comparing and contrasting

2

Leadership

Eighth Edition

3

To Madison, Isla, and Sullivan

4

Leadership

Theory and Practice

Eighth Edition

Peter G. Northouse Western Michigan University

5

FOR INFORMATION:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

2455 Teller Road

Thousand Oaks, California 91320

E-mail: [email protected]

SAGE Publications Ltd.

1 Oliver’s Yard

55 City Road

London EC1Y 1SP

United Kingdom

SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area

Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044

India

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.

3 Church Street

#10-04 Samsung Hub

Singapore 049483

Copyright © 2019 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Northouse, Peter Guy, author.

Title: Leadership : theory and practice / Peter G. Northouse, Western Michigan University.

Description: Eighth Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications, [2018] | Revised edition of the author’s Leadership, 2015. | Includes index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017049134 | ISBN 9781506362311 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Leadership. | Leadership—Case studies.

6

Classification: LCC HM1261 .N67 2018 | DDC 303.3/4—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017049134

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Acquisitions Editor: Maggie Stanley

Content Development Editor: Lauren Holmes

Editorial Assistant: Alissa Nance

Production Editor: Bennie Clark Allen

Copy Editor: Melinda Masson

Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.

Proofreader: Sally Jaskold

Indexer: Jean Casalegno

Cover Designer: Gail Buschman

Marketing Manager: Amy Lammers

7

Brief Contents

1. Preface 2. Acknowledgments 3. About the Author 4. About the Contributors 5. 1. Introduction 6. 2. Trait Approach 7. 3. Skills Approach 8. 4. Behavioral Approach 9. 5. Situational Approach

10. 6. Path–Goal Theory 11. 7. Leader–Member Exchange Theory 12. 8. Transformational Leadership 13. 9. Authentic Leadership 14. 10. Servant Leadership 15. 11. Adaptive Leadership 16. 12. Followership 17. 13. Leadership Ethics 18. 14. Team Leadership 19. 15. Gender and Leadership 20. 16. Culture and Leadership 21. Author Index 22. Subject Index

8

Detailed Contents

Preface Acknowledgments About the Author About the Contributors 1. Introduction

Leadership Defined Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership Definition and Components

Leadership Described Trait Versus Process Leadership Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership Leadership and Power Leadership and Coercion Leadership and Management

Plan of the Book Summary References

2. Trait Approach Description

Intelligence Self-Confidence Determination Integrity Sociability Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership Strengths and Leadership Emotional Intelligence

How Does the Trait Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research Case 2.2 A Remarkable Turnaround Case 2.3 Recruiting for the Bank

Leadership Instrument Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)

Summary References

9

3. Skills Approach Description

Three-Skill Approach Technical Skills Human Skills Conceptual Skills Summary of the Three-Skill Approach

Skills Model Competencies Individual Attributes Leadership Outcomes Career Experiences Environmental Influences Summary of the Skills Model

How Does the Skills Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team Case 3.2 A Shift for Lieutenant Colonel Adams Case 3.3 Andy’s Recipe

Leadership Instrument Skills Inventory

Summary References

4. Behavioral Approach Description

The Ohio State Studies The University of Michigan Studies Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid

Authority–Compliance (9,1) Country-Club Management (1,9) Impoverished Management (1,1) Middle-of-the-Road Management (5,5) Team Management (9,9)

Paternalism/Maternalism Opportunism

How Does the Behavioral Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application

10

Case Studies Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First Case 4.2 Eating Lunch Standing Up Case 4.3 We Are Family

Leadership Instrument Leadership Behavior Questionnaire

Summary References

5. Situational Approach Description

Leadership Style Development Level

How Does the Situational Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels Case 5.2 Why Aren’t They Listening? Case 5.3 Getting the Message Across

Leadership Instrument Situational Leadership® Questionnaire: Sample Items

Summary References

6. Path–Goal Theory Description

Leader Behaviors Directive Leadership Supportive Leadership Participative Leadership Achievement-Oriented Leadership

Follower Characteristics Task Characteristics

How Does Path–Goal Theory Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors Case 6.2 Direction for Some, Support for Others Case 6.3 Playing in the Orchestra

Leadership Instrument

11

Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire Summary References

7. Leader–Member Exchange Theory Description

Early Studies Later Studies Leadership Making

How Does LMX Theory Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair Case 7.3 Taking on Additional Responsibilities

Leadership Instrument LMX 7 Questionnaire

Summary References

8. Transformational Leadership Description

Transformational Leadership Defined Transformational Leadership and Charisma A Model of Transformational Leadership

Transformational Leadership Factors Transactional Leadership Factors Nonleadership Factor

Other Transformational Perspectives Bennis and Nanus Kouzes and Posner

How Does the Transformational Leadership Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 8.1 The Vision Failed Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership Case 8.3 Her Vision of a Model Research Center

Leadership Instrument Sample Items From the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X-Short

12

Summary References

9. Authentic Leadership Description

Authentic Leadership Defined Approaches to Authentic Leadership

Practical Approach Theoretical Approach

How Does Authentic Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader? Case 9.2 A Leader Under Fire Case 9.3 The Reluctant First Lady

Leadership Instrument Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire

Summary References

10. Servant Leadership Description

Servant Leadership Defined Historical Basis of Servant Leadership Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader Building a Theory About Servant Leadership

Model of Servant Leadership Antecedent Conditions Servant Leader Behaviors Outcomes Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership

How Does Servant Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 10.1 Everyone Loves Mrs. Noble Case 10.2 Doctor to the Poor Case 10.3 Servant Leadership Takes Flight

