Leadership study history

Week OneWhat is Leadership?

Case Study Methodology

Level 5 Leadership

Moses as a Leader

APA Writing Instruction

Defining the TermsIchak Adizes: “Same woman in different clothes”?

Administrator

Management

Executive

Leadership

Man

age

me

nt

vs. L

ead

ers

hip

Images of leadership

What is a leader/leadership? One word/phrase responses:

Being in front of the followers

A facilitator of group objectives

A consensus builder

A guide

A coach

A vision caster

The boss

The bridge builder

The Changing Definition of LeadershipAccording to Page (2009), the first modern use of the

word leadership came from John Wesley in 1742 “to describe how his mother, Suzanne Wesley, organized an hourly timetable for activities for each of her 17 children” (p. 17).

In 1768 the first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica under the word “lead” were the instructions to look under chemistry. So while there have always been leaders, they were referred to by their positions as kings, generals, presidents, etc. (Page, 2009).

The Changing Definition of LeadershipPage (2009) cites the work of Ciulla (1995) and Rost and Baker (2000) to illustrate the changing definitions of leader.

1920’s “[Leadership is] the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation.”

1930’s “Leadership is a process in which the activities of many are organized to move in a specific direction by one.”

1940’s “Leadership is the result of an ability to persuade or direct men, apart from the prestige or power that comes form offices or external circumstance.”

The Changing Definition of Leadership1950’s “[Leadership is what leaders do in groups.]

The leader’s authority is spontaneously accorded to him by his fellow group members.”

1960’s “[Leadership is] acts by a person which influence other persons in a shared direction.”

1970’s “Leadership is defined in terms of discretionary influence. Discretionary influence refers to those leaders behaviors under control of the leader which may vary from individual to individual.

The Changing Definition of Leadership1980’s “Regardless of the complexities involved in the

study of leadership, its meaning is relatively simple. Leadership means to inspire others to undertake some form of purposeful action as determined by the leader.”

1990’s “Leadership is an influence relationship between leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes.

2000’s “Leadership in the post-industrial world can be defined as an influence relationship among leaders and collaborators who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes, and not exclusively in organizational goals.” (pp. 18-19)

The History of Leadership Focus

How long has leadership been around?

How long has the study of leadership been around?

“Egyptian rulers, Greek heroes, and biblical patriarchs all have one thing in common—leadership” (1).

Stone, A. G., & Patterson, K. (2005). The history of leadership focus. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable. Virginia Beach, VA: Regent University, http://www.regent.edu/acad/sls/publications/conference_proceedings/ servant_leadership_roundtable/2005/pdf/stone_history.pdf

Is leadership important? Don Page (2009)states:

“Good leadership is the most important factor in contributing to an organization’s success and longevity” (p. 17).

Do you agree with this statement? Why?

What is “good leadership”? (See myths of leadership, p.20)

What is organizational “success”?

Page, Don. (2009). Servant empowered leadership: A hands-on guide to transforming you and your organization. Langley, BC, Canada: Power to Change.

The History of Leadership Focus

The earliest leadership studies dealt with leadership traits. Usually the larger than life leaders were identified and then efforts were made to identify the leadership traits that all great leaders had in common.

Eventually, it was discovered that no qualitative evidence could be found that proved that all great leaders shared the same traits.

The History of Leadership FocusEarly Leader Studies:

With the rise of the Industrial Revolution some began to view human interaction in mechanistic terms.

Max Weber, a German sociologist, “observed the parallels between the mechanization of industry and the proliferation of bureaucratic forms of organization” (2).

Stone, A. G., & Patterson, K. (2005).


Henri Fayol and F. W. Mooney “devoted their energies to identifying methods through which this kind of organizational structure could be achieved” (2)

The goal was to maximize the efficiency of the bureaucracy for the benefit of the organization.



Fredrick Taylor took the study of bureaucracy and structure to another level and introduced “Scientific Management” to the world.

“Taylor fused the perspective of an engineer into management with a strong emphasis on control . . . efficiency, quantification, predictability, and de-skilled jobs. He initiated time-and-motion studies to . . . achieve the highest level of efficiency possible” (2).



What do you see a potential pitfalls to this approach to leadership?

“Although mechanistic organizations proved productive . . . Emerging theorists encouraged leaders to recognize that humans are not machines and could not be treated as such” (2)


The History of Leadership FocusHawthorne Studies:

Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne studies focused on the effect of the work situation on leaders and followers. They found that the reactions of other individuals to their work, influenced workers as much as the structure of the organization.

(Study of lighting variations in the workplace.)


The History of Leadership FocusMaslow’s Hierarchy of Needs:

In 1959 Maslow proposed that productivity is tied to the motivation of the worker to produce.

Why was this was an important concept for leadership?

Maslow proposed a “hierarchy of needs,” which could be and should be employed by leaders in developing work strategies for employees.


Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

The History of Leadership FocusHerzberg’s Dual Factor Theory (HDF):

Maslow’s theory resulted in a redirection of leadership focus toward workers needs. The HDF theory furthered Maslow’s work “by providing insights into the goals and incentives that tend to satisfy a worker’s needs” (2)

Herzberg concluded that people have two categories of needs: Hygiene and Motivators.

The two needs should be met simultaneously.

Stone, A. G., & Patterson, K. (2005). The history of leadership focus. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable. Virginia Beach, VA: Regent University, http://www.regent.edu/acad/sls/publications/conference_proceedings/ servant_leadership_roundtable/2005/pdf/stone_history.pdf

Herzberg’s Dual Factor Theory

http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_herzberg_two_factor_theory.html

Typical Hygiene Factors Typical Motivation Factors

• Working conditions• Quality of supervision• Salary• Security• Company• Job• Company policies and administration• Interpersonal relations

• Achievement• Recognition for achievement• Responsibility for task• Interest in the job• Advancement to higher level tasks• Growth



Combining the hygiene and motivation factors in four scenario’s:

• High Hygiene+High Motivation: The ideal situation where employees are highly motivated and have few complaints.

