What makes a Good Leader Popular Theories of Leadership - Essay Example

Leadership Q What makes a Good Leader Leadership in simple terms means an ability to lead others around. Leadership qualities are not just an asset for a manager, but it helps even the junior-most member of a team. It indicates towards his/ her quality of getting the work done. John Hunt (Managing People at Work) states that leadership is the capacity to mobilise in competition or conflict a potential need in a follower. Terry (1994) says that competence for a managerial job is the product of both inherited and acquired qualities. Therefore the team leader has to be a good learner, so that he can capitalize on the stronger points of the team while trying to minimize the effects of weaker points. Pascale (1990) wrote that "managers do things right, while leaders do the right thing," A leader is supposed to be; Initiator: The leader must be able to take a lead in defining the work environment and team spirit. Model: The leader must himself be able to display his workmanship, so that he proves be a role model for the other members in the organization. Negotiator: The negotiating skills are the one's which distinctly differentiate a leader from other members. While stuck up in a tricky situation a leader uses his skills to convince the concerned people, tries to extract reasonable benefits for his team mates and negotiates a better deal from suppliers while weighing the outcomes of different alternatives. Coach: A leader has to be a good coach as well. He is supposed to impart the basic working principles amongst his team members. But he must not take this job so seriously that he starts interrupting the team members for each and every task. This results in undue interference in routine functioning of the team. Popular Theories of Leadership Many different writers and researchers have come out with differing styles and behavioral aspects of leadership and relevant theories. Theories of leadership may be classified under three headings: i. Trait theories, ii. Style theories, iii. Contingency theories. Trait Theories The trait theory values some traits or qualities of a leader. This theory is based on the assumption that the person is more important than the situation. It received some endorsement when it appeared that leaders such as Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin appeared to possess a mystical charm which captivated their followers. Trait theory assumers that A leader's intelligence should be above average and he or she should possess the ability to deal with complex problems. The leader should have the ability and initiative to see and deal with complex problems. Leaders are usually very self-confident and competent at their job. Leaders should have the ability to see problems in the wider context. This is known as the 'helicopter factor'. Trait theory has since attracted considerable criticism, as it places the individual's traits before the theories of management. But over the years history is replete with examples which indicate that such a theory has indeed worked wonders for the oraganisation or the country. Style Theories Style theories are based on the assumption that employees will work harder for managers who adopt certain styles of leadership. The following four styles were identified by Huneryager and Heckman in 1967: The dictatorial style: The manager tells his or her subordinates what to do, with the implied threat that they will be punished if they do not obey orders. This style is not widely used in industry and commerce. The autocratic style: Decision making is controlled by the leader, and participation by subordinates is not encouraged. Such a leader takes autocratic decisions based on his understanding of the situation. The democratic style: Such a leader believes in adopting an approach in which the subordinates are also consulted while taking some key decisions. Decision making is shared by the subordinates as well. For this to be really effective, the subordinates must be prepared to participate. The laissez faire style: Such an approach is said to be 'take it easy style'. The leader assumes that subordinates will do everything right for the job. Subordinates are given little or no direction, but are allowed to establish their own objectives and make their own decisions. This style of leadership is not considered very healthy for the organisation and the leader resorts to such style when he has little or no interest towards the well being of the oraganisation. Such style of leadership is often visible in public sector units or some government offices, where the leader is least bothered about job security and starts taking things for granted. Such style of leadership works quite fine when the leader is fortunate to have highly qualified professionals in his team. Similarly, the concept of style management was also developed by researchers at the Ashridge Management College, who in turn identified four styles of management as: The autocratic style: Here the manager passes on the instructions to his subordinates and they in turn are supposed to carry out those orders. The persuasive style: Such type of manager actually tires to motivate his or her subordinates before venturing on to the mission. The manager makes all the decisions but thinks his or her subordinates have to be motivated before they will do what he or she wants them to do. The consultative style: The manager and his or her subordinates discuss problems before a decision is made. The manager retains the right to make the final decision. The democratic style: The manager joins his or her subordinates in making a decision on the basis of common agreement. Contingency Theories The contingency approach seems to work on the instincts of the manager and the situation. It is based on the assumption that there is no single style of management applicable to every leadership situation. Such a theory was developed by Fiedler on the basis of two styles of leadership. In fact Fiedler's model is considered one of the earliest leadership