Leadership Instrument Servant Leadership Questionnaire

Summary

13

References 11. Adaptive Leadership

Description Adaptive Leadership Defined

A Model of Adaptive Leadership Situational Challenges Technical Challenges Technical and Adaptive Challenges Adaptive Challenges Leader Behaviors Adaptive Work

How Does Adaptive Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus Case 11.3 Redskins No More

Leadership Instrument Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire

Summary References

12. Followership Description

Followership Defined Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives Typologies of Followership

The Zaleznik Typology The Kelley Typology The Chaleff Typology The Kellerman Typology

Theoretical Approaches to Followership Reversing the Lens The Leadership Co-Created Process New Perspectives on Followership

Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest of the Organization’s Mission Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders

14

Followership and Destructive Leaders 1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures 2. Our Need for Security and Certainty 3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special 4. Our Need for Membership in the Human Community 5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social Death 6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad Leader

How Does Followership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 12.1 Bluebird Care Case 12.2 Olympic Rowers Case 12.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal

Leadership Instrument Followership Questionnaire

Summary References

13. Leadership Ethics Description

Ethics Defined Level 1. Preconventional Morality Level 2. Conventional Morality Level 3. Postconventional Morality

Ethical Theories Centrality of Ethics to Leadership Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership The Dark Side of Leadership Principles of Ethical Leadership

Ethical Leaders Respect Others Ethical Leaders Serve Others Ethical Leaders Are Just Ethical Leaders Are Honest Ethical Leaders Build Community

Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 13.1 Choosing a Research Assistant Case 13.2 How Safe Is Safe?

15

Case 13.3 Reexamining a Proposal Leadership Instrument

Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form) Summary References

14. Team Leadership Description

Team Leadership Model Team Effectiveness Leadership Decisions Leadership Actions

How Does the Team Leadership Model Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 14.1 Can This Virtual Team Work? Case 14.2 Team Crisis Within the Gates Case 14.3 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper

Leadership Instrument Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire

Summary References

15. Gender and Leadership Description

The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth Understanding the Labyrinth

Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Effectiveness Navigating the Labyrinth

Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies

Case 15.1 The “Glass Ceiling” Case 15.2 Lack of Inclusion and Credibility Case 15.3 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status

Leadership Instrument The Gender–Leader Implicit Association Test

Summary References

16. Culture and Leadership

16

Description Culture Defined Related Concepts

Ethnocentrism Prejudice

Dimensions of Culture Uncertainty Avoidance Power Distance Institutional Collectivism In-Group Collectivism Gender Egalitarianism Assertiveness Future Orientation Performance Orientation Humane Orientation

Clusters of World Cultures Characteristics of Clusters

Anglo Confucian Asia Eastern Europe Germanic Europe Latin America Latin Europe Middle East Nordic Europe Southern Asia Sub-Saharan Africa

Leadership Behavior and Culture Clusters Eastern Europe Leadership Profile Latin America Leadership Profile Latin Europe Leadership Profile Confucian Asia Leadership Profile Nordic Europe Leadership Profile Anglo Leadership Profile Sub-Saharan Africa Leadership Profile Southern Asia Leadership Profile Germanic Europe Leadership Profile Middle East Leadership Profile

Universally Desirable and Undesirable Leadership Attributes Strengths Criticisms Application

17

Case Studies Case 16.1 A Challenging Workplace Case 16.2 A Special Kind of Financing Case 16.3 Whose Latino Center Is It?

Leadership Instrument Dimensions of Culture Questionnaire

Summary References

Author Index Subject Index

18

Preface

This eighth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice is written with the objective of bridging the gap between the often-simplistic popular approaches to leadership and the more abstract theoretical approaches. Like the previous editions, this edition reviews and analyzes a selected number of leadership theories, giving special attention to how each theoretical approach can be applied in real-world organizations. In essence, my purpose is to explore how leadership theory can inform and direct the way leadership is practiced.

19

New to This Edition

First and foremost, this edition includes a new chapter on followership, which examines the nature of followership, its underpinnings, and how it works. The chapter presents a definition, a model, and the latest research and applications of this emerging approach to leadership. It also examines the relationship between followership and destructive, or toxic, leadership. In addition, the strengths and weaknesses of followership are examined, and a questionnaire to help readers assess their own follower style is provided. Three case studies illustrating followership, including one that addresses the Penn State sexual abuse scandal and another that looks at the 1936 U.S. Olympic rowing team, are presented at the end of the chapter.

In addition to the discussion of destructive leadership in Chapter 12, this edition includes an expanded discussion of the dark side of leadership and psuedotransformational leadership and the negative uses and abuses of leadership in several of the chapters. Readers will also find that the ethics chapter features a new self-assessment instrument, the Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (ELSQ), which assesses a leader’s style of ethical leadership and will help leaders understand their decision-making preferences when confronting ethical dilemmas.

This edition retains many special features from previous editions but has been updated to include new research findings, figures and tables, and everyday applications for many leadership topics including leader–member exchange theory, transformational and authentic leadership, team leadership, the labyrinth of women’s leadership, and historical definitions of leadership. The format of this edition parallels the format used in earlier editions. As with previous editions, the overall goal of Leadership: Theory and Practice is to advance our understanding of the many different approaches to leadership and ways to practice it more effectively.

