Management Research Paper

Inl. Studies of Man. i Org.. Vol. XIV. No. 2-3. pp. 86-98 M. E. Sharpe. Inc.. 1984

JAI B . P. SINHA (INDIA)

A Model of Effective Leadership Styles in India

The model

It is generally agreed that the effectiveness of a leadership style in a work organization is contingent on task characteristics and the nature of the leader-subordinate relationship. Task characteris- tics are much less crucial in Indian work organizations than in many other countries because of the cultural preference to view work in the context of relationship. Work in itself is not quite valued in India.' For a leader who is liked and respected, it is performed with involvement; otherwise, it gets perfunctory at- tention.

Indian subordinates prefer a personalized rather than a contractual relationship. An ideal superior is not just a boss whose authority is clearly delimited by the organizational manual or task requirements: he represents a benevolent source on which subordinates can depend for indulgence: Subordinates readily accept the boss's higher status and respect and obey him willingly

The author is Professor of Social Psychology, A.N.S. Institute of Social Studies, Patna, Bihar, 800 001, India. This paper was presented at the Inter- national Conference on Leadership, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan, 23-25 August 1984.

86

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 87

provided he extends support to them and caters to their work, personal, and social needs.^

In other words, a leader in such a situation has to be nurturant. A nurturant leader "cares for his subordinates, shows affection, takes personal interest in their well-being, and above all is com- mitted to their growth."^ In order to be effective, however, he makes his nurturance contingent on the subordinate's task ac- complishment. He structures his and his subordinates' roles and interactions in such a way that the subordinates understand and accept the goals and the normative structure of the group and cultivate commitment to them. He guides and directs them to work hard and maintain a high level of productivity. Those who meet his expectations are reinforced by nurturance. In the pro- cess, there develops a relationship of understanding, warmth, and interdependence, leading to higher productivity and better growth of both subordinates and leader.

The growth process is based on a reciprocal influence relation- ship between the leader and his subordinates. Initially the subor- dinates (5) depend heavily on the leader not only for guidance and direction but also for support and encouragement (at t-l). But as they work hard, they develop skill and experience and hence gain self-confidence. They start enjoying hard work and tend to as- sume greater responsibility. They now need less direction. As they mature and acquire commitment to their work, they strive for recognition, influence, and participation in decision making (5-1 a.tt-2). If the leader responds to these altered expectations of the subordinates by reducing the quantum of direction, retaining the warmth, and delegating more responsibility and autonomy (ntip), the subordinates feel more encouraged and involved and thus make further efforts to increase productivity. In the process, they become more prepared for greater participation (5-2). Eventually, the leader and the subordinates create a participative system (at t-2) in which they participate fully aind freely—al- though the cultural flavor of deference and affection blended in a personalized relationship still persists. There is a possibility, although a distant one, that they might even create an autonomous

88 JAl B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

group* in which the distinction between leader and subordinates is minimized. The leader represents the group to outsiders, and the members run the group with full involvement of the leader.

The progression from nurturant-task to participative style is a gradual and interactive process. In certain instances the process can become regressive. A nurturant-task leader, because of his successful experience in the first phase of the work relationship, may continue to insist on close supervision and paternal affec- tion, which the matured subordinates may not relish anymore. Their frustrations and the resultant resentment may threaten the leader, who, as a result, may regress toward an authoritarian style.^ If he does, he will disrupt the interaction system and put the subordinates on the defensive. Consequently, all—the leader, the subordinates, and the group—may suffer.

The evidence

In order to test the model, over 30 field and laboratory studies over the course of a decade have been conducted by Sinha and his co-workers. Fifteen of therii have been published in the book The nurturant-task leader (1980) *; a report on 12 appeared later, in 1982,' and a number of them are still in progress.* Taken together they examine the meaning, the structure, and the overlap among authoritarian, nurturant-task, and participative styles, their cor- relates, and their relationship with some outcome variables such as the effectiveness of subordinates, units, or departments, job satisfaction, etc. A selective presentation of the findings is at- tempted below.

