LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

→ 4.2.1 TRADITIONAL AND MODERN THEORIES  OF LEADERSHIP: (Universalist theories, behavioural theories, Heifetz  principles) 

Universalist Theories:  

• Great person theory: (Thomas Carlyle 1840) - States leaders are born with  certain traits that enable them to rise to power and lead according to instincts.  The greatest leader will arise when there is the greatest need.  

• Charismatic leadership theory: Below are the key traits of charismatic leaders: 1. Charisma: They possess the ability to attract and influence followers. 2. Popularity: They can build relationships and connections with others. 3. Environmental Sensitivity: They are adept at identifying threats, risks, and  opportunities in their surroundings. 

4. Communication Skills: They inspire others by effectively sharing their vision. 5. Respected and Adored: Followers hold them in high esteem and willingly follow  their guidance. 

6. High-Performance Standards: They set demanding benchmarks for both  themselves and others. 

• Transformational Leadership Theory: This is the ability to produce a significant  change in a situation. A Transformational leader motivates and energizes their  followers to reach goals by focusing on their needs. They inspire positive change,  fostering a sense of individual and group responsibility. By linking followers'  identities with the organization, they boost motivation and performance.  

Behavioural Theories of Leadership:  

Behavioural theories of leadership emphasize specific behaviours exhibited by  leaders rather than inherent personal qualities. 

• Researchers at Ohio State University, such as STOGDILL & COONS (1957), analysed data from various studies to identify over 100 different leader  behaviours. These behaviours were categorized into two main types: 

1. Initiating structure: This category involves tasks such as allocating  responsibilities, setting goals, establishing deadlines, and ensuring  standards are met.

2. Consideration: Leaders demonstrating consideration exhibit genuine  concern for workers' feelings, establish rapport, show trust and  

respect, listen to workers, and aim to boost self-confidence. 

• Similarly, studies at the University of Michigan identified two main types of leader  behaviours: 

1. Task-oriented behaviours: These behaviours focus on task completion,  including setting targets, supervising progress, and maintaining standards,  aligning with the concept of initiating structure. 

2. Relationship-oriented behaviours: Leaders in this category focus on the well being of the workforce, examining and understanding interpersonal  relationships among workers and between workers and managers, which  parallels the consideration aspect of leadership behaviour. 

Adaptive Challenges Heifetz Principles (2009):  

They define leadership as the art of mobilizing people in an organization to tackle tough  issues adapt and thrive.  

It states that leadership has to change instead of providing solutions the leader should  shift responsibility for change TO THE WORKFORCE. This may be difficult for some  employees as they would need to take on new roles and learn skills. The role of an  adaptive leader is to allow disorientation, conflict, and challenge to create a business  that can SURVIVE.  

Heifetz et al offer 6 principles of an adaptive leader.  

1. Get on the balcony: the leader needs to see the whole picture and view the  organisation as if they were observing from above.  

2. Identify the adaptive change: they need to see the nature and extent of change. 3. Regulate Distress: change will be scary for all stakeholders; this cannot be  avoided but it can be managed so that it's motivating and not overwhelming. 4. Maintain disciplined attention: the leader should be open to contrasting points of  view and avoid covering up issues that are disturbing or difficult. 

5. Give work back to the people: encouraging employees to use their expertise to  solve problems. It acknowledges that this shift may be difficult for those used to  traditional management but it’s essential to improve organizational potential. 

6. Protect voices of leadership from below: Traditional leadership stifles dissent,  while adaptive leadership values diverse perspectives to anticipate and tackle  challenges. 

EVALUATION OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP: 

Strengths: 1. Ohio State Uni work and Uni of Michigan bring together huge amounts of  data from a wide range of org. and individuals, making it highly generalisable

Weaknesses: 1. The Heifetz model lacks empirical research studies so there is a lack of  evidence, and debatable whether it's generalisable/valid and even if it can be applied to  real life. 

Issues and Debates: 1. Nature vs Nurture: Great person theory ASSUMES that  leadership comes from being born with certain traits (no genetic or biological evidence  to support this theory) 2. Application to everyday life: Traditional, modern, behaviourist  and adaptive theories of leadership theories have been applied within organisations all  over the world. 3. Individual and Situational: Heifetz's principles understand that  workplaces are dynamic and often changing with new problems arising. 4. 