20

Special Features

Although this text presents and analyzes a wide range of leadership research, every attempt has been made to present the material in a clear, concise, and interesting manner. Reviewers of the book have consistently commented that clarity is one of its major strengths. In addition to the writing style, several other features of the book help make it user-friendly.

Each chapter follows the same format: It is structured to include first theory and then practice. Every chapter contains a discussion of the strengths and criticisms of the approach under consideration, and assists the reader in determining the relative merits of each approach. Each chapter includes an application section that discusses the practical aspects of the approach and how it could be used in today’s organizational settings. Three case studies are provided in each chapter to illustrate common leadership issues and dilemmas. Thought-provoking questions follow each case study, helping readers to interpret the case. A questionnaire is provided in each of the chapters to help the reader apply the approach to his or her own leadership style or setting. Figures and tables illustrate the content of the theory and make the ideas more meaningful.

Through these special features, every effort has been made to make this text substantive, understandable, and practical.

21

Audience

This book provides both an in-depth presentation of leadership theory and a discussion of how it applies to real-life situations. Thus, it is intended for undergraduate and graduate classes in management, leadership studies, business, educational leadership, public administration, nursing and allied health, social work, criminal justice, industrial and organizational psychology, communication, religion, agricultural education, political and military science, and training and development. It is particularly well suited as a supplementary text for core organizational behavior courses or as an overview text within MBA curricula. This book would also be useful as a text in student activities, continuing education, in-service training, and other leadership-development programs.

22

Digital Resources

23

SAGE edge SAGE edge for Instructors

A password-protected instructor resource site at edge.sagepub.com/northouse8e supports teaching with high-quality content to help in creating a rich learning environment for students. The SAGE edge site for this book includes the following instructor resources:

Test banks built on AACSB standards, the book’s learning objectives, and Bloom’s Taxonomy provide a diverse range of test items with ExamView test generation. Each chapter includes 100 test questions to give instructors options for assessing students. Editable, chapter-specific PowerPoint® slides offer complete flexibility for creating a multimedia presentation for the course. Lecture notes for each chapter align with PowerPoint slides to serve as an essential reference, summarizing key concepts to ease preparation for lectures and class discussion. Carefully selected video and multimedia content enhances exploration of key topics to reinforce concepts and provide further insights. Sample answers to questions in the text provide an essential reference. Case notes include summaries, analyses, sample answers to assist with discussion, and exercises. Suggested course projects and assignments help students to apply the concepts they learn to see how they work in various contexts, providing new perspectives. Chapter-specific discussion questions for study help launch classroom interaction by prompting students to engage with the material and by reinforcing important content. Exclusive access to influential SAGE journal articles and business cases ties important research and scholarship to chapter concepts to strengthen learning. Tables and figures from the book are available for download. SAGE coursepacks provide easy LMS integration.

24

SAGE edge for students

The open-access companion website helps students accomplish their coursework goals in an easy-to-use learning environment:

Mobile-friendly practice quizzes encourage self-guided assessment and practice. Mobile-friendly flashcards strengthen understanding of key concepts. Carefully selected video and multimedia content enhances exploration of key topics to reinforce concepts and provide further insights. EXCLUSIVE! Full-text SAGE journal articles have been carefully selected to support and expand on the concepts presented in each chapter. Meaningful web resources with exercises facilitate further exploration of topics.

25

SAGE coursepacks

SAGE coursepacks make it easy to import our quality instructor and student resource content into your school’s learning management system (LMS) with minimal effort. Intuitive and simple to use, SAGE coursepacks give you the control to focus on what really matters: customizing course content to meet your students’ needs. The SAGE coursepacks, created specifically for this book, are customized and curated for use in Blackboard, Canvas, Desire2Learn (D2L), and Moodle.

In addition to the content available on the SAGE edge site, the coursepacks include the following:

Pedagogically robust assessment tools foster review, practice, and critical thinking and offer a better, more complete way to measure student engagement:

Diagnostic chapter pretests and posttests identify opportunities for student improvement, track student progress, and ensure mastery of key learning objectives. Instructions on how to use and integrate the comprehensive assessments and resources are provided. Assignable video with corresponding multimedia assessment tools bring concepts to life that increase student engagement and appeal to different learning styles. The video assessment questions feed to your gradebook. Integrated links to the eBook make it easy to access the mobile-friendly version of the text, which can be read anywhere, anytime.

Interactive eBook

Leadership (8th ed.) is also available as an interactive eBook, which can be packaged with the text for just $5 or purchased separately. The interactive eBook offers hyperlinks to original and licensed videos, including Peter Northouse author videos in which the author illuminates various leadership concepts. The interactive eBook includes additional case studies, as well as carefully chosen journal articles from the web, all from the same pages found in the printed text. Users will also have immediate access to study tools such as highlighting, bookmarking, note-taking/sharing, and more!

26

Acknowledgments

Many people directly or indirectly contributed to the development of the eighth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice. First, I would like to acknowledge my editor, Maggie Stanley, and her talented team at SAGE Publications (Lauren Holmes and Alissa Nance), who have contributed in so many different ways to the quality and success of this book. For their very capable work during the production phase, I would like to thank the copy editor, Melinda Masson, and the project editor, Bennie Clark Allen. In her own unique way, each of these people made valuable contributions to the eighth edition.