Relationships among leadership styles

The first major concern was to differentiate the nurturant-task {NT) style from the participative (P) style, on the one hand, and tbe authoritarian (JF) on the other. Some critics have contended that NT is almost identical with (9,9) style, or high on

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 89

Consideration-initiating Structure.^ It is true that nurturant and participative styles share a concern for subordinates, their needs, and feelings. Yet the people orientation ofthe participative style is fraternal in nature, assuming the values of equality. The nurturance style contains the affection, care, and warmth of a benevolent, paternal symbol; it reflects a difference in status in which the nurturance of a superior is symbiotically related to the dependence ofthe subordinates. The two, however, do overlap, and thus entertain a possibility of a smooth transition from NT to P under conducive circumstances.'"

Similarly, critics argue that nurturance in a basically feudal and authoritarian culture such as India's is a glorified facade to cover up an underlying authoritarian stance. The facade is likely to disappear as soon as the leader is put under stress. In other words, an authoritarian leader in a favorable condition can afford the luxury of bestowing affection and care on his subordinates, but basically he is a self- and power-oriented person."

There is no unequivocal evidence that Indian culture is authori- tarian. There are some overt authoritarian features, such as an emphasis on hierarchy, discipline, obedience, power, structured relationships, etc.; but the presence of the corresponding psychodynamics of authoritarianism—of anxiety, insecurity, cynicism, ego-alien sexuality, and paranoid dispositions—is doubtful. There may be some overlap between authoritarian and NT styles in terms of the preference for structure, but whether this preference reflects secondary authoritarianism is a matter of dispute.

A number of studies have been conducted to shed light on these issues. In two ofthe studies,'^ leaders were induced to conduct their groups in either F (i.e., authoritarian), NT, or P (i.e., participative) styles. The subsequent ratings by the group mem- bers, who were blind to the experimental manipulations, dis- closed that A^rieaders were perceived as similar to authoritarian ones in being strict, in pushing their ideas through, and in control- ling the members' ideas and activities. A^rieaders were, however, close to P leaders in encouraging the members to contribute to the

90 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

Table 1

Intercorrelations of Three Major Leadership Factors with the Remaining Factors

First three factors of leadership Subordinate-

Other factors of ieadership

Guidance & encouragement

Direction Task orientation Friendly orientation Power' Role performance Distance & discipline

Note: Decimal points have

*P < 0.01.

**P < 0.05; N = 523.

based participa-

tion

37* 56* 58* 60*

- 1 6 * 07

- 1 2 * *

been omitted.

Leader- centered

nurturance

53* 25* 20* 55*

- 4 9 * - 0 5 - 1 1 * *

Authori- tarian styie

- 1 4 * 12** 2 2 * *

- 0 3 57* 15* 37*

group task, for which they were given due credit. The most striking finding was that whereas P leaders were perceived as being interested in getting members' participation and F ones in maintaining their leadership, NT leaders showed concern for get- ting the work done.

Leaders rating themselves on a Likert-type scale revealed a moderate overlap of A^rwith F ( r = 0.31) and P (r = 0.39); the latter two were almost unrelated (r = 0.11).>^A factor structure of leadership styles'" based on the self-ratings of 523 executives of a large public enterprise generated ten dimensions of leader- ship, the first three being subordinate-based participation, leader-centered nurturance, and authoritarian style. The subordinate-based participation was strongly related to the fac- tors friendly, task orientation, and direction. The nurturance factor was strongly positively related to friendly orientation, guidance, and encouragement, and negatively to power, which,

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 91

along with distance and discipline, was strongly associated with an authoritarian style (see Table 1).

A unique feature of this study was the emergence of a distinct factor of task orientation, which was found to be more or less independent of the factors of either participation or nurturance. In other words, an executive can be task oriented without being either participative or nurturant. Research in government depart- ments and public enterprises subsequently indicated a widespread prevalence of a bureaucratic style. Hence, the leadership-style scale was expanded to incorporate five dimensions —bureaucrat- ic (JS), authoritarian (F), nurturant (AO, participative (P), and task oriented (7)—each having ten items in a Likert-type format. The items were written in such a way that an executive could rate his own styles and those of his superior.

