Leadership Theory

peachewsrenm_17

03CH_Weiss_Leadership_2e.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Operations Management homework help >Leadership Theory

3 Trait and Personality Factors

Learning Outcomes

After completing this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Explain how traits and personality influence leadership behavior.

2. Identify the Big Five personality characteristics and explain how they relate to leadership.

3. Describe emotional intelligence and how this theory relates to leadership.

4. Explain how narcissism and Machiavellianism can derail leaders.

5. Describe how the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator is used to understand leadership behaviors.

6. Describe entrepreneurial leadership and decision making. Explain why “intrapreneurship” is an important leadership process.

iStock/Thinkstock

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 49 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Leadership theory has evolved over time, often paralleling and reflecting changes in our eco- nomic structure and workplace environments. In more stable preindustrial times of the 19th century when our society was largely agrarian, early leadership scholars were in search of specific traits, or distinguishing qualities or characteristics of a person’s nature, that defined a successful leader. The pursuit of a specific set of traits became known as the “Great man” theory of leadership—meaning that there was a definitive set of qualities that made a person an exceptional leader.

Personality theory, that is, “individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feel- ing and behaving” (American Psychological Association, 2015), also emerged in the 19th cen- tury, but it was popularized with the development of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in 1943, when employers started to become more selective about who they hired and why. By the 1940s, the work environment was still stable but organizations grew in size, bureaucra- cies emerged, and the position of “manager” and rational planning evolved. Efficiency and predictability were emphasized in the study of leadership and organizations.

From the 1950s through the 1970s, the work environment moved from stable to more com- plex. Leadership theorists turned to the study of behaviors, motivation, and how to match leaders with followers in particular contexts. During the 1960s and 1970s, as organizations continued to change, cross-functional teams and horizontal structures were created. Group processes and contingency theory emerged, that is, the study of leadership styles that “fit” with followers and the work context. But efficiency was still valued and leadership theory focused on transactions (exchanges) between leader and follower, rather than transformations.

From the 1970s through the 1990s, the work environment became increasingly globalized and even more complex and competitive. Leadership studies turned the focus to leaders as transformational, change champions who influenced followers through relationships. In recent decades, leadership theory has further evolved due to the influences of the Internet, information technologies, and an increasingly diverse workforce. Leadership studies began to focus on change, teams, and variations of previous leadership concepts. Now trait and per- sonality theory, behavioral and contingency theory, leader–follower exchanges, and group and team processes are used in conjunction with one another to further our understanding of what makes effective leaders and leadership.

The increased emphasis on stakeholders and stockholders inside and outside of the orga- nization requires a wider range of competencies, thus the emergence of ethical leadership, strategic communication, high-performance cultures, negotiation, conflict management, and always people—individuals, teams, and groups.

So, then, what make a great leader? What distinguishes leaders from others? Are leaders born or made? These are questions we have puzzled over throughout history. In attempt- ing to answer such questions, early theories, as previously discussed, focused on traits and personality characteristics with the hope of finding the “magic ingredients” of leadership. Although certain traits can, according to recent research, predict the emergence and appear- ance of leadership, traits and personality characteristics alone cannot distinguish between effective and ineffective leadership (Robbins & Judge, 2015). However, research has shown that both traits and personality matter with regard to predicting organizational outcomes, such as leader–follower relationships, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, leader- ship promotion and development (Nichols & Cottrell, 2014).

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 50 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.1 Trait Theory

Personality theory, which encompasses trait theory, provides a broader context. Personality is the combination of physical, mental, emotional, and social characteristics and traits. Traits and personality theory, shown in the dimension of leadership in Figure 1.1 (in Chapter 1) are examined more closely in this chapter. We will discuss how leadership can be developed and how certain personality traits can be learned and used to pave the way for leadership prac- tices. As you read, consider your own personality and traits as they relate to your approach to leadership. Or, perhaps consider the personality and traits of leaders you admire and think about how they all fit into the theories presented. Assessments in this chapter provide infor- mation to help you understand your own evolving leadership style and the styles of others. To get started, take the Big Five personality assessment at http://personality-testing.info/tests /BIG5.php. Scroll down to take either the 50-item or the 100-item version. Your results will be explained later in this chapter.

This chapter begins with discussing the trait theory and the personality approach to leader- ship, which today focuses heavily on the Big Five personality traits. We then examine emo- tional intelligence (EQ) and other leadership characteristics related to personality. Finally, we examine the popular Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment that’s commonly used in the workplace. We conclude with a discussion about entrepreneurial leadership and deci- sion making with regard to personality.

3.1 Trait Theory One of the first modern efforts to scientifically study leadership was trait theory. Research- ers in the early 1900s were interested in why certain people became leaders and others did not. They studied military, political, and religious figures—Jesus, Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Napoléon Bonaparte, Joan of Arc, and others—and focused on identifying leadership traits, or innate individual characteristics that might result in a good leader. Their conclusion: Great leaders were born, not made.

The “great man” theory, as it was called, would give rise to what is now known as trait the- ory. Initially it was called into question; researchers examining the early studies noted that although these “great men” did share some characteristics, the theory overall failed to take a leader’s situational context into account (Stogdill, 1948). In other words, people who are leaders in one situation may not be leaders in a different kind of situation. However, Stogdill would later revive the trait approach when he empirically showed that certain traits did sup- port effective leadership across various situations (1974). These traits included dependabil- ity, cooperativeness, assertiveness, initiative, dominance, high energy, self-confidence, stress tolerance, responsibility, achievement orientation, adaptability, cleverness, persuasiveness, organizational and speaking abilities, risk taking, and originality.

Later researchers isolated other traits. Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) found in their qualita- tive studies that task knowledge, confidence, motivation, drive, cognitive ability, and integrity differentiate leaders from nonleaders. Other researchers have found that leaders have certain traits related to social intelligence, that is, the understanding and awareness of their own and others’ emotions, feelings, behaviors, and thoughts, as well as the ability to self-monitor and respond to different situations (Marlowe, 1986; Zaccaro, 2002). More recently, Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (2004) found higher intelligence, reasoning, and verbal and perception

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 51 9/2/15 1:57 PM

http://personality-testing.info/tests/BIG5.php

Section 3.1 Trait Theory

abilities in leaders compared to nonleaders. These researchers caution that leaders who have higher intelligence than their followers may experience problems relating to the followers because of the leaders’ advanced ideas.

Contemporary researchers have argued that optimism, drive, self-confidence, honesty, and integrity are particularly important for effective leadership (Jones, 2005). These particular traits are discussed in more depth here because they are particularly relevant to the leader- ship theories discussed in subsequent chapters.