I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable contributions to the development of this manuscript:

Sandra Arumugam-Osburn, St. Louis Community College-Forest Park Rob Elkington, University of Ontario Institute of Technology Abimbola Farinde, Columbia Southern University Belinda S. Han, Utah Valley University Deborah A. Johnson-Blake, Liberty University Benjamin Kutsyuruba, Queen’s University Chenwei Liao, Michigan State University Heather J. Mashburn, Appalachian State University Comfort Okpala, North Carolina A&T State University Ric Rohm, Southeastern University Patricia Dillon Sobczak, Virginia Commonwealth University Victor S. Sohmen, Drexel University Brigitte Steinheider, University of Oklahoma-Tulsa Robert Waris, University of Missouri–Kansas City Sandi Zeljko, Lake-Sumter State College Mary Zonsius, Rush University

I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable contributions to the development of the seventh edition manuscript:

Hamid Akbari, Winona State University Meera Alagaraja, University of Louisville Mel Albin, Excelsior College Thomas Batsching, Reutlingen University Cheryl Beeler, Angelo State University Julie Bjorkman, Benedictine University Mark D. Bowman, Methodist University Dianne Burns, University of Manchester

27

Eric Buschlen, Central Michigan University Steven Bryant, Drury University Daniel Calhoun, Georgia Southern University David Conrad, Augsburg College Joyce Cousins, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Denise Danna, LSUHSC School of Nursing S. Todd Deal, Georgia Southern University Caroline S. Fulmer, University of Alabama Brad Gatlin, John Brown University Greig A. Gjerdalen, Capilano University Andrew Gonzales, University of California, Irvine Decker B. Hains, Western Michigan University Amanda Hasty, University of Colorado–Denver Carl Holschen, Missouri Baptist University Kiran Ismail, St. John’s University Irma Jones, University of Texas at Brownsville Michele D. Kegley, University of Cincinnati, Blue Ash College Jeanea M. Lambeth, Pittsburg State University David Lees, University of Derby David S. McClain, University of Hawaii at Manoa Carol McMillan, New School University Richard Milter, Johns Hopkins University Christopher Neck, Arizona State University–Tempe Keeok Park, University of La Verne Richard Parkman, University of Plymouth Lori M. Pindar, Clemson University Chaminda S. Prelis, University of Dubuque Casey Rae, George Fox University Noel Ronan, Waterford Institute of Technology Louis Rubino, California State University, Northridge Shadia Sachedina, Baruch College (School of Public Affairs) Harriet L. Schwartz, Carlow University Kelli K. Smith, University of Nebraska-Lincoln David Swenson, The College of St. Scholastica Danny L. Talbot, Washington State University Robert L. Taylor, University of Louisville Precious Taylor-Clifton, Cambridge College John Tummons, University of Missouri Kristi Tyran, Western Washington University Tamara Von George, Granite State College Natalie Walker, Seminole State College William Welch, Bowie State University

28

David E. Williams, Texas Tech University Tony Wohlers, Cameron University Sharon A. Wulf, Worcester Polytechnic Institute School of Business Alec Zama, Grand View University Xia Zhao, California State University, Dominguez Hills

In addition, I would like to thank, for their exceptional work on the leadership profile tool and the ancillaries, Isolde Anderson (Hope College), John Baker (Western Kentucky University), Kari Keating (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Kathryn Woods (Austin Peay State University), Eric Buschlen (Central Michigan University), Lou Sabina (Stetson University), and Neda Dallal.

A very special acknowledgment goes to Laurel Northouse for her insightful critiques and ongoing support. In addition, I am especially grateful to Marie Lee for her exceptional editing and guidance throughout this project. For his review of and comments on the followership chapter, I am indebted to Ronald Riggio (Claremont McKenna University). I would like to thank Sarah Chace (Marian University) for her contributions to the adaptive leadership chapter, Leah Omilion-Hodges (Western Michigan University) for her contributions to the leader–member exchange chapter, Isolde Anderson (Hope College) for her comprehensive literature reviews, Robin Curtiss for her contributions to a case study on followership, and Rudy Leon for her editorial assistance.

Finally, I would like to thank the many undergraduate and graduate students whom I have taught through the years. Their ongoing feedback has helped clarify my thinking about leadership and encouraged me to make plain the practical implications of leadership theories.

29

About the Author

Peter G. Northouse, PhD, is Professor Emeritus of Communication in the School of Communication at Western Michigan University. Leadership: Theory and Practice is the best-selling academic textbook on leadership in the world and has been translated into 13 languages. In addition to authoring publications in professional journals, he is the author of Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (now in its fourth edition) and co-author of Leadership Case Studies in Education (now in its second edition) and Health Communication: Strategies for Health Professionals (now in its third edition). His scholarly and curricular interests include models of leadership, leadership assessment, ethical leadership, and leadership and group dynamics. For more than 30 years, he has taught undergraduate and graduate courses in leadership, interpersonal communication, and organizational communication on both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Currently, he is a consultant and lecturer on trends in leadership research, leadership development, and leadership education. He holds a doctorate in speech communication from the University of Denver, and master’s and bachelor’s degrees in communication education from Michigan State University.

30

About the Contributors

Crystal L. Hoyt completed her doctorate in social psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and is a professor of leadership studies and psychology at the University of Richmond. Her primary research interests include female and minority leaders, stereotyping and discrimination, stigma, and cognitive biases. In her primary area of research, she explores the role of beliefs, such as self-efficacy, implicit theories, and political ideologies, in the experiences and perceptions of women and minorities in leadership or STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields, or of those who are overweight. In a more applied fashion, she examines factors, such as role models, that may buffer individuals from the deleterious effects of stereotypes and discrimination. Her research appears in journals such as Psychological Science, Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, and The Leadership Quarterly. She has published over 50 journal articles and book chapters, and she has co-edited three books.

