SBenegaL

Category: Leadership

  • Emotional Intelligence

    In the last byte, we looked at Charismatic Leadership. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on emerging issues in Leadership, specifically: Emotional Intelligence.
     
    Emotional Intelligence is important for leaders to be effective. Emotional Intelligence refers to the ability of an individual’s to recognize and manage emotions of one and in others. Emotional Intelligence is equally if not more important than Intelligence or technical skills of a leader.
     
    Emotional intelligence is assumed to be composed of the following competencies:
    1. Self-awareness
    2. Empathy
    3. Adaptability
    4. Self-confidence.
    It is common to develop emotional intelligence as one grows old, but however it could be learnt.

    Emotional Intelligence affects the way leaders make decisions. In conditions of higher stress, leaders with higher emotional intelligence tend to keep their cool and make better decisions, while those leaders with lower emotional intelligence make poor decisions and lose their effectiveness.

  • Situational Leadership Model 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion about the situational leadership model. We continue this discussion in today’s byte.

    The model uses two dimensions of leadership behavior that were used in the Ohio studies – task oriented and relationship oriented. Follower readiness is determined by the four levels indicated.

    According to the model, a leader shout use a telling style (s1) when a follower is unable and unwilling to do a certain tasks – instructions and monitoring are crucial here. When a follower is unable but willing and confident of doing the task – in such a case the leader can use a selling style (s2). In case a follower is able to complete a task but may be unwilling or insecure of doing so, then a participatory style (s3) might be suited. In case the follower is able and willing, the leader could use delegating style (s4).

    A key limitation of this model is the absence of a central hypothesis that could be tested, which would make it a more valid, reliable theory of leadership.  However, given its intuitive appeal, this model is widely used an accepted in corporative training and development.

  • Situational Leadership Model

    In the last byte, we looked at the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model of Normative Decision moving. In today’s byte, we move ahead to discuss about the Situational Leadership Model.

    The situational leadership model was developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard and suggests that leader’s behavior should be adjusted to the maturity level of the followers.
    We could simply visualize the model in the diagram below:

  • Path-Goal Theory 3

    In the last byte, we looked at which of the leadership style would be appropriate according to the Path-Goal Theory, based on the follower’s aspiration. In today’s byte, we continue the discussion further.

    In addition to the consideration that the leader should provide to the follower in deciding his/her leader behavior; the work environment is also to be included. The workplace characteristics like – task structure, work group, authority system; combined with the follower characteristics like – ability level, authoritarianism, locus of control; are to be considered in adopting a leadership behavior.
     
    An example would help make this point clear – If the followers are highly trained professionals, and the task is difficult, yet achievable one – an achievement oriented style adopted by the leader would be more appropriate than any of the other ones.
     
    Given that this theory assumes that leaders adapt their behavior and style to fit the characteristics of their follower and the environment in which they work – it is evident that there would be a lot of variety to be taken note of. Researchers today are focusing on what style works best in specific situations by including factors like – organization size, the leader style – visionary/transactional etc  to be able to help strengthen the theory.

  • Path-Goal Theory 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion on the Path-Goal Theory of Leadership. We continue the discussion further in today’s byte. 

    If we carefully observe the path-goal theory, we note that Robert House has based the leadership effectiveness theory on the Expectancy theory of Motivation. The basic role of the leader is thus, to clear the follower’s path to the goal and he/she may use one of the four leadership behavior styles as appropriate – with the primary motive of helping followers clarify the path that paths that lead them to work and personal goals.
     
    The leader selects of the four leadership behavior style as shown, one that is most helpful to the follower at a given time.
    1. Directive style is used when the leader must give specific guidance about work tasks, schedule work and let followers know what is expected
    2. Supportive style is used when the leader needs to show concern for the follower’s wellbeing and social status
    3. The Participative Style is used when the leader must engage in joint decision-making activities with followers.
    4. Achievement oriented style would be used when the leader must set a challenging goal for followers and show a strong confidence in them.

  • Path-Goal Theory

    In the last byte, we discussed about the leader’s effectiveness based on the situation. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on The Path-Goal Theory proposed by Robert House.
     