Two attempts to examine the stability in the factor structures of the styles yielded a rather complicated picture. One study'' iden- tified ten factors. A people-oriented style emerged first, and a personal task-oriented (nearest to NT) style was second. Partici- pation emerged as a different configuration, in seventh place. The three were highly correlated Xr = 0.64, N = 196, P < 0.01). Surprisingly, the three were closely related to the factor close supervision Xr = 0.50, P < 0.01). On the other hand, the authoritarian style was fragmented into the factors power orien- tation, suspicion and limited role, and closed-mindedness. The three were highly interrelated (Xr = 0.43, P < 0.01). The factor impersonal orientation, as expected, was associated with bureaupathic style (r = 0.55, P < 0.01).

In the second study'* task mastership emerged as the first factor and structured task orientation as the third. The participa- tive style was differentiated into pure participative and equity- oriented styles. Nurturant came out as the tenth factor and includ- ed some of the participative items. The three factors clustered together, reflecting a people-oriented style. Task-oriented factors in this study combined with closed-mindedness and power orien- tation, which are components of an authoritarian style.

When the executives' ratings ofthe styles of their departmental

92 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

heads were factor analyzed, task-oriented style again emerged as the first factor, authoritarian as the second, bureaucratic as the third, participative as the sixth, and nurturant as the seventh factor. Some items of the bureaucratic style got clustered around restricted role relationship or rigidity in role performance.

In summary, when particular styles are experimentally induced in group leaders, subordinates perceive them as such, although there are some meaningful overlaps. In reality, however, the styles get mixed up. Executives do not adopt an exclusive style. They always have a mix, and the nature of the mix depends partly on the commonness of the styles and partly on the specific organi- zations.

By and large, the nurturant and participative styles and their derivatives cluster together, meaning that these styles belong to a more generalized style of people's orientations. Hence, it may not be difficult for an executive to move from one style to another. Similarly, the authoritarian and bureaucratic styles and their de- rivatives are often combined. Task orientation is a distinct config- uration, which in some organizations aligns with the people's orientation and in others with the authoritarian-bureaucratic com- plex.

Correlates of leadership styles

A field study'' of self-ratings on the NT and P styles disclosed great similarity (r = 0.88,7V = 165). A^Thad a moderately posi- tive correlation with F (r = 0.27). P and F were negatively related (r = -0.18). Despite this unusually high overlap between NT and P, the two had distinctly different patterns of relationship with the perception of their subordinates. When the subordinates were perceived to be neither efficient, dedicated to work, nor willing to work on their own, the appropriate styles were either F or NT, the former getting higher weight than the latter (Table 2). However, F was reported to be ineffective, and caused dissatis- faction among subordinates. NT, on the other hand, led to greater effectiveness. But in the opposite condition, NT was quite

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 93

Table 2

Correlations between Leadership Styles and Perception of Subordinates

Perception of subordinates

1. Efficiency 2. Dedication to

work 3. Willingness to

work without supervision

4. Need for personal care

5. Being difficult to supervise

Noie: Decimal points have P = Participative style.

•P < O.Ot.

*»P < 0.05.

F

- 4 3 *

- 3 4 *

- 5 5 *

17**

10

been omitted. F

Styles NT

- 1 7 * *

- 2 4 *

- 2 9 *

14

18**

= Authoritarian, NT

P

01

- 0 7

01

- 1 5 * *

06

= Nurturant-task,

ineffective—that is, when the subordinates were efficient, dedi- cated to work, and willing to work on their own, it was the P style, rather that the NT,, that was reported to be effective. The participative style was conducive to greater satisfaction irrespec- tive of the work orientation of the subordinates (Table 3).

In a survey,'* leadership styles were correlated with the indica- tors of effectiveness in fertilizer and coal organizations. Manag- ers who rated themselves as nurturant also perceived their subor- dinates, their superiors, themselves, their department, and their organization as effective. Those who were task oriented and people oriented also found their subordinates effective. Bureau- cratic and authoritarian leaders, however, did not find either their subordinates, departments, or organizations effective.