→ 4.2.2 LEADERSHIP STYLE: (Muczyk and Reimann four styles,  Scoullers levels of leadership, Leadership and gender) 

Muczyk and Reimann’s Four Styles of Leadership (1987): 

Autocratic Leadership: behaviour style in which the leader controls all the decisions  with no input or help from others. 

Democratic Leadership: behaviour style in which the leader includes employees/groups in the decision-making process. 

Directive: behaviour style with a high amount of leader direction. 

Permissive: behaviour style with a low amount of leader direction. 

Scullers levels of leadership (2011):  

Scouller proposes the 3P model of leadership, emphasizing three key elements: public,  private, and personal leadership. Public leadership involves influencing groups, while  Private leadership focuses on individuals within a team. Personal leadership encompasses the psychological and ethical development of a leader, including their  skills, beliefs, and presence. Scouller highlights personal leadership as the most influential level, likening its impact to ripples spreading from a pebble dropped in a  pond. Developing personal leadership involves enhancing technical skills, cultivating the  right attitude toward others, and mastering psychological aspects. 

Leadership Style and Gender: 

Researchers are interested in the differences between males' and females’ leadership  styles and the effect of those styles. 

KEY STUDY CUADRADO ET AL. (2008) – WOMENS ACCESS TO  MANAGERIAL POSITIONS AND LEADERSHIP STYLES / GENDER.:C

Aim	1- The study aimed to investigate how the gender of leaders and  their use of stereotypical or non-stereotypical leadership styles  affect work evaluations. 2- It also sought to determine if the  evaluator's gender influenced evaluations.
Hypothesis	Four hypotheses were tested:  1. Female leaders using stereotypically masculine  behaviours will receive less favourable evaluations than  male leaders.  2. Male leaders using stereotypically feminine behaviours will not receive less favourable evaluations than female  leaders.  3. Female leaders will receive less favourable evaluations  from male evaluators compared to female evaluators. 4. Male leaders will receive similar evaluations from both  male and female evaluators.
Main Theories Explained	The "glass ceiling effect," is an invisible barrier preventing  women's advancement, this is a key focus. Furthermore, gender  disparity in leadership positions is particularly evident in  organizations like the UK National Health Service (NHS), where  women make up a majority of the workforce but only 37% hold  senior roles. Women tend to use less effective leadership styles  or risk facing prejudice if they adopt stereotypically male  behaviours. This study explores how women are evaluated less  favourably when they exhibit autocratic and task-oriented styles  typically associated with men.
Sample	136 psychology students   From the open university of Spain  53% female – mean age 27

	47% male – mean age 29
Method   (Research method & design)	Laboratory experiment   Independent groups design   Independent variable – 1- sex of leader and 2- sex of evaluator  (female or male) 3- leadership style (female-stereotypical or  male-stereotypical).  Dependant variables: adjective list, leadership efficacy: the  ability of a leader to produce a desired outcome and leadership  capacity: the attitude and knowledge required for effective  leadership.  The anonymous questionnaire used, a 7-point Likert scale with  1= never applicable to the leader, 7= always applicable to the leader.
Procedure	A pilot study using 40 participants was carried out before the  main study to test all aspects of the investigation. Participants  were tasked with evaluating a supervisor from an emergency  medical service. Depending on their assigned experimental  condition, participants assessed either a male or female  supervisor who had been in their role for a trial period. They  read a description of the supervisor's behaviour and completed  an anonymous questionnaire to evaluate their work. The  description varied based on the leader's gender (male "Carlos"  or female "Lucia") and leadership style (stereotypically  masculine/autocratic or stereotypically feminine/democratic),  with four different versions presented.  After reading the narrative, participants completed an  anonymous questionnaire to aid in the evaluation process. The  questionnaire included several measures: 1. Participants  rated the supervisor using a seven-point scale based on  fourteen adjectives, seven positive (e.g., intelligent, honest) and  seven negatives (e.g., careless, bossy). 2. The supervisor's  leadership capacity was assessed using a seven-point scale  with four items, including evaluations of their general leadership  capacity and competence as a supervisor. 3. Leadership  effectiveness was measured with a seven-point scale and five  items, including evaluations of the supervisor's achievement and  performance in their role.
Results	• Contrary to expectations, supervisors using a   stereotypically feminine leadership style were favoured over those using a stereotypically masculine style by both  male and female evaluators.