Optimism refers to having a positive outlook or thinking positively. Optimistic leaders tend to see the good in people and organizations and believe in favorable results. This doesn’t mean optimistic leaders are blind to the negative; they are simply able to see possibilities and seek opportunities. Imagine if Apple® CEO Steve Jobs had stopped at Macintosh computers, or if he had allowed a power struggle with the company’s board to halt his career. (This happened in the 1970s, and Jobs went on to found another company before returning to Apple and spearheading the launch of its vanguard cell phone and tablet.) Stephen McDonnell, founder and CEO of Applegate Farms, the leading producer of organic and natural meats and cheeses is widely quoted as arguing that optimistic attitudes are the most commonly observed char- acteristic in top-level executives. Optimism is a main characteristic of leaders (Daft, 2011). Furthermore, optimistic leaders instill and inspire similar attitudes in others. They demon- strate more self-confidence, believing in themselves and showing more assurance in their own skills, abilities, decisions, and visions. Self-confident, optimistic leaders are not para- lyzed by fear or anxiety and can therefore more readily lead others to face uncertainty and challenging situations.

Drive can be described as determination, motivation, or compulsion that leads to increased effort. Driven leaders seek achievement, show tenacity, and are perceived as ambitious ( Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991). In other words, they work hard. Effective leaders also often tap into their followers’ drive. A management strategy called ROWE—which stands for “results- oriented work environment” and was first introduced at Best Buy—evaluates employees by

Branson: Paul Kane/Getty Images News/Thinkstock; Winfrey: Jason Merritt/ Getty Images Entertainment/Thinkstock

Richard Branson and Oprah Winfrey share entrepreneurial traits. Winfrey is more helping and affiliative; Branson is more fun loving and risk taking.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 52 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.1 Trait Theory

the results they produce, not the schedules they keep. Google cofounder and CEO Larry Page supports a “20% program,” in which professional engineers can use 20% of their time to cre- ate and team up on projects they like. Such approaches involve giving “people autonomy over what they’re doing and how they do it, an opportunity to master it and a sense of purpose in doing it in the first place” (Spiers, 2010; see also Pink, 2009).

Honesty can be defined by what it is not: lying, and knowingly and willingly deceiving others. Integrity means wholeness of character; a leader with integrity is integrated and balanced, and acts ethically. A survey of 1,500 managers identified honesty and integrity as the most desired values in leaders.

Honesty, as a dimension related to ethics discussed in chapter 2, is absolutely essential to leadership. After all, if we are willing to follow someone, whether it is into battle or into the boardroom, we first want to assure ourselves that the person is worthy of our trust. We want to know that he or she is being truthful, ethical, and principled. We want to be fully confident in the integrity of our leaders. (Kouzes & Posner, 1993, p. 138–139/2012)

Integrity and honesty are also related to the survival and success of corporations. Bernard Madoff, currently serving a 150-year prison term for $17 billion investor fraud and who in 2014 suffered a heart attack, is a recent business example of dishonesty and greed. Classic examples of corporate scandals—Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, Arthur Andersen, and other pres- tigious firms—at the turn of this century have taught us that honesty counts. Enron—the former energy, commodity, and services company—specifically became synonymous with corporate corruption and greed after executives decided to hide the company’s true financial condition via suspect accounting practices. The company and its former executives paid the consequences: Enron had to divest and sell its North American power utility, gas pipeline assets, and global interests in utilities and power plants, and paid out more than $21.6 billion

to its creditors between 2004 and 2010 (“Enron Creditors Recovery Corp”). Former president Ken Lay and former CEO Jeff Skilling were found guilty on multiple charges, including fraud, making false statements to accoun- tants, and insider trading. Ken Lay died of a heart attack in 2006 before being sentenced to a life term in jail, and as of 2011, Jeff Skilling was still serving a 24-year prison sentence, that was reduced in 2013 by 10 years. However, the fallout extended far beyond those two men: Thousands of employees at Enron and the other firms lost almost all of their pension savings.

Trait theory is based on considerable research and has broad appeal; people like to perceive leaders in terms of cer- tain traits. However, although the traits

Chris Hondros/Getty Images News/Thinkstock

Bernie Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in prison in 2009 for running the biggest fraudulent Ponzi scheme in U.S. history. He lured investors into his investment scheme, taking $65 billion. He was charged with fraud, money laundering, perjury, and theft (Yang, 2014).

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 53 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.2 Personality Approach

discussed here have shown to be associated with leadership, no traits, with the exception of the Big Five discussed in the next section, have been linked to successful organizational out- comes or performance, and it is difficult to predict how leaders with certain traits would be effective in organizational situations. (We will discuss this more in later sections.) However, the trait theory approach does serve a purpose in the workplace. As we will discuss further in the following section on personalities, trait theory provides some insight into what makes a good leader.

3.2 Personality Approach The word personality is often asso- ciated with people who are either popular and well liked or are unpop- ular and not very well liked—that is, we tend to say a person has a “good personality” or not. This oversim- plification of the concept can be misleading. As part of social science and organizational behavior stud- ies, personality is a powerful concept that organizes individual capacities, emotions, and motives (Wang, 2010), and can provide insights into how leaders, followers, and professionals make decisions and influence rela- tionships. It is a useful tool.

Are leaders made or born? There is consensus among scholars that per- sonality is partly hereditary but also developed. Although personality can and does change, it is more changeable

in adolescence according to some researchers (Hampson & Goldberg, 2006). Knowing a per- son’s personality profile does not predict who will be an effective or ineffective leader, but as we discuss in the following sections, there are personality characteristics that do indicate effective, emergent leadership practices. Also, personality theory is another tool and concept you can use to help you better understand yourself as an evolving or current leader as well as understanding the actions and behaviors of leaders around you.

Personality theory provides a broader context of which trait theory is a part. Personality is the combination of physical, mental, emotional, and social characteristics and traits. It can be the way people act and react to others (Robbins & Judge, 2015), and it affects an individual’s perceptions and behaviors. Unlike the great man theory and early research on traits, some personality characteristics have been linked to leadership effectiveness. Leaders benefit by knowing their personality characteristics. First, they can increase their own self-awareness and awareness of others. Research (Palmer, Green, Duncan, & Zarate, 2013), as well as practi- cal experience, shows that leaders’ personality characteristics influence followers. Second,

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Personality is a powerful concept that can provide insights into how leaders, followers, and profession- als make decisions and influence relationships

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 54 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.2 Personality Approach

they can learn to adjust their personal style to accommodate their followers. Finally, they can adapt their communication and personal style to enhance performance. We will examine two personality theories that are among the most popularly used by corporations worldwide and are of interest to current scholars: the Big Five personality model and the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). We will also discuss emotional intelligence. But first let’s start with the dark side of personality.

Dark Side of Personality

In an attempt avoid glorifying the nature of leadership and the personalities of those who lead, scholars have written about the “dark side” of personality. We will point out some of these critiques in different chapters throughout the text, but let’s touch on what the dark side of personality actually means.

Slattery (2009), for example, defines the dark side of leadership as “an ongoing pattern of behaviour exhibited by a leader that results in overall negative organisational outcomes based on the interactions between the leader, follower and the environment. Organisational goals, morale and follower satisfaction are thwarted through the abuse of power and self-interest of the leader” (p. 4). Other authors have referred to the dark side of leaders as “toxic,” “destruc- tive,” “petty tyrants,” “aversive,” “arrogant,” and derailed (Slattery, 2009).