    We could better understand the Path-Goal Theory by looking at the key concepts shown in the diagram below:

  • Contingency Theories of Leadership 3

    In the last byte, we looked at the concept of Least Preferred Coworker and the scale used. In today’s byte, we look at the situations factor’s influence in Fiedler’s Contingency Theory.

    In the beginning of our discussion on Fielder’s Contingency Theory, we had mentioned that there are three dimensions that influence the leader’s style of leadership. These are:
    1. Task Structure: The degree of clarity, or ambiguity, in the work activities assigned to the group. This includes the number and clarity of rules and regulations and procedures for getting the work done.
    2. Position Power: The authority associated with the leader’s formal position in the organization. This includes the leader’s legitimate authority to evaluate and reward performance, punish errors, and demote group members.
    3. Leader-Member Relations: The quality of interpersonal relationships among a leader and the graph members. The quality of leader-member relationships is measured by the Group-Atmosphere Scale, composed of nine eight-point bipolar adjective sets.
    A favorable leadership situation is one with a structured task for the work group, strong position power for the leader, and a good leader-member relation. An unfavorable leadership situation is one with an unstructured task, weak position power for the leader and a moderately poor leader-member relationship. Between these two extremes, the leadership situation has varying degrees of moderate favorableness for the leader.

  • Contingency Theories of Leadership 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion on Fiedler’s Contingency Theory. In today’s byte, we explore it a bit deeper in this attempt.

    Fiedler classifies leaders using the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Scale. This scale asks the leader to describe the least preferred coworker using a sixteen eight point scale bipolar adjective sets. The leader would mark the bank that is most descriptive of the least preferred coworker.

    The leaders are then classified – one who describes their least preferred coworker in positive terms (ex: pleasant, efficient, cheerful etc) is classified as high LPC, or relationship oriented; and those who describe their least preferred coworker in negative terms (ex: unpleasant, inefficient, gloomy etc) are said to be having a low LPC, or task-oriented, leaders.

    Note that, this technique is a projective technique which asks a leader to think about the person whom he or she can work least well (the least preferred coworker or LPC). This itself makes the score controversial element of the theory as the projective technique would have an extremely low measurement reliability

  • Contingency Theories of Leadership

    In the last byte, we looked at a comparison between the leadership grid and the Ohio State Research. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on the Contingency Theories of Leadership.

    The roots of Contingency Theory of Leadership arises from the belief that leadership style must be appropriate to a particular situation. The way one could interpret these theories is – “IF the situation is ____, then the appropriate leadership behavior is _____ “. We shall begin our discussion on these theories with an introduction to Fiedler’s Contingency Theory in this byte and continue this further.

    Fiedler’s Contingency Theory assumes that leaders are either task-oriented or relationship oriented, depending on how the leaders obtain their major gratification. The theory thus, proposes the fit between the leader’s need structure and the favorableness of the leader’s situation determine the team’s effectiveness in work accomplishment.

    Task-oriented leaders are primarily gratified by accomplishing tasks and getting work done, while relationship-oriented leaders are primarily gratified by developing good, comfortable interpersonal relationships. Thus, the effectiveness of the type of leaders depends on the favorableness of the situation.
    The favorableness of the situation has three components:
    • Leader’s position power.
    • Structure of the team’s task
    • Quality of the leader-follower relationship.

  • Leadership: Michigan Studies

    In the last byte, we looked at the Ohio State studies and classified leadership styles. In today’s byte, we look at another attempt to classify the leadership behavior – the Michigan Studies
    Given the implications that leadership has on the emotional atmosphere, the Michigan studies identified two styles of leadership – employee oriented and production oriented.
    A production-oriented style leads to a work environment characterized by constant influence attempts on the part of the leader, either through direct, close supervision or through the use of many written unwritten rules and regulations for behavior. The emphasis is on getting the work done.
    An employee oriented leadership style leads to a work environment that focused on relationships. The leader in these situations would avoid a lot of direct or close supervision and establishes fewer written or unwritten rules and regulations for behavior. These leaders have a higher concern for people and their needs.
    Looking back at all the three classifications, one could observe that there has been two broad dimensions emphasized – one focusing and tasks and the other on people!