	• The democratic, feminine leadership style received higher  scores across measures of adjective ratings, leadership  capacity, and performance efficacy for both male and  female leaders.  • There were no statistically significant differences in  ratings based on the gender of the evaluator or the  gender of the leader.
Conclusions	- Female leaders do not face less favourable evaluations  compared to males when employing stereotypically male  leadership styles.  - There is no bias from males towards leaders of their sex. - Stereotypically female leadership styles are valued more than  stereotypically masculine styles in contemporary organizations. - Autocratic, stereotypically masculine leadership is evaluated  less favourably than democratic, stereotypically feminine  leadership by both male and female evaluators, potentially  reflecting a shift in organizational preferences towards more  collaborative and inclusive leadership approaches.
Strengths	• Quantitative data collection through rating scales  enhances the objectivity and reliability of measurements. • Standardized procedure ensures consistency across  participants, aiding replication and reliability of the study. • Lab Experiment means extraneous variables and more controls increase internal validity and validity overall
Weaknesses	• The use of a narrative task may have mundane realism and fail to capture real-life workplace dynamics.  • The sample consisting of psychology students from one  university in Spain may limit generalizability due to  cultural and demographic biases.  • The study lacks ecological validity as it does not reflect  real-world workplace evaluation processes.  • The reliance on self-report measures may limit the study's  reliability due to social desirability bias, participants may  answer in a way they deem is the desired answer, and  psychology students are smart enough to develop  demand characteristics.  • The study's sample consisting mainly of young  psychology students may not accurately represent the  wider population and may introduce bias into the results.

Issues and Debates

• Application to everyday life: The study's findings suggest  practical implications for organizations, highlighting the  value of feminine leadership styles.c  • Idiographic versus nomothetic: The study takes a  nomothetic approach, focusing on general patterns, but  lacks detailed insights into individual reasons behind  evaluations.  • Reductionism versus holism: The study's approach to  breaking down complex behaviour into rating scales and  adjectives is reductionist, limiting insight into individual  motivations.

EVALUATION OF LEADERSHIP STYLES: 

Strengths: 1. Standardized questionnaires for both Muczyk and Scouller increase reliability. 2. The theory suggests that to be an effective theory you need to consider  cultural aspects of leadership and that autocracy and directive leadership may be more applicable to non-American cultures than democratic leadership. 

Weaknesses: Questionnaire validity is dependent on how accurately leaders and  followers can assess their behaviour; they both can also be influenced by social  desirability bias. 2. Scoullers three levels cannot be tested since leadership presence is  not a common personality characteristic, the clear basis of quantitative measurement of  the 3PS is vague and unscientific. 3. Scoullers work focuses on traditional Western values and work structures that influence aspects like self-mastery, appraisal, and goal  setting. However, these may not apply universally across all cultures and types of work. 

Issues and Debates: Individual and Situational: Muczyk consider the relationship  between leader and situation directly, so they look at both factors making leadership  styles effective in different situations.  

Nature vs. Nurture: The 3P Model by Scouller is nurture, leadership presence cannot be  defined by common predetermined qualities or behaviours.  

Application to real life: Muczyk and Reimann's contributions to organizations are very  valuable as they emphasize the importance of matching leadership styles to the  situation and groups, which is important in decision-making and implementation of  leadership.  

→ 4.2.3 LEADERS AND FOLLOWERS: (Leadership  practices, Kelleys (1988) followership) 

Leadership Practices Inventory – Kouzes and Posner (1987) 

Kouzes and Posner argue leadership is a measurable, learnable, and teachable set of  behaviours. So, they developed the Leadership practice inventory (LPI) to measure the  extent to which an individual engages in each of the 5 exemplary examples of  leadership that they established through research based on thousands of case studies,  a large number of interviews and millions of survey questionnaires. 