Other scholars, such as Hogan and Hogan (2001), provided 11 dark side personality traits: excitable, skeptical, cautious, reserved, leisurely, bold, mischievous, colorful, imaginative, dili- gent, and dutiful. Ashforth (1994) noted that the signs of dark side leadership also include behaviors such as “self-aggrandisement, belittling followers, lack of consideration for others, a forcing style of conflict,” punishment for no reason, discouraging initiatives, and undermin- ing organizational goals and the well-being of followers (Slattery, 2009, p. 3).

This is all to say that personality is complex. Personal beliefs, values, and motivation, in addi- tion to situational and relational factors, all play a part in helping us understand leadership and how particular personalities manifest themselves. Having a charming personality could compel followers, but we need to be mindful of where it is we’re being led.

The Big Five Personality Characteristics

The Big Five personality characteristics—which have also been referred to as “traits”— are the product of decades of research (Digman, 1990) and have shown the most promis- ing empirical results related to leadership effectiveness. The model condenses 25 years of research into five general characteristics (or factors) that make up personality. Studies confirm that there is a relationship between these characteristics and job performance (Barrick & Mount, 2004; Oh & Berry, 2009). According to this model, any individual’s person- ality you wish to describe is based on the following characteristics:

1. Extraversion: The extent to which a person is outgoing, excitable, sociable, talkative, assertive, and emotionally expressive. Highly extroverted leaders can also exert high-energy, take-charge, determined attitudes and behaviors. Extraversion also relates to dominance, that is, leaders who are assertive, competitive, and have a

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 55 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.2 Personality Approach

take-charge approach to getting things done. Opposite the spectrum of extraversion is introversion—individuals who are more often energized by reflecting through thinking and taking time to observe and process information, and who relate to individuals more comfortably than to large groups. Extraversion has been shown to be the most predictive characteristic of effective emergent leadership (Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002). Note that being too assertive and dominant can also result in decreased leader effectiveness (Ames & Flynn, 2007).

2. Agreeableness: The extent to which a person shows trust, cooperation, compas- sion, kindness, affection, and understanding. Agreeableness is also related to being sensitive, affiliative, and sociable (Jokisarri & Nurmi, 2009), that is, paying attention to others, forming relationships, and being friendly and approachable. This trait is related to emotional intelligence, discussed later in the chapter. Agreeable people are generally more liked than disagreeable individuals, are more “compliant and rule abiding, less likely to get into accidents, and more satisfied in their jobs” (Robbins & Judge, 2015, p. 127). However, agreeable people participate in citizenship behavior, contributing to organizational performance and not showing organizationally devi- ant behavior (Ilies, Fulmer, Spitzmuller, & Johnson, 2009).

3. Conscientiousness: The extent to which a person is thoughtful, goal directed, depend- able, organized, and mindful of details. Conscientiousness and openness, next to extraversion, indicate a strong association to leadership. Because conscientiousness and extraversion are also positively related to leadership self-efficacy (Ng, Ang, & Chan, 2008)—that is, an individual’s belief about her or his ability to produce outcomes—it follows that this personality characteristic, and that of extraversion, are also related to leadership performance (Robbins & Judge, 2015).

4. Neuroticism (Adjustment): The extent to which a person is emotionally unstable, anxious, moody, irritable, less self-confident, and prone to sudden emotional out- bursts. A question for leaders and followers with regard to this dimension is how to manage one’s emotions. Effective management of emotions results in self-control, stability, calmness, and maintaining composure in difficult and crisis situations. Composure and being relaxed is also associated with higher self-confidence, more positive attitudes, and being able to offer constructive and uplifting feedback. At the opposite end of this spectrum, as noted above, is a loss of self-control and self- confidence, symptoms of which often manifest as nervousness and irritability that can lead to negativity, narcissistic behaviors, and even hostility.

5. Openness: The extent to which a person is imaginative, flexible, insightful, and intellectually curious and sensitive. Being open to new experiences encourages creativity, innovation, and the ability to deal with complexity and ambiguity— all are important characteristics needed for change and exploration. A study by Palmer et al. (2013) showed that participants’ personalities who are more extra- verted and open to new experiences “believe Directive Leadership contributed to being an outstanding leader and, conversely, that the more extraverted and open to new experiences the participants, the less they believed Bureaucratic Leadership contributed to outstanding leadership, and the more they believed that Self- Serving Leadership inhibited outstanding leadership” (p. 62). At the same time, those who are more open to experiences may also be more prone to workplace accidents (Clark & Robertson, 2008). The opposite end of the spectrum of open- ness is close-mindedness which indicates inflexibility, not having resilience, and not being able to adapt to change—characteristics that do not contribute to effec- tive leadership influence and performance.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 56 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.3 Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

Big Five Continuum

Another way of understanding the Big Five model is to view the characteristics on a con- tinuum, that is, to what extent and under what conditions are you extraverted or introverted, agreeable or antagonistic, conscientious or lacking integrity and dependability, able or unable to control your emotions, and open or closed to new experiences?

1. Extraversion ................................................................................................................. Introversion 2. Agreeableness ............................................................................................................. Antagonism 3. Conscientiousness........................................................................................ Unscrupulousness 4. Neuroticism/Adjustment ......................................................................... Emotional stability 5. Openness to experience................................................................................ Closed-mindedness

A meta-analysis—an analysis that combines and synthesizes the results of several separate and related studies—of leadership and personality studies between 1967 and 1998 found that four of the traits from the Big Five theory were strongly associated with being an effec- tive leader: in order of strongest effect, extraversion and conscientiousness, openness, and low neuroticism. Studies have also largely supported the idea that the Big Five theory is uni- versally applicable across cultures, despite differences in language, history, religion, political systems, and other cultural features (Paunonen et al., 1996; Triandis & Suh, 2002; Yamagata et al., 2006). As will be discussed in later chapters, culture affects behaviors and values, which in turn can affect how coworkers interact with one another. The Big Five theory has provided evidence for accessing personality characteristics across cultures.

In addition to the assessment source offered earlier, take the brief Five Factor Personality Test (at http://www.personalitytest.org.uk), then reflect on your experiences and personal style at work, at home, and with friends. Do your experiences agree with or differ from your Big Five assessment results? In what ways can this assessment be helpful to you as a devel- oping leader?

3.3 Emotional Intelligence (EQ) Emotional intelligence, abbreviated EI or EQ (as in IQ, only here we are discussing emotional elements of intelligence), is a person’s ability to be self-aware (recognize one’s emotions when experienced), notice emotions in others, and manage emotional cues and information. An emotionally intelligent leader is able to effectively manage oneself and others ( Goleman, 2000) and is further able to use the power of emotional energy to inspire, motivate, under- stand, and improve the morale of organization members and teams. One researcher attributed Abraham Lincoln’s enormous power as a president to emotional intelligence, not to IQ, cha- risma, or political ability (Kauffman & Coutu, 2009). Another study, which examined the suc- cesses and failures of 11 U.S. presidents (from Franklin Roosevelt to Bill Clinton), found that the main characteristic differentiating the successful (e.g., Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Reagan) from the unsuccessful (e.g., Johnson, Carter, and Nixon) was emotional intelligence (Smola & Sutton, 2002). Emotional intelligence can be learned and practiced.