In another study, conducted in university departments, the leadership styles of department heads were correlated with educa- tional climate and quality of education. First, a sample of post- graduate students was asked to spell out the various leadership

94 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

Table 3

Correlations among Leadership Styies and Leader's Effectiveness, Unit's Efficiency, and Subordinates' Satisfaction for Groups According to Preparedness

Subordinates' preparedness

High (N = 84) Low(N = 81)

High (N = 84) Low(N = 81)

High (N = 84) Low(N = 81)

Note: Decimal points

•P < 0.01.

•*P < 0.05.

F

17 19

- 2 7 * * - 2 2 * *

- 3 1 * - 2 4 * *

have been omitted.

Leadership styles NT

Leader's effectiveness - 5 8 *

29*

Unit's efficiency - 3 7 * + 30*

Subordinates' satisfaction - 2 2 * *

11

P

38* 04

09 - 1 6

47* 38*

acts that a university head performs. Then a sample of 250 post- graduate students rated their heads on the various acts. The acts generated three distinct styles: authoritarian, nurturant-task, and participative. The styles were correlated with the most dominant factors of educational climate and teaching methods. The general factor educational climate reflected a "situation in which people resort to flattery, but at the same time, communication is open and free, and the growth of the organization also takes place. Other items forming the cluster . . . contained ideas . . . which included closeness to the head, concern for establishing authority, willingness to share information, and vigilance." This kind of educational climate was very highly associated with NT (r = 0.83) and P ( r = 0.57) and negatively with F ( r = -0.67). Similarly, teaching by directive methods combined with encour- agement and emotional support was again highly correlated with

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 95

NT (r = 0.68) and P (r = 0.42) and negatively with F {r = - 0.50).

Further support for the thesis of the effectiveness of the NT style was provided by a study by Singhal'' in which she tried to determine the causal relationship between an NT style on the part of college teachers and students' commitment to education. She reported satisfactory consistency in the measurement of both. Furthermore, she provided statistical evidence to show that NT resulted in greater commitment than the other way around.

Evidence from an experimental study

As stated in the beginning, the model suggests that if subordinates prefer dependency and a personalized relationship, accept status differences, and are not quite work motivated, the A r̂ style may be expected to be effective. A phase of the NT style, it is further postulated, prepares subordinates for a P style of supervision, which thereafter will be more effective.

An experimental study^° was designed to test these hypotheses. First, a,23-item Belief and Preference Scale measuring one's preference for a personalized and dependency relationship and a belief in status difference was administered to a sample of 150 freshmen students. The 40 with the highest scores were selected for 20 2-person groups. Twenty randomly selected students from the senior classes were assigned the role of leaders—one for each group. The 20 3-person groups thus formed were randomly as- signed to 4 treatment conditions, each having 2 phases of leader- ship with an interval of 24 hours between.

The design was as follows:

Conditions

1 2 3 4

Phase 1

NT NT P P

Phase

NT P

NT P

96 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

In condition 1, the leaders adopted an A^rstyle and continued with the same style in phase 2; in condition 2, the leaders adopted an NT style in phase 1, but switched over to P in phase 2, and so on. Leadership styles were verbally induced, and sufficient rationale was provided for continuing with the same style or switching to another. The group members worked on ten social problems, discussed one problem at a time, and suggested possible solu- tions, which were either accepted or rejected by the other mem- bers and the leader of the group. A group's performance was measured in terms of (a) number of ideas, (b) degree of appropri- ateness of the ideas, and (c) extent of involvement of the group members.

The findings provided strong evidence in support of the model: 1. The highest scores on all three variables were reported

under a P style of leadership when it was preceded by a phase of NT leadership.

2. The NT—P- combination yielded the best results on all variables.

3. NT leadership, when it followed P leadership, led to a reversal on all three counts.

The members and the leader were also asked to indicate their support for each other's ideas. The findings were again unequivo- cal. The NT—P- combination was the best. Prolonged use of A r̂ (i.e., NT—NT- combination) or of TVr following P reduced the effectiveness of a leader.