effectiveness models. It was based on studies of a wide group of situations and concentrated on the relationship between leadership and organisational performance. The two styles of leadership identified by Fiedler are; Psychologically Distant: Such managers preserve their distance from their subordinates by ensuring there are exact relationships between their superiors and subordinates. Such managers prefer being distant in their relationships with colleagues in the organisation, preferring formal means of consultation to simply talking to their staff. Psychologically Close: These managers prefer contacts to be as informal as possible, are more concerned with ensuring good human relationships than high levels of efficiency. Such managers maintain as informal roles and relationships as possible with superiors and subordinates. On the basis of his findings, Fiedler went on to develop his contingency theory in A Theory of Leader Effectiveness (McGraw-Hill). He suggested that the effectiveness of a work group comprises these factors: the relationship between the group and its leader - that is, the level of respect the group and the leader have for each other, the degree to which the task is specified and the power of the leader in relation to the group. Charles Handy (Understanding Organizations) has also developed a contingency approach to leadership. It suggests that the style of leadership adopted will be influenced by four sets of factors: The leader - his or her style of operating and personal characteristics. These include such factors as his or her value system and his or her confidence in subordinates. The subordinates - their preferred style of leadership in the light of circumstances. This is governed by such factors as their estimate of their own intelligence and capability, together with their desire for involvement in their work. The task - its objectives and technology. For example, is the task routine, creative, important or complex The environment - the organisational setting of the leader, the group and the importance of the task. Handy argues that the situation in which the group is operating will have a great influence on the degree of freedom that the leader has in any of the other three factors. He suggests that the environment has six key features: The leader's power position in the organisation, The link between the leader and the group, The rules of the orvlganisation, The structure and technology of the organisation, The range of tasks, The type of subordinate. If we consider these features of the environment in pairs, we will initially find that the person who exercises a great deal of power will probably set his or her own style of leadership, and lay down guidelines within which the group may operate. But no matter how efficient the manager, he or she cannot act independently: the rules, structure and technology will have an effect. Therefore if an organisation is completely centralised with an autocratic form of leadership, it may be very difficult to alter it. Moreover, every organisation has a wide range of tasks, from the simple to the complex, and a wide variety of people, whose intelligence levels will differ considerably. Under these circumstances the leadership style adopted will have to vary greatly. Functional Leadership Model John Adair developed his 'action-centred' or 'functional' leadership model in the 1970s. Adair believed that the leadership process was based on achieving three types of interrelated roles. It had to be examined against the background of the whole situation, as that showed which of the sets of roles was to be given precedence. Adair established a leadership training scheme around this grouping. It was based on the following eight leadership practices as applied to task, group and individual: 1. Defining the task, 2. Planning, 3. Evaluating, 4. Motivating, 5. Briefing, 6. Controlling, 7. Organising, 8. Setting an example From the discussion above, it is quite clear that there can be no rigid style of leadership from one set of tasks in similar organisations. In fact the leader has to do deal with individual human beings. The basic qualities, functional level, efficiency and motivation level of a human being varies to a great extent depending on the sets of circumstances. In fact the individual's efficiency might also be affected depending on his or her mood on a particular day. For example, someone joining duties after couple of days' leave will work with a refreshing frame of mind while someone waiting for his or her leave to be sanctioned by the management will work with a totally different mindset. In fact such variation in efficiencies is often observed when the workers come to work on Monday and when they are waiting for their weekends on Friday. Leadership in general is supposed to inspire the team with which the leader has to work. A chain is said to be as strong as the weakest link in it. A team is also composed of a number of people with differing abilities, qualification and motivation levels. A cohesive team of highly motivated and well organized members can do wonders for the growth of the organization. On the other hand a group of individuals concerned with only their work and their own benefits can potentially harm the interest of the organisation. An organization can no doubt function with the boss giving commands to his/ her subordinates and the subordinates in turn following the instructions and completing the tasks. But a basic disadvantage in this type of functioning is that the employee doesn't feel the belonging to the organization and therefore may not go for value addition and creativity to the task. An individual is least bothered about the final product, once he/ she has done his/ her share of task. A team on the other hand helps in networking of the individuals, with exchange of ideas and suggestions. This not only helps in regular updation of the knowledge level of the team members but also enriches the final product and service. When the customer feels the advantage of value addition, he'll naturally be attracted towards the product/ service. Therefore, the leader needs to inspire his or her team mates depending upon the circumstances and the requirements. Therefore, while using the leadership theories in good measure, an effective leader has to adapt the theories to circumstances for effective management. In fact some scholars have aired views against giving 'undue' importance to concept of leader and leadership. Opinions have also been expressed opposing the leadership style theories. Charles Handy (Understanding Organizations) wrote that: 'Leadership is a topic that has a rather dated air about it. It smacks of trench warfare and imperial administration. It implies setting up one person above another, raises spectres of elites and privileged classes. 