadership Theories There have been a number of different theories and approaches that have been developed in the past by various authors and experts in the field. This section will detail the various theories which will allow getting a clear understanding of the concept. The various authors and their theories are as follows: a) Daniel Goleman’s Approach: Daniel Goleman’s approach consists of six major styles of leadership. In his book Primal Leadership, he has highlighted that good leaders are effective because they create resonance. Based on this he explained resonance can be done in six ways, which in turn lead to the leadership styles. These styles included visionary leadership, coaching leadership, affiliative leadership, democratic leadership, pacesetting leadership and commanding leadership (Goleman, 2006). According to Goleman, all leaders’ categories into these styles of leadership, and the most useful type of leadership among these the visionary leadership style. Here the leaders inspire employees and believes in its own vision, along with being empathetic. It also highlights how the efforts from all the people within an organization, contribute to the ‘dream’. This type of leadership style has proved to be the most beneficial for companies where change is required and a new vision is required (Goleman, 2006). The other styles that Goleman has discussed within his book are the coaching style, which falls in the second best style of leadership for companies. This method is where the leaders are listeners and helps people identify their strengths and weaknesses, and in a number of aspects they also act as counselors, encouragers and delegates. This has proved to be the second best method of leadership and is most effective to help competent and motivated employees to improve their performance (Goleman, 2006). This is mainly done by building long – term capabilities. The other four styles as expressed by Goleman have not proved to be very useful to companies and are mainly to help motivate employees during stressful times. These help build a support for employees to get higher results like in the case of sales and finally in cases of severe crisis. The next section will detail the approach provided by Warren Bennis. b) Warren Bennis’s Approach: Warren Bennis also known as ‘The Father of Modern Leadership’ as per the Fortune Magazine has created a strong image in the contemporary leadership styles and no study of leadership will be complete including his finding and research (Crosby, 1997). According to him, leaders pull rather than push, and have the ability to empower and trust others to act. Also with a clear vision in their minds, they rightly communicate the vision to all the teams (Bennis, 1999). Leaders also work through teams and not based on hierarchies. Also it has been noted that leaders have stringer self confidence and self esteem, along with a positive attitude. It is also to be noted that leaders have a good grasp of self and they understand their strengths, develop their skills and also have a clear idea of how to use their talents. This also allows for a more positive attitude to be contributed to all within the organization. Bennis refers to this as an “An attitude of positive other regards”. He has also mentioned there are four main qualities that are required and possessed by leaders. These include Vision, Trust, Communication and Management of Self. Bennis argues that these qualities must be instilled in everyone within the organization and thus every person in the organization should be a leader. He also argues that it is a major duty of the leader to ensure that people enjoy what they do. c) Mintzberg’s Theory of Leadership: Henry Mintzberg is a major contributor to the field of management. He has provided the management field with a better understanding of leadership versus management. Mintzberg has focused and emphasized a lot on monitoring, informational, decision making and also interpersonal aspects of the work of leaders (Buchanan, 2004). Mintzberg has contributed to the topics of leadership, management, and also strategy formation for workplaces. He has emphasized on the importance of improving of the leadership selection internationally. He has also argued that leadership and management required to be aligned to the organizational development. He also argued that it is up to the internals of the organization to make the right choice of the leaders rather than externals, who do not have complete knowledge of the organization and its people. He has discussed some very important aspects of leadership and has emphasized on important aspects like the half truths. The half truth that has been used by managers in a number of ways is that people are ‘human resources’ (Locke, Edwin, 1975). Mintzberg argues and highlights that it is incorrect to refer to human beings as ‘human resources’. He argues that half truths are dangerous mainly because of the fact that they can affect the actions of the leaders to be not well thought out and planned (Grint, 2001). Also the half truths are not reasonable and require to have been taken as a huge threat to the managers and leaders of organizations. The leaders require being very careful with the decisions they make because every decision they make in