A note of precaution

The success story of the model will be misleading if it is not pointed out that there have been cases of failures. In a number of studies, the A r̂ style did not lead to greater effectiveness of the subordinates. At times it worked through the organizational cli- mate, which then infiuenced effectiveness of the subordinates. At others, its infiuence was probably overshadowed by other factors, such as power or organizational norms.

We have yet to conduct longitudinal studies in which we can

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 97

follow and facilitate the interactive process of the leader-subor- dinate relationship as it evolves from A r̂ through nt/p to P styles and thus helps the subordinates as well as the leader realize greater effectiveness and personal growth. The conceptualization of the shift from NT to P suggests that a leadership style is not linked with personality traits and that a leader can employ a "cafeteria" approach in adopting different styles for different subordinates. There is some support for these contentions, but the evidence is not yet conclusive.

Notes

1. See J. B. P. Sinha (1978) "Superior Subordinate Relationship and Alienation." National Labour Institute Bulletin, 4(3). 209-223. Kahar states that what an Indian is "sensitive to (and concerned with) are not the goals of work and productivity that are external to the relationship, but the relationship itself, the unfolding of emotional affinity" (S. Kakar [1978] The Inner World: A Psycho-Analytic Study of Hindu Childhood and Society. London: Oxford Uni- versity Press). McClelland supports this view further when he observes that Indiansperform their work as a "favor" to someone (D. C. McClelland [1975] Power: The Inner Experience. New York: The Free Press).

2. J. B. P. Sinha (1980) The Nurturant Task Leader. New Delhi: Concept Publishing House.

3. Ibid., p. 55. 4. P. G. Herbst (1976) Alternatives to Hierarchies. Leiden: Martinus

Nijhoff, Social Science Division. 5. A. Nandy (1975) "Master Builders." The Sunday Statesman. P. 12. 6. Sinha (1980) Op. cit. 7. J. B. P. Sinha (1982) "Further Testing of a Model of Leadership

Effectiveness." Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 19(2). 143-60. 8. A. Hassan, "Subordinate and Task Characteristics as Moderators of

Leadership Effectiveness." Ph.D. thesis, Patna University, Patna, India; C. B. P. Singh, "Behaviour Strategic in Power Relationship." Ph.D. thesis. Patna University, Patna, India; N. Verma. "The Implicit Theory of NT Leadership." ICSSR project. New Delhi, India.

9. R. R. Blake and J. S. Monton (1964) The Managerial Grid. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing; J. K. HcmphiU (1954) A Proposed Theory of Leadership in Small Groups. Columbus, Ohio: Personnel Research Board. Ohio State University.

10. Sinha (1980) Op. cit. In fact, the Indian culture prescribes such a transition in father-son relationships. As a son matures, the father is expected to treat him as an equal and to fade away eventually as the son takes charge of the family.

98 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

11. A. Nandy (1976) "Adorno in India: Revisiting the Psychology of Fascism." Indian Journal of Psychology, 51, 168-78.

12. Sinha (1980) Op. cit., pp. 171-92. 13. J. Verma, quoted by Sinha (1980) Op. cit., p. 99. 14. A. H. M. HabibuUah and J. B. P. Sinha (1980) "Motivational Climate

and Leadership." Vikalpa, 5, 85-93. 15. Hassan, Op. cit. Research in progress. 16. Singh, Op. cit. Research in progress. 17. J. B. P. Sinha and G. P. Chowdhary (1981) "Perception of Subordi-

nates as a Moderator of Leadership Effectiveness in India." Journal of Social Psychology, 113, 115-21.

18. S. B. P. Singh (1982) "A Study of Leadership Styles and Their Effec- tiveness." Ph.D. thesis, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, India.

19. S. Singhal (1981) "Effective Leaders and Leadership Styles in a College Context: Some Research Evidence." Paper presented at the Workshop on Organizational Research in India, Department of Psychology, Allahabad Uni- versity, 1-2 October.

20. J. B. P. Sinha and T. N. Sinha, quoted by Sinha (1980), Op. cit., pp. 179-92.