One research study indicated that effective leaders use different components of emotional intelligence. Goleman (2000) grouped these various capabilities into four basic classifications,

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 57 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.3 Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

as shown in Figure 3.1: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management.

Self-Management

Self A

w ar

en es

s B

eh av

io r

Others

• Emotional self-control • Taking initiative • Conscientiousness • Optimism • Trustworthiness • Adaptability

Relationship Management

• Development of others • Bond building • Teamwork and collaboration

Social Awareness

• Empathy • Service orientation • Organizational awareness

Self-Awareness

• Emotional self-awareness • Self-confidence • Accurate self-evaluation

Figure 3.1: Emotional intelligence—four dimensions

Self-Management

Self A

w ar

en es

s B

eh av

io r

Others

• Emotional self-control • Taking initiative • Conscientiousness • Optimism • Trustworthiness • Adaptability

Relationship Management

• Development of others • Bond building • Teamwork and collaboration

Social Awareness

• Empathy • Service orientation • Organizational awareness

Self-Awareness

• Emotional self-awareness • Self-confidence • Accurate self-evaluation

Self-awareness is the foundation for the other three emotional capabilities. When leaders are not self-aware, it is doubtful they can be aware of others. Being self-aware means being able to see and understand your emotions and feelings and how they affect you in your work and private life. As a result, you can accurately evaluate your weaknesses and strengths. You also have more self-confidence and trust in your own instincts, particularly when there are no answers from other sources. A self-aware leader is better able to “see reality” in complex situations and in other people.

Self-management, the second important capability, is the ability to control moods, emo- tions, and desires that can be problematic and disruptive. This doesn’t mean suppressing, avoiding, disguising, or denying these feelings; it means understanding them (Weisinger, 1998). Thus, those around you can be assured that you will be consistently authentic and honest with them—without being an emotional time bomb. You also will be known for honoring your responsibilities and overcoming obstacles easily because you can adapt to different situations without letting your emotions get in the way (Daft, 2011). Leaders who cannot do this can self-destruct professionally. They may offend or blame followers or important partners by projecting their fears and insecurities onto them. They may act immorally and illegally by not controlling their desires or moods. Consider politicians who have had emotional outbursts, committed unethical acts, or been caught lying and conse- quently been pressured to quit because they lost the public’s trust, their legitimacy, and

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 58 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.3 Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

their influence. It takes years to build a credible reputation, and moments to lose it.

Social awareness is the ability to understand oth- ers. A socially aware leader is empathetic: able to put oneself in other people’s situations and show compassion and concern, while keeping an objective perspective. Frost (2004) called this process the ability to show “professional intimacy.” Socially aware leaders are also better able to under- stand the context of an organizational situation— they can more clearly see the big picture of their organization—while understanding the needs of clients, employees, and other external stakehold- ers. Former Los Angeles Lakers coach Phil Jackson, who has worked with some of the sport’s great players, emphasized social awareness in his coach- ing style. As a former professional basketball player himself, Jackson was able to empathize with the men he coached. He practiced meditation and set- tled his team down with moments of quiet reflec- tion, strengthening the team’s common bond, and helping players become more aware of each other’s capabilities. Jackson recognized that a strong, cohe- sive team is the key to the big picture: an NBA cham- pionship. Jackson won 11 NBA championship titles as a coach and player—the most in the league’s history (Abbott, 2010).

Relationship management is the capability to emotionally connect with others, build posi- tive relationships, and express kindness, compassion, and sensitivity. Successful leaders are good communicators able to create and sustain relationships, thus building broad networks of people and setting the stage for unprecedented collaboration. We have already established that leaders inspire trust. As a result, they are able to influence others, setting the tone for a caring or high-achieving company culture, managing conflict, leading change, and guiding people to achieve extraordinary visions and organizational goals.

Emotional intelligence has had mixed empirical results with regard to leadership effective- ness, but continues to be studied and used by practitioners. It is important to note that EQ, while important to leadership, is not a substitute for IQ (mental ability) (Dubrin, 2015). Lead- ers need logical and emotional abilities in solving problems and influencing others. Neither IQ nor EQ is more important than the other; both are essential for effective leadership and followership. Leadership studies have provided sufficient evidence over the last century to argue that there is no best way, style, or characteristic to lead and influence people to accom- plish organizational goals.

Please take Assessment 3.1 for your EQ score and compare your results with the other assess- ments you have taken. Remember, there is no right or wrong style. These assessments can help you identify your strengths and areas for development as an evolving leader.

Chris Carlson/Associated Press

Social awareness is the ability to understand others and be empathetic. Former Los Angeles Lakers coach, now President of the New York Knicks, Phil Jackson, has shown professional inti- macy, organizational awareness, and a service orientation to his players and to the organization he’s with.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 59 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.3 Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

Assessment 3.1: Emotional Intelligence

Instructions

For each of the following questions, please indicate the degree to which each statement characterizes you.

1—Never like me. 2—Occasionally like me. 3—Sometimes like me. 4—Frequently like me. 5—Always like me.

1. I empathize with other people when they have problems.

2. I go out of my way to help someone in need.

3. Most people feel comfortable talking to me about their personal feelings.

4. People enjoy spending time with me.

5. It is easy for me to openly express warm and loving feelings toward others.

6. When someone is annoying me, I stop to think about the other person’s situation rather than losing my temper.

7. In most cases I give people a second chance.

8. I think about how I can improve my relationships with those people with whom I don’t get along.

9. I think about why I don’t like a person.

10. When someone makes me uncomfortable, I think about why I am uncomfortable.

11. I can be assertive and forceful in situations where others are trying to take advantage of me.

12. I can delay gratification in pursuit of my goals.

13. When I am anxious about a challenge, I still can prepare for it.

14. I am able to stay motivated when things do not go well.

15. I keep myself focused on my goals.

16. Overt human suffering makes me feel uncomfortable.

17. Criticism is difficult for me to accept.

18. Having car trouble makes me feel stressed.

19. I lose control when I do not win in a sporting contest.

20. Traffic jams cause me to lose control.

Scoring

Sum your scores for questions 1–5, and divide by 5.

My “perception, appraisal, and expression of emotions” score is _______.

(continued)

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 60 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.4 Other Personality-Related Leadership Characteristics

Assessment 3.1: Emotional Intelligence (continued)

Sum your score for questions 6–10 and divide by 5. My “emotional facilitation of thinking” score is _______. Sum your score for questions 11–15 and divide by 5. My “understanding and analyzing emotions, and employing emotional knowledge” score is _______. For questions 17–20, reverse-score each item by subtracting your score from 6. Next, sum your new scores for these four questions, add in your score to question 16, then divide by 5. My “reflective regulation of emotions” score is _______. Finally, sum your four scores together and divide by 4. My overall (global) emotional intelligence score is _______.