a small way or another affects the lives of the employees. Thus he argues that true leaders are a product of the decisions that they take and thus a true leader is one who thinks through all the factors before taking a decision and after considering every possibility. Mintzberg’s argument that the decisions of leaders are diluted by the half truths is a very positive and right argument. Considering the various examples that he has enlisted in the argument, it is clear that the half truths cause a the leaders to make ineffective decisions and also in some terms can be the underlying factors for the organizations moving into the wrong path and moving towards failure to some extent (MICA, 2004). It is clear that basing the leadership decisions on half truths can be very damaging not only to the company but also to the lives of the employees that are involved. Thus Mintzberg’s argument is very appropriate and it is important to understand and differentiate among the half truths and the other half truths (MICA, 2004). Thus in conclusion it is important to understand that a good leader require looking at the other side of the truth before making any decisions. d) James MacGregor Burn’s Theory: James MacGregor Burns is an example of a classical leader. He has developed a number of different leadership theories and in his book Burns states “One of the most universal carvings of our time is a hunger for compelling and creative leadership” (Swanson, 2007). He has concentrated on another very essential aspect of motivation for the employees and a strong mode of leading people. He argues that leaders and subordinates are to be treated equal and that they are peers to one another, with the only difference of different roles for each person (Burns, 2004). Thus it is essential according to him to have a strong human touch by the leaders. This allows the followers to remain engaged and satisfied at higher need levels. Burns concentrated a lot on ensuring that employees receive better remunerations and that the employees of the company are well motivated with satisfied higher needs (Burns, 1982). This method of leadership is one which concentrates on transformation of the situation and is called transformational leadership (Evans, 2009). Also from Burns, 1982, “The relations of most leaders and followers are transactional—leaders approach followers with an eye to exchanging one thing for another: jobs for votes, or subsidies for campaign contributions. Such transactions comprise the bulk of the relationships among leaders and followers, especially in groups, legislatures, and parties. Transforming leadership, while more complex, is more potent. The transforming leader recognizes and exploits an existing need or demand of a potential follower. But, beyond that, the transforming leader looks for potential motives in followers, seeks to satisfy higher needs, and engages the full person of the follower. The result of transforming leadership is a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may covert leaders into moral agents” (Swanson, 2007) (Burns, 1982). It is seen that the affects of using Burns style has led to a number of benefits in the product and also positively affect the insight of the employees and allow the employees to gain a deeper analysis of themselves and their skills and strengths. Apart from this the employees also receive better and higher levels of motivation. The leaders in this case aim at ensuring that the employees are treated lawfully and are provided with benefits that will help further their motivation and thereby improve the end results in terms of the products. Also this in turn helps provide a better commitment in the employees and also leads the employees to be more innovative and more committed to their jobs (Burns, 1982). In short a transformational leader is one who allows the employees work, efforts and commitment to be duly recognised and thereby allows the employees to be highly motivated to their jobs. When an organisation is running well, and the production is good, then the company is expressed to be a ‘well – oiled engine’, an ‘assembly line’, etc. There are a number if terms used for organisations that do not perform as well, then organisations are referred to as ‘broken down’, ‘things need fixing’, etc. In response to this, mechanical terms are generally used, like ‘nuts and bolts’ of the operation etc. it has been seen that organisations love re- engineering. Gareth Morgan says, "One of the most basic problems of modern management is that the mechanical way of thinking is so ingrained in our everyday conception of organisations that it is often difficult to organise in any other way" (Gazendam, 1993) This section has dealt with a few of the essential theories of leadership that have been set down in the past. These to a great extent contribute to and are referred as the traditional theories of leadership. Over the years there have been several others who have contributed to the field and have provided several other theories and concepts for effective leadership (Slocum and Hellriegel, 2006). The next section will deal with the development of the concept of charismatic leadership and how it fits in to the general theories on leadership. This will be followed by the ‘New genre of