Susan E. Kogler Hill (PhD, University of Denver, 1974) is Professor Emeritus and former chair of the School of Communication at Cleveland State University. Her research and consulting have been in the areas of interpersonal and organizational communication. She specializes in group leadership, teamwork, empowerment, and mentoring. She is author of a text titled Improving Interpersonal Competence. In addition, she has written book chapters and published articles in many professional journals.

Stefanie Simon is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Siena College. She earned her PhD in social psychology from Tulane University and was the Robert A. Oden Jr. Postdoctoral Fellow for Innovation in the Liberal Arts at Carleton College before joining the faculty at Siena. Her research centers on the psychology of diversity, with a focus on prejudice, discrimination, and leadership. In her work, she focuses on the perspective of the target of prejudice and discrimination, as well as the perspective of the perpetrator of prejudice and discrimination. She is particularly interested in how leaders of diverse groups can promote positive intergroup relations and reduce inequality in society.

31

1 Introduction

Leadership is a highly sought-after and highly valued commodity. In the 20 years since the first edition of this book was published, the public has become increasingly captivated by the idea of leadership. People continue to ask themselves and others what makes good leaders. As individuals, they seek more information on how to become effective leaders. As a result, bookstore shelves are filled with popular books about leaders and advice on how to be a leader. Many people believe that leadership is a way to improve their personal, social, and professional lives. Corporations seek those with leadership ability because they believe they bring special assets to their organizations and, ultimately, improve the bottom line. Academic institutions throughout the country have responded by providing programs in leadership studies.

In addition, leadership has gained the attention of researchers worldwide. Leadership research is increasing dramatically, and findings underscore that there is a wide variety of different theoretical approaches to explain the complexities of the leadership process (e.g., Bass, 2008; Bryman, 1992; Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson, & Uhl-Bien, 2011; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Dinh et al., 2014; Gardner, 1990; Hickman, 2016; Mumford, 2006; Rost, 1991). Some researchers conceptualize leadership as a trait or as a behavior, whereas others view leadership from an information-processing perspective or relational standpoint. Leadership has been studied using both qualitative and quantitative methods in many contexts, including small groups, therapeutic groups, and large organizations. Collectively, the research findings on leadership from all of these areas provide a picture of a process that is far more sophisticated and complex than the often-simplistic view presented in some of the popular books on leadership.

This book treats leadership as a complex process having multiple dimensions. Based on the research literature, this text provides an in-depth description and application of many different approaches to leadership. Our emphasis is on how theory can inform the practice of leadership. In this book, we describe each theory and then explain how the theory can be used in real situations.

32

Leadership Defined

There are many ways to finish the sentence “Leadership is . . .” In fact, as Stogdill (1974, p. 7) pointed out in a review of leadership research, there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are people who have tried to define it. It is much like the words democracy, love, and peace. Although each of us intuitively knows what we mean by such words, the words can have different meanings for different people. As Box 1.1 shows, scholars and practitioners have attempted to define leadership for more than a century without universal consensus.

Box 1.1 The Evolution of Leadership Definitions

While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting a definition to the term has proved to be a challenging endeavor for scholars and practitioners alike. More than a century has lapsed since leadership became a topic of academic introspection, and definitions have evolved continuously during that period. These definitions have been influenced by many factors from world affairs and politics to the perspectives of the discipline in which the topic is being studied. In a seminal work, Rost (1991) analyzed materials written from 1900 to 1990, finding more than 200 different definitions for leadership. His analysis provides a succinct history of how leadership has been defined through the last century:

33

1900–1929 Definitions of leadership appearing in the first three decades of the 20th century emphasized control and centralization of power with a common theme of domination. For example, at a conference on leadership in 1927, leadership was defined as “the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927, p. 124).

34

1930s In the 1930s, traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an emerging view of leadership as influence rather than domination. Leadership was also identified as the interaction of an individual’s specific personality traits with those of a group; it was noted that while the attitudes and activities of the many may be changed by the one, the many may also influence a leader.

35

1940s The group approach came into the forefront in the 1940s with leadership being defined as the behavior of an individual while involved in directing group activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same time, leadership by persuasion was distinguished from “drivership” or leadership by coercion (Copeland, 1942).

36

1950s Three themes dominated leadership definitions during the 1950s:

continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what leaders do in groups; leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which defined leadership based on behavior of the leader; and effectiveness, in which leadership was defined by the ability to influence overall group effectiveness.

37

1960s Although a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw harmony amongst leadership scholars. The prevailing definition of leadership as behavior that influences people toward shared goals was underscored by Seeman (1960), who described leadership as “acts by persons which influence other persons in a shared direction” (p. 53).

38

1970s In the 1970s, the group focus gave way to the organizational behavior approach, where leadership became viewed as “initiating and maintaining groups or organizations to accomplish group or organizational goals” (Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns’s (1978) definition, however, was the most important concept of leadership to emerge: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers” (p. 425).

39

1980s The 1980s exploded with scholarly and popular works on the nature of leadership, bringing the topic to the apex of the academic and public consciousness. As a result, the number of definitions for leadership became a prolific stew with several persevering themes:

Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still predominantly delivered the message that leadership is getting followers to do what the leader wants done. Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership definitions of the 1980s, influence was examined from every angle. In an effort to distinguish leadership from management, however, scholars insisted that leadership is noncoercive influence. Traits. Spurred by the national best seller In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982), the leadership-as-excellence movement brought leader traits back to the spotlight. As a result, many people’s understanding of leadership is based on a trait orientation. Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a movement defining leadership as a transformational process, stating that leadership occurs “when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p. 83).