• High Hygiene+Low Motivation: Employees have few complaints but are not highly motivated.

• Low Hygiene+High Motivation: Employees are motivated but have a lot of complaints. A situation where the job is exciting and challenging but salaries and work conditions are not up to par.

• Low Hygiene+Low Motivation: The worst situation. Unmotivated employees with lots of complaints.

The Shift in FocusThe shift in focus in leadership studies.

Stone and Patterson argue that by the 1930’s “leader focus had moved to understanding the relationship between a leader’s actions and the follower’s satisfaction and productivity. Theorists began to consider behavioral concepts in their analysis of organizational leadership” (3).


McGregor (1960)McGregor believed that the management practices represented by a hierarchical, pyramid, organizational structure represent a view of workers that he termed Theory X.

Managers who hold a Theory X view of workers assume that workers prefer to be directed, are not interested in taking responsibility, and want safety above all else. Therefore structure includes control and close supervision of employees (3).


McGregor (1960)McGregor believed that management needed practices based on a more accurate understanding of human nature and motivation.

He proposed the Theory Y view of workers which proposed that individuals are not, by nature, lazy and unreliable. People can be self-directed and creative at work if properly motivated. An essential task of management is to unleash this potential (3).


McGregor (1960)

http://accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_03_mcgregor.html

Situational/Contingency Theory

Researchers defining the situational/contingency theory of leadership acknowledged that leaders id more than simply “act”—they often had to “react” to specific situations, and thus, the situational/contingency theory of leadership evolved.


Hersey and Blanchard (1996)Situational Leadership, proposed by Hersey and Blanchard advocated that the leader’s use of differing leadership behaviors were dependent upon two interrelated maturity factors: (a) Job maturity—relevant task and technical knowledge and skills, and (b) Psychological maturity—the subordinate’s level of self-confidence and self-respect (Yukl, 1998)

An employee with a high level of job and psychological maturity requires little supervision; while an employee who has a low level of job and psychological maturity requires hands-on attention (5).


Hersey and Blanchard (1996)

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/styles/situational_leadership_hersey_blanchard.htm

Fielder’s Contingency TheoryFielder’s contingency theory posited that leader effectiveness is determined not by the leader’s ability to adapt to the situation, but by the ability to choose the right leader for the situation.

Some leaders are Simply better for specific situations than others and the situation determines the identified leaders’ success, though leaders would need to be capable of understanding when they were not right for the situation and remove themselves–a task of humility (5).


Transactional LeadershipResearch in the 1990’s revealed that many leaders engage in transactional leadership models:

Focuses on managing status quo.

Focuses on specific interactions between leaders and followers.

Focuses on control not adaptation.

Leadership is an exchange of rewards for employees’ compliance.

Does not focus on identifying the organization’s goals and how employees can work toward aligning goals.


Transformational LeadershipFurther research revealed power derived from a leader’s position in a hierarchical structure is becoming obsolete.

In contrast transformational leaders look at where the organization should be and how to handle internal an external change and employee needs to reach that goal.

Burns (1978) says that the transformational leader model asks followers to transcend their own self-interests for the good of the group, organization, or society.


Transformational LeadershipBass & Avolio (1990) developed Burn’s ideas and posited the formal concept of transformational leadership.

Transformational leadership is concerned more about progress and development.

Transformational leadership enhances the effects of transactional leadership on followers.

Followers are empowered to accomplish organizational objectives.

Transformational leaders inspire followers to higher levels of performance for the sake of the organization.


Transformational LeadershipTransformational leaders transform the personal values of followers to support the vision and goals of the organization by fostering a climate of trust and shared visions.

According to Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino (1991) there are four primary behaviors of transformational leaders:

1. idealized influence (charismatic influence),

2. inspirational motivation,

3. intellectual stimulation, and

4. individualized consideration.


Transformational LeadershipFUNCTIONAL ATTRIBUTES ACCOMPANYING ATTRIBUES

1) Idealized Influence/Charisma 1) Vision2) Trust3) Respect

4) Risk-Sharing5) Integrity

2) Inspirational Motivation 6) Modeling

7) Commitment to Goals8) Communication

9) Enthusiasm

3) Intellectual Simulation 10) Rationality

4) Individualized Consideration 11) Problem-Solving

12) Personal Attention13) Mentoring

14) Listening15) Empowering

Stone, A. G., & Patterson, K. (2005), p. 10.

Transformational Leadership


Bennis & Nanus (1985) Bass (1985) Kouzes & Posner (1987)

Attention through Vision Charisma Challenging the process

Meaning throughcommunication

Inspiration Inspiring a shared vision

Trust through positioning Intellectual stimulation Enabling others to act

Deployment of self Individualizedconsideration

Modeling the way

Encouraging the heart

Transformational leadership strategies and characteristics

Transformational and Servant Leadership


Both are high-order evolutions in leadership paradigms.

Both emphasize a high concern for people and production.

Servant leadership is a logical extension of transformational leadership. How do they differ?

Servant leaders do not have an affinity for an abstract organization; rather, they value people who constitute the organization.

Primary difference is the leader’s focus. The focus of the servant leader is on service to their followers.

Servant leaders rely on service rather than power.

Servant Leadership Robert Greenleaf coined the term “servant-leader” in a

1970 essay. Most would consider him the “father” of the servant-leader model.

We will explore “Servant Leadership” in more detail in week 5”

The shift in leadership focus is reflected in the work by Jim Collins, Good to Great (2001).

Leadership study history

Education

Transcript of Leadership study history