leadership theories’, and the major contributions from authors like House and others. Charismatic Leadership: According to Weber: charisma is 'a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which s/he is set apart from ordinary people and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader'. He also says, ‘resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him’. Origin of Charismatic Leadership: In the early 1920’s Maxx Weber a German Sociologist explained that there are three ideal types of leadership, domination and authority. The term Charisma has been derived from the Greek word ‘kharisma’, meaning gift from God. Aristotle once wrote: “There are men, so godlike, so exceptional, that they naturally, by right of their extraordinary gifts, transcend all moral judgment or constitutional control: 'There is no law which embraces men of that caliber: they are themselves law”. Charismatic leaders mainly refer to people with an elusive and also an indefinable personality trait which in a number of terms seems unnatural and is considered to be supernatural. These traits have been expressed to be traits like ability to lead, charm, persuade, influence and inspire others (Beer, Lawrence, Quinn Mills and Walton, 1985). There have been numerous leaders who have adopted this form of leadership in the past. These include leaders in various fields like politics and religion. A few of the best examples include Fidel Castro, Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton, Mahatma Gandhi, Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., Ronald Reagan, Patrice Lumumba, Moses David Berg, L. Ron Hubbard, Jesus, Jim Jones, Moses, Sun Myung Moon, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Prem Rawat known to his students as Maharaji, Rajneesh also called Bhagwan and Osho, Charles Taze Russell, Sathya Sai Baba, Joseph Smith and Werner Erhard. All of these leaders have been able to contribute in their own way to their organisations. There have been several views and thoughts that have been presented for the charismatic leaders. ‘Conger & Kanungo (1998) describe five behavioural attributes of Charismatic Leaders that indicate a more transformational viewpoint: Vision and articulation; Sensitivity to the environment; Sensitivity to member needs; Personal risk taking; Performing unconventional behaviour. Musser (1987) notes that charismatic leaders seek to instil both commitment to ideological goals and also devotion to themselves. The extent to which either of these two goals is dominant depends on the underlying motivations and needs of the leader’. Charismatic Leadership and General Theories: As has been understood from the above discussion, Charismatic leaders are known for their approach to every big and small problem. The actions of the leaders have a cumulative affect on the changes that they tend to bring about in the people. There are several similarities between the charismatic leaders and transformational leaders. The most essential and basic difference is their focus. The transformational leaders focus on transforming the organisation and in some cases the followers as well, while the charismatic leaders prefer to let things remain the same and do not want to change things. In the case of charismatic leaders it is quite easy for the followers to get carried away while talking to the person because of the strong aura that they have, while there are strong chances that when they are not around followers will be back to the details that they provided just to realise that the conversation did not make any sense at all or is flawed. “The values of the Charismatic Leader are highly significant. If they are well-intentioned towards others, they can elevate and transform an entire company. If they are selfish and Machiavellian they can create cults and effectively rape the minds (and potentially the bodies) of the followers” (Changing Minds, 2009). House and his Contributions: Robert House is a big contributor to the field of study. He has developed a path – goal theory of leadership based on the expectancy theory by Victor Vroom. In 1964, an American psychologist Victor Harold Vroom, developed the first expectancy theory and based it on three main concepts. These concepts were valence, instrumentality and expectancy, thus the name valence – instrumentality – expectancy theory. Valence: This refers to what individuals perceive for a particular outcome. It refers to the preferences and perceived values of individuals. These include the emotional orientation which individuals have towards the outcomes. The value the employee places on money, promotion, benefits and satisfaction. It is essential the management is able to recognize this and appreciate the employees accordingly. Instrumentality: this refers to the probability that good performance will lead to rewards irrespective of the promises made by the management. It is essential that the management recognizes the employee efforts and rewards them accordingly. Also if the management does make promises to the employees for rewards, it is essential that those are fulfilled. Expectancy: This again is the probability that efforts will lead to good performance. It is essential to understand that all employees have different expectations and levels of