'Why is leadership necessary' asked a group of graduates. 'Surely a group of intelligent, well meaning individuals can tackle any problems without the need of a leader' Yet call it chairman or coordinator or organiser, there is a need in all organisations for individual linking pins who will bind groups together and as members of other groups represent their groups elsewhere in the organisation.' But on the other hand, a reputed name in management theories and principles, Peter Drucker (The Practice of Management) wrote: 'There is no substitute for leadership. But management cannot create leaders. It can only create the conditions under which potential leadership qualities can become effective or it can stifle potential leadership. The supply of leadership is much too limited and unpredictable to be depended upon for the creation of the spirit the business enterprise needs to be productive and to hold together. In a nutshell it can be said that leadership traits are a prerequisite for venturing into any activity. Such qualities, if developed even in the subordinate and the follower, helps in better implementation of the strategy and achieving the targets. Q-2. How might the performance of the leaders be measured The performance as such can be measured by the efficiency and effectiveness of the output delivered by the leader. The leader can be termed successful if he or she is able to make the company profitable or the company is able expand to reach newer markets. But, it is said that, 'a creative effort should be rewarded, even if the project fails'. That goes on to explain the efforts of a leader as well. His or her leadership skills must be judged in the light of his overall effective efforts. There have been many definitions and theories of leadership from the numerous contributions in this field of study. These theories in general identify some of the common traits of being successful leaders. For example the path goal theory of leadership classifies leaders into four primary styles1; Directive Leadership: This implies that the leader is able to identify the rules and regulations for the subordinate staff to work towards achieving certain targets. Supportive Leadership: Such a leader is able to successfully adopt a friendly approach towards the staff. He comes out in support of the staff during the need. And the staff in turn delivers the results. Achievement-oriented Leadership: Such a leader is able to deliver the targets in facts and figures, by way of number of produced units or the number of clients serviced. The obsession of such a leader lies with the goals and achievements of the company/ organisations/ team. At times such a leader appears insensitive towards the needs and requirements of the subordinate staff. Participative Leadership: This type of leader is able to forge an alliance with the team members. He is able to make a rapport with the subordinates and tries to behave as an integral member of the team as well and values the advice of subordinates about work, task goals, and paths to resolve goals. This leadership style involves sharing information as well as consulting with subordinates before making decisions. Howard Good (2006), the former president of Highland Central School Board in Highland, N.Y., says, "Being board president brings power and prestige, but you must inspire and help others to be successful". The success of a leader can be gauged by the extent to which he or she is able to play the central role in making or breaking the team. It is the team leader who can synergize the efforts or just wither away the advantage, with his actions. A team leader is supposed to delegate the powers and responsibilities amongst his/ her team mates, inspire the team members by being an example and motivate his team with appropriate motivating factors. This implies that the leader will be termed as effective if; He or she is able to elicit the contributions from all concerned He or she is able to organize the team members by assigning them the responsibilities, and The leader is able to develop an information system for monitoring and coordination activities. He or she is able to drive the organisation towards success braving adverse circumstances. An excellent example of a successful leader during turbulent times is Anne Mulcachy, CEO of Xerox. Although Xerox woes are far from over, Mulcahy has gotten the company off the critical list. One characteristic that has gained her the admiration and respect of employees, customers and shareholders alike is her willingness to tell the truth. "Part of her DNA is to tell you the good, the bad and the ugly" says one colleague. Mulcahy is also fiercely concerned about people. Even during the darkest days, she refused to consider bankruptcy, prefering instead to focus everyone on rebuilding for the future. Her willingness to work with subordinates on the front lines has expanded her credibility and enabled her to energise people who were previously demoralised and hopeless. Despite the company's financial distress, she rejected a plan to abolish raises and she implemented symbolic gestures of appreciation, she met face-to-face with customers to smooth ruffled feathers and with creditors to renegotiate credit agreements and assure them that the company would pay back its enormous debts. When she had to make