Interpretation

Thorndike (1920) provided an intelligence framework that identified three types of intelligence: social, concrete, and abstract. His conceptualization of social intelligence is the underpinning for the contemporary reference to emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence involves the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to regulate emotions reflectively to promote emotional and intellectual growth” (Tapia, 2001). This definition links intelligence and emotion and promotes the dual ideas that emotion can make thinking more intelligent and that one can think intelligently about emotions.

According to Tapia (2001), your first score reflects your ability to appraise emotions in yourself and others (empathy). The second score deals with emotions when thinking is prioritized by directing attention to important information. (Are your emotions sufficiently vivid and available so they can be used as aids to judgment and memory concerning feelings?) Your third score deals with your ability to label emotions and understand complex feelings. Your fourth and final score concerns your ability to stay open to feelings (both those that are pleasant and those that are unpleasant). Overall, the global scale for emotional intelligence attempts to assess your perception, assimilation, understanding, and management of emotion.

A high score on each of the four dimensions is reflective of a high level of emotional intelligence on that particular dimension. A score equal to or greater than 4 on each dimension and on the global assessment suggests a high level of emotional intelligence. A score equal to or less than 2 on each dimension and on the global assessment suggests a low level of emotional intelligence. Source: Measuring Emotional Intelligence, Psychological Reports, 88 (2001) pp. 353—364, Copyright 2001 Ammons Scientific Ltd. These 20 items reflect a subset of the Tapia (2001) and Tapia & Burry-Stock (1998) instrument for the measurement of emotional intelligence and are shown here to illustrate the measure and highlight the construct’s meaning. Tapia and Burry-Stock’s 41-item measure can be found in: M. Tapia & J. Burry- Stock. 1998. Emotional Intelligence Inventory. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama.

3.4 Other Personality-Related Leadership Characteristics Other personality attributes are also important predictors of leadership behaviors. The fol- lowing characteristics help you better understand and evaluate leadership effectiveness in others and in yourself: self-concept, locus of control, narcissism, Machiavellianism, entrepre- neurial leadership, risk taking, and decision making.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 61 9/2/15 1:57 PM

Section 3.4 Other Personality-Related Leadership Characteristics

Self-Concept

Self-concept is a person’s overall understanding about herself or himself that includes atti- tudes, feelings, self-esteem, and self-confidence. Those who have a positive self-concept see themselves as capable and in control of themselves and their environment, and have confi- dence in their judgments, ideas, and skills. Those with a negative self-concept and core evalu- ation question their capabilities, see themselves as powerless, and tend not to value or like themselves (Barry & Friedman, 1998; Robbins & Judge, 2011). Leaders who have negative or weak, insecure self-concepts can limit others’ career development and personal growth, as well as sabotage their own reputations.

Self-concept can also affect the way leaders view, influence, and lead others. McGregor (1960) observed two types of general attitudes that leaders have about subordinates: Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X leaders, whose assumptions may be characterized as “command and con- trol,” see people as lazy and unmotivated to work and thus believe followers have to be con- trolled, directed, coerced, and micromanaged. These types of leaders are more production and task oriented and can be short-tempered, impatient, and autocratic when it comes to followers’ feelings and concerns. Theory Y leaders, on the other hand, whose assumptions may be char- acterized as commitment and trust oriented, see people as being more interested in assuming responsibility and more willing and ready, in the right working environments, to give full effort, attention, creativity, and energy to helping achieve organizational goals. Such leaders tend be more consideration and people oriented. Research evidence regarding attitudes and leadership success generally supports McGregor’s two classifications, but his theory requires more study.

Locus of Control

Why do some leaders tend to take credit for success but blame others for mistakes, while other leaders assume responsibility for whatever happens under their leadership? This tendency can be described in terms of an individual’s locus of control. Locus is another word for site or loca- tion, so locus of control literally refers to where a person thinks control, or responsibility, lies. Leaders with a high internal locus of control believe what happens to them is a result of their own actions and they take responsibility accordingly. Leaders with a high external locus of control believe outside forces determine what happens to them and tend to blame others for mistakes and mishaps. These people are less likely to succeed in effectively leading others.

A leader who exhibits a high internal locus of control owns and takes responsibility for a decision he or she makes, its outcome, and its consequences. Take a quick online quiz to get a sense of your locus of control (http://www.psych.uncc.edu/pagoolka/LC.html).

Narcissism

Narcissists have a grandiose sense of self-importance. They are arrogant and are always seek- ing admiration and attention. More extreme narcissists believe the world revolves around them. Oracle’s® CEO Larry Ellison has been described as having a high level of narcissistic tendencies. One of his executives said, “The difference between God and Larry is that God does not believe he is Larry” (Maccoby, 2000, p. 70). It is not surprising that some narcissists are more charismatic than other leaders (Sosik, Chun, & Zhu, 2014).

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 62 9/2/15 1:57 PM

http://www.psych.uncc.edu/pagoolka/LC.html

Section 3.4 Other Personality-Related Leadership Characteristics

Most would agree that Ellison is a successful leader—Oracle is among the top software com- panies in the world—but narcissists are generally less favorable leaders. Narcissists in the workplace talk down to and belittle people who challenge them, and tend to create toxic environments. In extreme cases, narcissistic leaders can literally destroy companies. We can return to Enron as an example, as former CEO Jeff Skilling could possibly have been such an extreme narcissist. He manipulated financial statements and information to suit his needs and formed a clique around himself of Enron traders and aggressive followers whom he liked and could manipulate. He acted in his own self-interest, without regard to ethics or other people, and forced Enron’s spectacular downfall.

Manufacturing conglomerate Tyco provides another example. The company came under fire in 2002 when it was discovered that then-chairman and CEO Dennis Kozlowski was using company money for personal luxuries. For example, Kozlowski hosted lavish parties imitating ancient Roman settings and once gave a $2 million birthday party for his wife on the Italian island of Sardinia, at Tyco’s expense. He was also found to have purchased a $6,000 shower curtain with company funds (Crawford, 2005). Kozlowski was sentenced in 2005 to a lengthy prison sentence for stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from Tyco, but the company spent years working to repair its reputation.

However, as we saw with Oracle’s Ellison, narcissists do not necessarily leave scandals in their wake. In a Harvard Business Review article, Maccoby (2000) described what he called “productive narcissists”:

Leaders such as former General Electric chairman and CEO Jack Welch or finan- cier and philanthropist George Soros are examples of productive narcissists. They are gifted and creative strategists who see the big picture and find meaning in the risky proposition of changing the world and leaving behind a legacy. Indeed, one reason we look to productive narcissists in times of great transition is that they have the audacity to push through the massive transformations that society periodically undertakes.

Maccoby (2000) noted that productive narcissists may become unproductive when they become “unrealistic dreamers”—people who are unable to see things as they really are. Productive narcis- sists can become unrealistic dreamers because they are poor listeners, are sensitive to criticism, lack empathy, dislike mentoring, and possess an intense desire to compete. Exhibiting these types of behaviors and lack of skills does not contribute to effective goal attainment or meaningful influ- ence on followers.