confidence about the individual capability. It is essential that the management can recognize the needs for the employees to enhance their capabilities and improve their individual capabilities (Quick MBA, 2008). The theory is based on the expectancy equation: F = V * I * E Where, F is the Force of motivation. This can be got as a result of the product of the Valence, Instrumentality and Expectancy. This is very essential as even if one of the three aspects is zero it would result in the force to equal to zero. Vroom has defined each of the three and created a relationship between the three. He explains that each of three elements has a clear importance and clearly choosing one element over the other has been clearly defined as: Effort – performance expectancy – E > P expectancy: this refers to the idea that efforts will lead to requires performance levels. Performance – outcome expectancy – P > O expectancy: this refers to the probability that successful performance will lead to certain desired outcomes. House explains the importance of the theory as, “the meta proposition that leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviours that complement subordinates' environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance” (House & Howell, 1992). This theory is a very impactful one in the new genre of leadership theories and the theory concentrates on four essential leadership behaviours. This includes achievement – oriented, directive, participative and supportive. House’s theory states that the four leadership behaviour is similar to fluid and that leaders can adapt to any change based on the situation and the demand. The theory however can be classified not only as charismatic leadership but also as transactional leadership and a contingency theory as well (House & Baetz, 1979). Conclusions: House has become one of the major contributors to the ‘new genre of leadership theories’. He has provided a very different view and approach to the concept and has used a very strong background to develop this theory. He has also highlighted the leader’s self – belief is very high and this can easily lead them to believe that they are infallible and this could clearly lead to leaving the followers into an abyss (Lewin, 2009). He also highlights that the self – absorption and the need to be admired can leave them being poor leaders and questioning their skills of leadership as well. House’s views and ideas are very practical with a deep insight into the characteristics of the charismatic leaders. He has been able to develop contribute to a great extent and bring out the strong relationship between transitional and charismatic leaders. House has provided a clear new approach to the concept of leadership (House & Baetz, 1979). Bibliography Beer, M., Lawrence, P.R., Quinn Mills, D., and Walton, R.E., 1985, ‘Human Resource Management: A General Manager’s Perspective’, Free Press, Glencoe, IL Buchanan D. and Huczynski A., 2004, Organizational behaviour, 5th edn, Prentice Hall, Essex Burns, J. M., 2004, ‘Transforming leadership’, 30 January 2004, Grove press Burns, J.M., 1982, ‘Leaderhip’,9 November 1982, 1st edition, Harper Perennial Changing Minds, 2009, ‘Charismatic Leadership’, Accessed on 4th October 2009, Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/styles/charismatic_leadership.htm Conger, J. A., and R. N. Kanungo, 1998, ‘Charismatic Leadership in Organizations’, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Crosby, P.B., 1997, ‘The Absolutes of Leadership (Warren Bennis Executive Briefing)’, 15 July 1997, Jossey – Bass Evans, M.H., 2009, ‘Leadership’, Accessed on 20 February 2009, Retrieved from http://www.exinfm.com/training/pdfiles/course18.pdf Gazendam, H.W.M, 1993, ‘Variety Controls Variety: On the use of Organisation Theories in Information Management’, Groningen: Wolters – Noordhoff, 400p Goleman, D., 2006, ‘Emotional intelligence: 10th Anniversary Edition: Why it can matter more than IQ’, 26 September 2006, 10 Anv edition, Bantam Grint, K., 2001, 'The Arts of Leadership', 12 July 2001, Oxford University Press, USA House, R. J., & Shamir, B, 1993, ‘Toward The Integration Of Transformational, Charismatic, And Visionary Theories’, In M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), ‘Leadership Theory And Research: Perspectives And Directions’, 81-107. New York: Academic Press. House, R.J. & Baetz, M., 1979, ‘Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions, In B. M. Staw (Ed.), ‘Research in organizational behavior’, vol. 1: 341-423. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press House, R.J. & Howell, J.M., 1992, ‘Personality And Charismatic Leadership’, Leadership Quartely, 3: 81 – 108 Lewin, K., 2009, ‘What’s your leadership style’, Accessed on 26th April 2009, Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/library/quiz/bl-leadershipquizb.htm Locke, Edwin A., 1975, ‘Personnel Attitudes and Motivation’, Annual Review of Psychology, 1975, Vol. 26, p388 MICA, 2004, ‘Half Truths of leadership’, Excellence in Management & Leadership Series, Accessed on 5th October 2009, Retrieved from http://www.micaworld.com/pdfs/Mintzberg_Participant_Guide.pdf Slocum, J. W. and Hellriegel, D., 2006, ‘Fundamentals of Organizational Behaviour’, Thomson South-Western, USA Read More