40

From the 1990s Into the 21st Century Debate continues as to whether leadership and management are separate processes, but emerging research emphasizes the process of leadership, whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal, rather than developing new ways of defining leadership. Among these emerging leadership approaches are

authentic leadership, in which the authenticity of leaders and their leadership is emphasized; spiritual leadership, which focuses on leadership that utilizes values and sense of calling and membership to motivate followers; servant leadership, which puts the leader in the role of servant, who utilizes “caring principles” to focus on followers’ needs to help these followers become more autonomous, knowledgeable, and like servants themselves; adaptive leadership, in which leaders encourage followers to adapt by confronting and solving problems, challenges, and changes; followership, which puts a spotlight on followers and the role followers play in the leadership process; and discursive leadership, which posits that leadership is created not so much through leader traits, skills, and behaviors, but through communication practices that are negotiated between leader and follower (Aritz, Walker, Cardon, & Zhang, 2017; Fairhurst, 2007).

After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a common definition for leadership. Because of such factors as growing global influences and generational differences, leadership will continue to have different meanings for different people. The bottom line is that leadership is a complex concept for which a determined definition may long be in flux.

Source: Adapted from Leadership for the Twenty-First Century, by J. C. Rost, 1991, New York, NY: Praeger.

41

Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership

In the past 60 years, as many as 65 different classification systems have been developed to define the dimensions of leadership (Fleishman et al., 1991). One such classification system, directly related to our discussion, is the scheme proposed by Bass (2008, pp. 11– 20). He suggested that some definitions view leadership as the focus of group processes. From this perspective, the leader is at the center of group change and activity and embodies the will of the group. Another set of definitions conceptualizes leadership from a personality perspective, which suggests that leadership is a combination of special traits or characteristics that some individuals possess. These traits enable those individuals to induce others to accomplish tasks. Other approaches to leadership define it as an act or a behavior—the things leaders do to bring about change in a group.

In addition, some define leadership in terms of the power relationship that exists between leaders and followers. From this viewpoint, leaders have power that they wield to effect change in others. Others view leadership as a transformational process that moves followers to accomplish more than is usually expected of them. Finally, some scholars address leadership from a skills perspective. This viewpoint stresses the capabilities (knowledge and skills) that make effective leadership possible.

42

Definition and Components

Despite the multitude of ways in which leadership has been conceptualized, the following components can be identified as central to the phenomenon: (a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c) leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals. Based on these components, the following definition of leadership is used in this text:

Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.

Defining leadership as a process means that it is not a trait or characteristic that resides in the leader, but rather a transactional event that occurs between the leader and the followers. Process implies that a leader affects and is affected by followers. It emphasizes that leadership is not a linear, one-way event, but rather an interactive event. When leadership is defined in this manner, it becomes available to everyone. It is not restricted to the formally designated leader in a group.

Leadership involves influence. It is concerned with how the leader affects followers and the communication that occurs between leaders and followers (Ruben & Gigliotti, 2017). Influence is the sine qua non of leadership. Without influence, leadership does not exist.

Leadership occurs in groups. Groups are the context in which leadership takes place. Leadership involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose. This can be a small task group, a community group, or a large group encompassing an entire organization. Leadership is about one individual influencing a group of others to accomplish common goals. Others (a group) are required for leadership to occur. Leadership training programs that teach people to lead themselves are not considered a part of leadership within the definition that is set forth in this discussion.

Leadership includes attention to common goals. Leaders direct their energies toward individuals who are trying to achieve something together. By common, we mean that the leaders and followers have a mutual purpose. Attention to common goals gives leadership an ethical overtone because it stresses the need for leaders to work with followers to achieve selected goals. Stressing mutuality lessens the possibility that leaders might act toward followers in ways that are forced or unethical. It also increases the possibility that leaders and followers will work together toward a common good (Rost, 1991).

Throughout this text, the people who engage in leadership will be called leaders, and those toward whom leadership is directed will be called followers. Both leaders and followers are involved together in the leadership process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders (Burns, 1978; Heller & Van Til, 1983; Hollander, 1992; Jago, 1982). An extended discussion of followership is provided in Chapter 12. Although leaders and followers are

43

closely linked, it is the leader who often initiates the relationship, creates the communication linkages, and carries the burden for maintaining the relationship.

In our discussion of leaders and followers, attention will be directed toward follower issues as well as leader issues. Leaders have an ethical responsibility to attend to the needs and concerns of followers. As Burns (1978) pointed out, discussions of leadership sometimes are viewed as elitist because of the implied power and importance often ascribed to leaders in the leader–follower relationship. Leaders are not above or better than followers. Leaders and followers must be understood in relation to each other (Hollander, 1992) and collectively (Burns, 1978). They are in the leadership relationship together—and are two sides of the same coin (Rost, 1991).

44

Leadership Described

In addition to definitional issues, it is important to discuss several other questions pertaining to the nature of leadership. In the following section, we will address questions such as how leadership as a trait differs from leadership as a process; how appointed leadership differs from emergent leadership; and how the concepts of power, coercion, and management differ from leadership.

Figure 1.1 The Different Views of Leadership

Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.