Superstock/Superstock

The term Mach is derived from Niccolò Machiavelli’s 16th-century book The Prince and refers to those who gain and use power without regard to con- sequences. Machiavelli wrote “the ends justify the means.”

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 63 9/2/15 1:58 PM

Section 3.4 Other Personality-Related Leadership Characteristics

Maccoby (2000) suggests that such individuals find a trusted sidekick who can help anchor them—and that they get therapy.

Machiavellianism (Mach)

Machiavellianism (Mach) is named for Niccolò Machiavelli, who, in the 16th century, wrote a book about how to get and use power. The term Mach (short for Machiavellianism) refers to those who gain and use power without regard to the consequences. Machiavelli once noted “let the ends justify the means.”

Take Bill, for instance. Bill is a real go-getter. He is the youngest supervisor for a large finan- cial services firm, and has had two promotions in the last two years. A vice president who knows Bill commented, “Bill is a nice guy, but he’ll do anything it takes to get ahead. I know he’s thrown a couple of guys who were competing for his position under the bus. We like that spirit and energy, but it may do him in if he isn’t careful.” Bill may be what theorists call a high Mach, or someone who shows more Machiavellian behaviors. High Machs tend to be more aggressive and, in terms of ethics, act in nonconstructive ways in the workplace with their manipulative behavior (O’Boyle, Forsyth, Banks, & McDaniel, 2012; Hartog & Belschak, 2012). Take the Mach assessment (at http://www.amanet.org/training/articles/Ethical- Leadership- Self-Assessment-How-Machiavellian-Are-You.aspx) and see how you score.

Research shows that high Machs are more manipulative. They tend to persuade others rather than be persuaded. High Machs like their work less than low Machs and are often more stressed and involved in deviant work behaviors (Christie & Geis, 1970)—but they also tend to win.

Scoring high on the Mach assessment does not mean that you are immoral or sinister. A high Mach score may indicate that you are more detached and not as personally engaged with others. High Machs may see life as a game and use pragmatic and manipulative means to excel. Thus, high Machs seem to prosper when face-to-face interaction is prevalent over indirect communica- tion; when situations have minimal rules and regulations, allowing for more improvisation; and when winning can be achieved without emotional involvement in details (Christie & Geis, 1970). High Machs, then, succeed more in situations where the ends justify the means, where regula- tions are ambiguous to nonexistent, and where the stakes (monetary or other material gain) are high. Whether or not they cross the line from ethical to unethical or legal to illegal behaviors and actions is not an inherent part of being a high Mach. It may simply be one risk a high Mach faces. See “Take the Lead: The Conundrum of the Superstar Employee.”

Take the Lead The Conundrum of the Superstar Employee

As a manager in the upper echelons in your organization, you are responsible for developing employees. One employee, Christine, is particularly talented. She is known as someone who sets and accomplishes lofty goals. She does this by setting high expectations for her subordinates. When she commits to a task, she almost always sees it through.

(continued)

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 64 9/2/15 1:58 PM

http://www.amanet.org/training/articles/Ethical-Leadership-Self-Assessment-How-Machiavellian-Are-You.aspx

Section 3.5 Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

Take the Lead (continued) The challenge is that many of her followers complain that she talks down to them, and becomes irate and belittling when they fail to meet goals. It is often reported that she has very little patience when personal issues cause subordinates to fail to achieve goals . . . even when the personal issues are significant and unexpected.

You want to support Christine, as she is productive. However, you recognize that these negative behaviors could have a negative long-term effect on the work group.

1. What terms could be used to describe Christine’s personality? 2. What are the potential long-term effects of keeping Christine employed by the

organization? 3. What would you do to minimize the negative ramifications of Christine’s behavior? 4. How would you describe Christine’s EQ? Specifically, what dimensions are likely

especially low? 5. Would you fire Christine? Why?

3.5 Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Personality affects perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Understanding our own personality and the personality of others with whom we live and work can help everyone, because person- ality affects job satisfaction, relationships, and performance (Yukl, 2011). Although personality assessments are not the only way of discovering who we are, the more reliable and valid ones, such as the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), add additional insights into our strengths and areas for development. Generally, personality assessments provide a range of scores on particular dimensions. For example, a person is not completely scored as an extrovert or intro- vert, but will typically score a certain percentage higher of one dimension than another.

A goal of taking and understanding any assessment, particularly the ones in this chapter, is personal and professional development. What we do not know, we cannot manage, improve, or perhaps change. As you read and take the assessments here, as in other chapters of this text, reflect on these scores with the goal of self-improvement and developing your leader- ship potential.

The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality assessment offers a more complete profile of how different personality dimensions, taken together, can help leaders evaluate and gain insights into the general effectiveness and ineffectiveness of their behaviors. The MBTI is the most widely used assessment worldwide (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004). Almost 90% of Fortune 100 companies report using this instrument, including AT&T, 3M, General Electric, Citigroup, Apple, and FedEx. It is also used by the U.S. armed forces and other organizations. Although research does not validate the MBTI’s effect on leadership effectiveness, the assess- ment is used to help leaders better understand and appreciate themselves and their followers.

For example, let’s say you’re a hiring manager and you have two qualified candidates to choose from for a leadership position. In his former company, Terrence was a company vice president. He is shy and soft-spoken, but is known for his behind-the-scenes skill of quietly influencing others for the good of the company. The other candidate, Sarah, on the other hand,

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 65 9/2/15 1:58 PM

Section 3.5 Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

is far more outspoken and can even be confrontational. She has a knack for persuading others to work harder. Who is the more effective leader?

There is no obvious answer to this question, except for perhaps “it depends.” It depends on parts of all the leadership theories, concepts, and approaches in this book. We will discuss this in more depth throughout the text, but for now we will consider this question from the perspective of these two individuals’ personalities. The MBTI can help break down these personalities to figure out what is the right fit for particular organizational goals and cultures.

The MBTI consists of 100 questions. It classifies individuals as:

• Extraverted (E) or Introverted (I). Extraverts are generally sociable, outgoing, and assertive. They gain energy from being around others. Introverts are generally qui- eter and sometimes shy and gain energy by focusing internally on their thoughts and feelings.

• Intuitive (N) or Sensing (S). Intuitive types focus on the big picture and look for pat- terns and relationships. They are visionaries. Sensing types use their five senses to gather information. They are more fact and detail oriented.

• Feeling (F) or Thinking (T). Feeling types focus on emotions, values, and others’ feel- ings. Thinking types focus on logic and objectivity in making decisions.

• Perceiving (P) or Judging (J). Perceiving types desire more information and data in order to make a decision. They enjoy ambiguity and complexity. Judging types like closure, certainty, and deadlines in making decisions quickly on limited data.

Personalities are thus described in terms of varying combinations of these four categories. Each has its own strengths, weaknesses, and typical behaviors, which come with potential positive and negative consequences. If you take the MBTI assessment online, reflect on how accurately the profile describes you. Can you observe how your personality may relate to your leadership style and influence?