the tough decisions to close the struggling personal computer division and lay off employees, she personally walked the halls to tell people sorry and let them vent their anger. "She was leading by example," says one creditor. "Everybody at Xerox knew she was working hard, and that she was working hard for them." Employees rallied around her, and there were startling improvements in performance. Costs were reduced significantly and all the company's divisions returned to profitability. Although it remains to be seen whether Mulcahy can place Xerox once again at those heights, she has led the organisation masterfully during the greatest crisis in its 100-year history. In general, the performance of a successful leader can be measured by; i. His or her ability to adapt to different sets of situations. The leader might be required to deal with a less qualified worker on the production floor and at the same he/she has to negotiate the deal with distributors/ suppliers of the company. Similarly the success lies in the fact if he/she behaves according to the circumstances. ii. The extent to which the leader is assertive. If the leader is able to assert requisite level of authority on his/ her subordinates, peers and seniors. iii. The extent to which the leader is able to fulfill his/ her ambitions and able to chart out a list of achievements. iv. The concern shown by a leader towards the social environment and social issues is also a critical success factor for the leader v. The leader can be termed as a successful leader if his team mates/ subordinates are able to express their confidence in him/ her. vi. The most crucial factor for a leader is the extent to which he/she is able to motivate his/ team towards achieving the goals. Because it is the level of motivation which determines all other aspects of a successful performance. Even the lack of any positive motivation by the managers often results in an automatic provisioning of negative motivation. How somebody makes use of his/ her efforts towards a goal is determined by the motivating/ de-motivating factors. Motivation in simplest terms can be defined as a means of providing motives. Motives can act towards making or marring the work, towards doing a job more efficiently or for distorting the work environment. Two schools of thought in psychology define the human behavior like; The psychic inner causes of behavior which states that the actions or behavior of a person emanate from the internal psychological structure often called personality. As employees differ in their personality so do they differ in their behavior. It further states that a change in behavior can only be brought about by changing the personality of individuals. The second school of thought states that the behavior of a person is primarily determined by the external situational factors, called the stimuli and the reward's associated with one's response. By bringing about a change in these factors the behavior can be redirected and molded accordingly. In practice however, it is observed that the human behavior is a proportionate mix of these two theories i.e. human behavior is a function of a person in relation to the situation, having 'personality' and 'situation' as the two variables. Motivational factors arouse a need, propelling a person to channelise his efforts and energies in the direction of fulfilling those needs. These needs are aroused in the employee of an organization to increase the output, provide quality, increase efficiency, maintain industrial peace etc. For a student the need for better marks is aroused by the class teacher to improve the results of the school, class and the teacher himself. Need arousal too is an art in itself, which requires a good understanding of the human behavior. An effective manager must understand the fact that there are at least two ways by which the behavior of employees could be directed towards the productive pursuits in the organization. One is by changing the personality, i.e. the internal psychological structures of the person, which is a long-drawn and uncertain process. Another strategy is to modify the characteristics of the situation prevailing around the employees. These situational factors have tremendous influence in shaping one's personality. If an employee, putting more efforts and energy, coming out with better results than another one having a lethargic attitude towards the work, are treated in the same manner than this may act as a negative motivation for the efficient employee. Most human resource management strategies are eventually meant to optimally utilize the capabilities of individuals and groups towards achievement of organizational objectives. Performance of an individual is a function of his ability and willingness to use his efforts towards achieving personal or organizational goals. This willingness or desire to act and to behave comes in the ambit of motivation. Motivation or lack of it gets manifested in human behavior. A good manager is supposed to keep observing such a behavior and draw inferences accordingly. In general motivation helps in; i. Better performances for the organization ii. Better working environment in the organization iii. Sense of achievement for the organization as well as the employee iv. Honor and recognition for the workaholic employees v. Sense of belongingness and responsibility amongst the employees vi. Advancement of career opportunities for the employee and business opportunities for the organization vii. Overall growth for the organization. References: 1. Leadership Theories. Available online at http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/p/leadtheories.htm (Oct 14, 2007) 2. Terry, George R. and Franklin Stephen G. (1994). Principles of management. Richard D. Irwin Inc. USA. 3. Leadership-Models and Theories. Available online at http://www.stewart-associates.co.uk/leadership-models.aspx (Oct 14, 2007) 4. Pascale, R. (1990). Managing on the edge. New York: Penguin Books. 5. Good, Howard (2006). Leader of the Pack. American School Board Journal, xx 2006. Read More