45

Trait Versus Process Leadership

We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader” or “She is a natural leader.” These statements are commonly expressed by people who take a trait perspective toward leadership. The trait perspective suggests that certain individuals have special innate or inborn characteristics or qualities that make them leaders, and that it is these qualities that differentiate them from nonleaders. Some of the personal qualities used to identify leaders include unique physical factors (e.g., height), personality features (e.g., extraversion), and other characteristics (e.g., intelligence and fluency; Bryman, 1992). In Chapter 2, we will discuss a large body of research that has examined these personal qualities.

To describe leadership as a trait is quite different from describing it as a process (Figure 1.1). The trait viewpoint conceptualizes leadership as a property or set of properties possessed in varying degrees by different people (Jago, 1982). This suggests that it resides in select people and restricts leadership to those who are believed to have special, usually inborn, talents.

The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon that resides in the context of the interactions between leaders and followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a process, leadership can be observed in leader behaviors (Jago, 1982), and can be learned. The process definition of leadership is consistent with the definition of leadership that we have set forth in this chapter.

46

Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership

Some people are leaders because of their formal position in an organization, whereas others are leaders because of the way other group members respond to them. These two common forms of leadership are called assigned leadership and emergent leadership. Leadership that is based on occupying a position in an organization is assigned leadership. Team leaders, plant managers, department heads, directors, and administrators are all examples of assigned leaders.

Yet the person assigned to a leadership position does not always become the real leader in a particular setting. When others perceive an individual as the most influential member of a group or an organization, regardless of the individual’s title, the person is exhibiting emergent leadership. The individual acquires emergent leadership through other people in the organization who support and accept that individual’s behavior. This type of leadership is not assigned by position; rather, it emerges over a period through communication. Some of the positive communication behaviors that account for successful leader emergence include being verbally involved, being informed, seeking others’ opinions, initiating new ideas, and being firm but not rigid (Ellis & Fisher, 1994).

Researchers have found that, in addition to communication behaviors, personality plays a role in leadership emergence. For example, Smith and Foti (1998) found that certain personality traits were related to leadership emergence in a sample of 160 male college students. The individuals who were more dominant, more intelligent, and more confident about their own performance (general self-efficacy) were more likely to be identified as leaders by other members of their task group. Although it is uncertain whether these findings apply to women as well, Smith and Foti suggested that these three traits could be used to identify individuals perceived to be emergent leaders.

Leadership emergence may also be affected by gender-biased perceptions. In a study of 40 mixed-sex college groups, Watson and Hoffman (2004) found that women who were urged to persuade their task groups to adopt high-quality decisions succeeded with the same frequency as men with identical instructions. Although women were equally influential leaders in their groups, they were rated significantly lower than comparable men were on leadership. Furthermore, these influential women were also rated as significantly less likable than comparably influential men were. These results suggest that there continue to be barriers to women’s emergence as leaders in some settings.

A unique perspective on leadership emergence is provided by social identity theory (Hogg, 2001). From this perspective, leadership emergence is the degree to which a person fits with the identity of the group as a whole. As groups develop over time, a group prototype also develops. Individuals emerge as leaders in the group when they become most like the group prototype. Being similar to the prototype makes leaders attractive to the group and gives

47

them influence with the group.

The leadership approaches we discuss in the subsequent chapters of this book apply equally to assigned leadership and emergent leadership. When a person is engaged in leadership, that person is a leader, whether leadership was assigned or emerged. This book focuses on the leadership process that occurs when any individual is engaged in influencing other group members in their efforts to reach a common goal.

48

Leadership and Power

The concept of power is related to leadership because it is part of the influence process. Power is the capacity or potential to influence. People have power when they have the ability to affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses of action. Judges, doctors, coaches, and teachers are all examples of people who have the potential to influence us. When they do, they are using their power, the resource they draw on to effect change in us.

Although there are no explicit theories in the research literature about power and leadership, power is a concept that people often associate with leadership. It is common for people to view leaders (both good and bad) and people in positions of leadership as individuals who wield power over others, and as a result, power is often thought of as synonymous with leadership. In addition, people are often intrigued by how leaders use their power. Understanding how power is used in leadership is instrumental as well in understanding the dark side of leadership, where leaders use their leadership to achieve their own personal ends and lead in toxic and destructive ways (Krasikova, Green, & LeBreton, 2013). Studying how famous leaders, such as Hitler or Alexander the Great, use power to effect change in others is titillating to many people because it underscores that power can indeed effectuate change and maybe if they had power they too could effectuate change.

In her 2012 book The End of Leadership, Kellerman argues there has been a shift in leadership power during the last 40 years. Power used to be the domain of leaders, but that is diminishing and shifting to followers. Changes in culture have meant followers demand more from leaders, and leaders have responded. Access to technology has empowered followers, given them access to huge amounts of information, and made leaders more transparent. The result is a decline in respect for leaders and leaders’ legitimate power. In effect, followers have used information power to level the playing field. Power is no longer synonymous with leadership, and in the social contract between leaders and followers, leaders wield less power, according to Kellerman. For example, Posner (2015) examined volunteer leaders, such as those who sit on boards for nonprofit organizations, and found that while these followers did not have positional authority in the organization, they were able to influence leadership. Volunteer leaders engaged more frequently in leadership behaviors than did paid leaders.

Table 1.1 Six Bases of Power

Referent Power

Based on followers’ identification and liking for the leader. A teacher who is adored by students has referent power.

Expert Power

Based on followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. A tour guide who is knowledgeable about a foreign country has expert

49

Power power.