It is possible that you are not completely in one category or another. For example, you may fall somewhere in between being an extravert and an introvert, but your results label you an extravert because you happen to lean more in that direction. Note, also, that these types are not unchangeable. As individuals age and gain more experience and expertise, their types usually change.

Answer the MBTI questions at http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp and read your profile from the 16 types at http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality- type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types.asp. Reflect on your results as you read this text.

There is no magic combination of letters that guarantees a better leader, but studies have revealed some trends. Limited research suggests that judging and thinking appear most related to effective leadership. Most leaders studied are judging types, and even organizations that would seem to value “feeling” more highly—such as counseling centers—tend to select thinking types as managers (Daft, 2011). A book titled Profiles of Genius, by Landrum (1993), examined 13 founders of highly successful companies, such as Sony®, Microsoft®, Apple, and Honda, and found that most were NTs (intuitive thinkers)—a type found in only 5% of the U.S. population.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 66 9/2/15 1:58 PM

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp

http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types.asp

Section 3.6 Entrepreneurial Leadership

Other tentative research findings include:

• Intuitive leaders are the major- ity in fields and organizations that involve long-term plan- ning and breaking new ground.

• Sensing types are the major- ity in the construction, manu- facturing, and banking fields, where immediate and tangible preferences are valued over intuitive styles (Daft, 2011).

Of course, not all successful leaders or managers come from the same mold or fit the same stereotypes. Darwin Smith, who was CEO of the paper-products company Kimberly-Clark from 1971 to 1991, was described as “shy, awkward, shunning attention.” However, Good to Great author Jim Collins (2005) described Smith as having what Collins termed “Level 5 leadership,” a blend of “deep personal humility” with “intense professional will.” Collins wrote that Smith “showed iron will” as he turned the company into a “worldwide leader in its industry, generating stock returns 4.1 times greater than the general market.” It might be that Smith, like the shy vice president Bob in our hypothetical example at the beginning of this discussion, had other characteristics (like iron will) that may or may not have been reflected in a personality assessment. He could also have had the right mix of experience, attitudes, and skills that matched the organization (Kimberly-Clark) at the right time in its life cycle. Had Smith taken the MBTI, he might have confirmed that his personality profile identified his organizational style accurately.

3.6 Entrepreneurial Leadership What do leaders like Elon Musk, Melinda Gates, Jeff Bezos, Oprah Winfrey, Beyonce Knowles- Carter, Richard Branson, and Taylor Swift have in common? They are entrepreneurial risk takers who innovate.

Entrepreneurial leaders organize and initiate new, innovative ventures and business prac- tices, assuming much of the responsibility and risk in hope of maximum reward (Daft, 2011; Kuratko & Hodgetts, 1998). These people can range from business magnates like those mentioned above to small-business owners who may not be in the news. Some col- lege and university students have become entrepreneurial leaders: Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg were university students when they started their companies. All had the same thing in common: vision, enterprise, and a willingness to take risks. They also think and act outside the box. Their behaviors can be harmful or dangerous, yet at the same time hold the potential for positive outcomes. It could be argued that without risk, there is little reward. But taking risks does not assume success. Take the assessment on risk taking and entrepreneurial thinking to see how entrepreneurial you are.

Comstock/Stockbyte/Thinkstock

Level 5 Leadership is defined as a blend of deep personal humility and intense professional will.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 67 9/2/15 1:58 PM

Section 3.6 Entrepreneurial Leadership

Decision Making

Shepherd, Trenton, and Patzelt (2014) reviewed 602 articles, distilled them to 156, and sum- marized characteristics of entrepreneurs as individuals who are highly diverse and different in their beliefs and desires, which

help explain why some choose to become entrepreneurs and why others choose managerial or other employment-related roles. Relative to nonen trepreneurs, entrepreneurs have higher levels of individualism, openness to change, and self-enhancement and lower levels of power, conformity, security (Holt, 1997), and collectivism (Tan, 2001). Compared to nonentrepreneurs, entrepreneurs also appear to have a more versatile thinking style that balances both linear (i.e., analytic, rational, logical) and nonlinear (i.e., intuitive, creative, emotional) approaches to thinking about a situation (Groves, Vance, & Choi, 2011). Moreover, entrepreneurs are more likely to see situations as relating to personal strengths, representing an opportunity, and representing potential for gain than nonentrepreneurs. (Palich & Bagby, 1995)

These authors present a complex and nuanced picture of entrepreneurial decision making which includes differences in gender, national and cultural heritage, perceptions, emotions and affect, experiences, environmental context and assessments of risk, level of self-efficacy, and meta-cognitive thinking. Moreover, entrepreneurs can also be prone to certain biases, such as “overoptimism, overconfidence, and overreliance on experience.”

Entrepreneurs, compared to nonentrepreneurs (Shepherd et al., 2014), tend to show traits and characteristics higher in individualism, openness to change, and self-enhancement; while demonstrating lower levels of power, conformity, security (Holt, 1997), and collectivism (Tan, 2001). Obviously not all entrepreneurs are alike, but these characteristics serve as a starting point for understanding differences between entrepreneurial and nonentrepreneurial traits and behaviors.

Figure 3.2 illustrates Shepherd’s et al. (2014, p. 14) four dimensions that influence entrepreneurial opportunity decision making, based on research in this field. The first dimension that influences opportunity assessment is the individual characteristics of the entrepreneur: their personalities, emotional makeup, biases, and perceptions of the environments.

The second decision entrepreneurs make—whether or not to enter an entrepreneurial career—is influenced by individual “aspirations and attitudes, abilities, and opportunity costs.” Besides the financial factors needed to start a new venture, Shepherd et al. (2014) state that “perceptions of the self (e.g., identity, abilities, and desires), perceptions of the envi- ronment (e.g., hostile, munificent), and decision-making tools” (p. 14) are important influ- encers. The third influencing factor, or whether or not to exploit an opportunity, involves the degree of planning, the organizational context, the funding, and how the entrepreneur per- ceived through his or her moral lens and values the anticipated outcomes of the opportunity decision. Finally, whether or not an entrepreneur decides to exit an opportunity depends on the performance of the business as well as personal circumstances and investment reasons. Shepard et al. (2014) also note that other factors such as gender differences, risk assessment,

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 68 9/2/15 1:58 PM

Section 3.6 Entrepreneurial Leadership

cultural background, and external environment factors also influence an entrepreneur’s opportunity assessment decision making.