Kouzes and Posner identified five key practices of exemplary leadership: 

1. Model the Way: Leaders should set an example, be clear about their beliefs, remain  honest and humble, and understand the importance of teamwork. 

2. Inspire a Shared Vision: Effective leaders have a vision for the future and inspire  others to share that vision. They are forward-looking and credible. 

3. Challenge the Process: Leaders actively seek opportunities, take risks, and  experiment. They challenge the status quo and are not afraid of failure. 4. Enable Others to Act: This involves fostering collaboration, empowering others to  make decisions, and creating trustworthy relationships within the team. 5. Encourage the Heart: Leadership isn't just about intellect but also about emotion.  Leaders recognize and celebrate the accomplishments of others, inspiring them through  recognition and rewards. 

Kouzes and Posner developed the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) to measure  these practices. It consists of two parts: the LPI self, completed by the leader, and the  LPI observer, completed by up to 10 others. Both versions comprise 30 questions, each  focusing on the five practices, rated on a ten-point scale. 

Followership – Kelley (1988): 

The outcome of a group's endeavours is not entirely based on how good the leader is; it  also relies on the followers' ability to follow effectively. 

Kelley identified two dimensions that elucidate followership: independent critical thinking  and the degree of activity. Independent critical thinkers are discerning and questioning  their surroundings, while the active-passive dimension distinguishes those who wait for  direction from those who proactively pursue organizational goals. 

This framework yields five follower styles: 

1. The Sheep: Passive and reliant on external motivation, they perform tasks without  initiative or critical thinking. 

2. The Yes-People: Committed and conformist, they support the leader without  questioning decisions and defend them against opposition. 

3. The Survivors: Adapt to changes and avoid controversy, waiting for majority support  before taking a stand

4. The Alienated Followers: Negative and critical, they question the leader's decisions  but often remain passive. 

5. The Effective Followers: Positive, active, and independent thinkers who evaluate  decisions before accepting them, capable of thriving even without direct leadership. 

Kelley talked about what makes a good follower. said there are four important things: 1. Self-Management: This means being able to think for yourself, work on your own, and  control what you do. 

2. Commitment: It's like being dedicated to what the group or organization is trying to  do. This keeps you motivated and excited about the goals. 

3. Competence: This is about having the skills needed to get things done. It's like being  really good at what you do and always trying to get better. 

4. Courage: This is about sticking to your beliefs and doing what's right, even when it's  hard or when others might not agree. It's about being honest and loyal. 

EVALUATION OF LEADER AND FOLLOWERS: 

Strengths: 1. The Likert 10-point scale allows for easy analysis since it uses quantitative data, which is more objective and not subject to experimenter bias and therefore is more reliable. 2. Kouzes and Posner (1993) involved 2876 managers and observers  from a wide variety of organisations; the results did not show gender bias, there were no  significant signs of social desirability, and the LPI is applicable across organisations. 3.  Kelley has research evidence to support idea of exemplary followership leading to high  performance. FAVARA (2009) studied 175 workers in an org. using questionnaires and  found that there was a positive correlation in job satisfaction and performance with  exemplary leadership. 

Weaknesses: 1. Psychometric test usage in Kouzes and Posner may be subject to  social desirability bias and also exaggeration and lying. Therefore, the results of the  study do not measure the practices accurately, lowering the validity of the measure. 

Issues and Debates: Cultural differences: Kouzes and Posner's Leadership Practice  Inventory (LPI) may overlook cultural differences, limiting its generalizability, Studies  have shown significant score differences in the LPI across cultures, indicating a  weakness in its ability to generalize beyond specific cultural contexts. Idiographic vs. Nomothetic: LPI follows a nomothetic approach but initially uses both  qualitative and quantitative methods.  

Application to real life: Organizations can use the LPI to identify areas for leadership  improvement, benefiting both leaders and followers. Kelleys followership theory shows  organisations what an effective follower is and how it can be obtained which is very  useful for increasing morale and productivity.