Decision Maker

Entrepreneurship Acitivities

Environment

1. Opportunity assessment decisions

5. Heuristics and biases in the decision-making process

7. Environment as entreprneurial decision context

6. Characteristics of the entrepreneurial decision maker

2. Entrepreneurial entry decisions

3. Decisions about exploiting opportunities

4. Entrepreneurial exit decisions

Figure 3.2: Map of entrepreneurial decision-making research

Decision Maker

Entrepreneurship Acitivities

Environment

1. Opportunity assessment decisions

5. Heuristics and biases in the decision-making process

7. Environment as entreprneurial decision context

6. Characteristics of the entrepreneurial decision maker

2. Entrepreneurial entry decisions

3. Decisions about exploiting opportunities

4. Entrepreneurial exit decisions

Intrapreneurs

It is important to note that to assume that entrepreneurs only start companies would be limiting the definition of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs who work inside established organizations are called intrapreneurs. Intrapreneurs take risks to create new solutions to develop, extend, and change products and services for competitive advantage. For example, the yellow Post-It notes that are now taken for granted were invented by scientists Spencer Silver and Art Fry, who both worked at 3M. Silver developed the adhesive, and it was Fry who thought to apply this “low-stick” adhesive to a piece of paper. However, even after they designed and readied the Post-It® prototype, it reportedly would be several years before 3M was willing to recognize its value. Silver and Fry were probably one of the first intrapreneurs. 3M later instituted a “bootleg- ging” program, enabling innovative engineers to take time off while at work to experiment with entrepreneurial products. Intrapreneurs may not be as visible as entrepreneurs but they serve a valuable service and function to organizations in terms of all the roles discussed in Chapter 1.

Like the study of leadership, and Figure 1.1, the roadmap for this text, to understand entre- preneurial leadership and intrapreneurs also involves examining the dimensions of persons, processes, and systems—leaders in their environmental contexts.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 69 9/2/15 1:58 PM

Summary & Resources

Chapter Summary Trait theory and personality theory are central to the study of leadership. It has been said that many organizational cultures reflect and mimic the personality of their leader(s). The Big Five personality traits are, to date, the most empirically significant cross-cultural indica- tors of emergent leadership characteristics, job performance, and job satisfaction. Extra- version, conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism (adjustment) are important indicators of leadership. In addition, the MBTI is one of the most globally used assessments. Although it alone cannot predict effective leadership or leaders, it is useful in developing self-awareness and in helping leaders gain insight into their personalities.

The dark side of leadership can be defined as “an ongoing pattern of behaviour exhibited by a leader that results in overall negative organisational outcomes based on the interactions between the leader, follower and the environment. Organisational goals, morale and follower satisfaction are thwarted through the abuse of power and self-interest of the leader” (Slat- tery, 2009, p. 4). Being aware of the dark side of leadership and being able to take reasonable courses of action are important to followers, the organization, and one’s well-being in an orga- nization. For publicly traded companies the shareholders’ wealth and resources are at stake, and for nonprofits and other organizations, the well-being of employees and safe-guarding of resources may be at risk. Sometimes toxic leadership and destructive behaviors can be con- trolled and corrected; sometimes not. Human Resources executives are good resources when it is suspected that top-level leaders may be placing an organization at risk. Attorneys for the organization and members of the board of directors are other such resources.

Other personality characteristics and frameworks, such as EQ (emotional intelligence), self-concept, locus of control, narcissism, Machiavellianism (Mach), and entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial leadership, are also helpful tools and concepts for understanding personal dimensions of leaders and of ourselves. While environmental and contextual factors influ- ence entrepreneurial behavior, we also need to understand the personal and emotional makeup of leaders to gage how effectively they relate to themselves and to others in achiev- ing performance goals.

Web Resources

Edgar Schein on Corporate Culture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZB3jJlGWuk A leading organizational culture thinker discusses his latest thinking on corporate culture.

Organizational Culture on the Screen

http://www.ovguide.com/movies_tv/office_space.htm; http:// www.ovguide.com/ movies_tv/nine_to_five_1980.htm A collection of clips from the movies Office Space and Nine to Five helps illustrate negative organizational culture.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 70 9/2/15 1:58 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZB3jJlGWuk

http://www.ovguide.com/movies_tv/office_space.htm

http:// www.ovguide.com/movies_tv/nine_to_five_1980.htm

Summary & Resources

Leadership Is All About Emotional Persuasion

http://www.forbes.com/ A communications consultant offers some insight on persuasion.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What leadership traits are still important to consider when evaluating a leader’s per- sonal effectiveness? Explain.

2. Can leaders who do not show high levels on the positive dimensions of the Big Five personality characteristics be effective in their roles? Explain.

3. Argue the pros and cons of the importance of emotional intelligence to effective leadership.

4. Explain how your MBTI profile offers both effective results and potential derailments to your effectiveness as a leader.

5. Offer examples of leaders in the current business and general news that exemplify different dimensions of the Big Five personality characteristics. Then explain how the characteristics you identified are helping or hindering their effectiveness.

6. Identify a leader(s) in the news who has exhibited “dark side” characteristics. Explain the situation and evidence that this is the case. Were there any consequences from that leader’s negative or destructive behaviors?

7. Compare and contrast your own evolving or current leadership style with the char- acteristics of entrepreneurial leaders. Use concepts from the text in your comparison and contrast.

Key Terms Big Five personality traits Personality dimensions that measure extraversion– introversion, agreeableness–antagonism, conscientiousness–unscrupulousness, neurot- icism (adjustment)–emotional stability, and openness to experience–close-mindedness.

Emotional Intelligence (EQ) Involves the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to regulate emotions reflectively to promote emotional and intellectual growth.

entrepreneurial leadership Leaders who organize and initiate new, innovative ven- tures and business practices.

external locus of control Leaders with a high external locus of control believe outside

forces determine what happens to them and tend to blame others for mistakes and mishaps.

internal locus of control Leaders with a high internal locus of control believe what happens to them is a result of their own actions and take responsibility.

intrapreneurs Entrepreneurs who work inside established organizations.

locus of control Refers to where a person thinks control, or responsibility, lies.

Machiavellianism (Mach) Refers to those who gain and see power without regard to the consequences: As Machiavelli wrote, “let the ends justify the means.”

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 71 9/2/15 1:58 PM

http://www.forbes.com/

Summary & Resources

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Per- sonality assessment that offers a more complete profile of how different per- sonality dimensions, taken together, can help leaders evaluate and gain insight into the general effectiveness and ineffective- ness of their behaviors. Measures the dimensions of extroversion–introversion, intuition–sensing, thinking–feeling, and judging–perceiving.

narcissism Those who have a grandiose sense of self-importance. They are arrogant and are always seeking admiration and attention.

personality Individual differences in char- acteristic patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving.

self-awareness The ability to see and understand your emotions and feelings and how they affect you in your work and private life; the foundation for the other three emo- tional capabilities in emotional intelligence.

self-concept A person’s overall under- standing about herself or himself that includes attitudes, feelings, self-esteem, and self-confidence.

self-management The ability to control moods, emotions, and desires that can be problematic and disruptive.

social awareness The ability to under- stand others.

Theory X Leaders whose assumptions may be characterized as “command and control” view people as lazy and unmoti- vated to work and thus believe followers have to be controlled, directed, coerced, and micromanaged.

Theory Y Leaders whose assumptions may be characterized as commitment and trust oriented view people as being more interested in assuming responsibility and more willing and ready to participate in task accomplishment. Note that neither Theory X nor Theory Y is more valid than the other. Empirical studies provide such evidence.

traits A distinguishing quality or character- istic of a person’s nature.

wei82445_03_c03_049-072.indd 72 9/2/15 1:58 PM