Legitimate Power

Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge who administers sentences in the courtroom exhibits legitimate power.

Reward Power

Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. A supervisor who compliments employees who work hard is using reward power.

Coercive Power

Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coach who sits players on the bench for being late to practice is using coercive power.

Information Power

Derived from possessing knowledge that others want or need. A boss who has information regarding new criteria to decide employee promotion eligibility has information power.

Source: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper & Row; and “Social Influence and Power,” by B. H. Raven, 1965, in I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current Studies in Social Psychology (pp. 371–382), New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

In college courses today, the most widely cited research on power is French and Raven’s (1959) work on the bases of social power. In their work, they conceptualized power from the framework of a dyadic relationship that included both the person influencing and the person being influenced. French and Raven identified five common and important bases of power—referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and coercive—and Raven (1965) identified a sixth, information power (Table 1.1). Each of these bases of power increases a leader’s capacity to influence the attitudes, values, or behaviors of others.

In organizations, there are two major kinds of power: position power and personal power. Position power is the power a person derives from a particular office or rank in a formal organizational system. It is the influence capacity a leader derives from having higher status than the followers have. Vice presidents and department heads have more power than staff personnel do because of the positions they hold in the organization. Position power includes legitimate, reward, coercive, and information power (Table 1.2).

Table 1.2 Types and Bases of Power

Position Power Personal Power

Legitimate Referent

50

Reward Expert

Coercive

Information Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.

Personal power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable. When leaders act in ways that are important to followers, it gives leaders power. For example, some managers have power because their followers consider them to be good role models. Others have power because their followers view them as highly competent or considerate. In both cases, these managers’ power is ascribed to them by others, based on how they are seen in their relationships with others. Personal power includes referent and expert power (Table 1.2).

In discussions of leadership, it is not unusual for leaders to be described as wielders of power, as individuals who dominate others. In these instances, power is conceptualized as a tool that leaders use to achieve their own ends. Contrary to this view of power, Burns (1978) emphasized power from a relationship standpoint. For Burns, power is not an entity that leaders use over others to achieve their own ends; instead, power occurs in relationships. It should be used by leaders and followers to promote their collective goals.

In this text, our discussions of leadership treat power as a relational concern for both leaders and followers. We pay attention to how leaders work with followers to reach common goals.

51

Leadership and Coercion

Coercive power is one of the specific kinds of power available to leaders. Coercion involves the use of force to effect change. To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may include manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment. Coercion often involves the use of threats, punishment, and negative reward schedules and is most often seen as a characteristic of the dark side of leadership. Classic examples of coercive leaders are Adolf Hitler in Germany, the Taliban leaders in Afghanistan, Jim Jones in Guyana, and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, each of whom used power and restraint to force followers to engage in extreme behaviors.

It is important to distinguish between coercion and leadership because it allows us to separate out from our examples of leadership the behaviors of individuals such as Hitler, the Taliban, and Jones. In our discussions of leadership, coercive people are not used as models of ideal leadership. Our definition suggests that leadership is reserved for those who influence a group of individuals toward a common goal. Leaders who use coercion are interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in the wants and needs of followers. Using coercion runs counter to working with followers to achieve a common goal.

52

Leadership and Management

Leadership is a process that is similar to management in many ways. Leadership involves influence, as does management. Leadership entails working with people, which management entails as well. Leadership is concerned with effective goal accomplishment, and so is management. In general, many of the functions of management are activities that are consistent with the definition of leadership we set forth at the beginning of this chapter.

But leadership is also different from management. Whereas the study of leadership can be traced back to Aristotle, management emerged around the turn of the 20th century with the advent of our industrialized society. Management was created as a way to reduce chaos in organizations, to make them run more effectively and efficiently. The primary functions of management, as first identified by Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling. These functions are still representative of the field of management today.

In a book that compared the functions of management with the functions of leadership, Kotter (1990) argued that they are quite dissimilar (Figure 1.2). The overriding function of management is to provide order and consistency to organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement. Management is about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and constructive change.

As illustrated in Figure 1.2, the major activities of management are played out differently than the activities of leadership. Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7– 8) contended that both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper. For example, if an organization has strong management without leadership, the outcome can be stifling and bureaucratic. Conversely, if an organization has strong leadership without management, the outcome can be meaningless or misdirected change for change’s sake. To be effective, organizations need to nourish both competent management and skilled leadership.

Figure 1.2 Functions of Management and Leadership

53

Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.

Many scholars, in addition to Kotter (1990), argue that leadership and management are distinct constructs. For example, Bennis and Nanus (2007) maintained that there is a significant difference between the two. To manage means to accomplish activities and master routines, whereas to lead means to influence others and create visions for change. Bennis and Nanus made the distinction very clear in their frequently quoted sentence, “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (p. 221).

Rost (1991) has also been a proponent of distinguishing between leadership and management. He contended that leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a unidirectional authority relationship. Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of developing mutual purposes, management is directed toward coordinating activities in order to get a job done. Leaders and followers work together to create real change, whereas managers and subordinates join forces to sell goods and services (Rost, 1991, pp. 149–152).

In a recent study, Simonet and Tett (2012) explored how leadership and management are best conceptualized by having 43 experts identify the overlap and differences between leadership and management in regard to 63 different competencies. They found a large number of competencies (22) descriptive of both leadership and management (e.g., productivity, customer focus, professionalism, and goal setting), but they also found several

54

unique descriptors for each. Specifically, they found leadership was distinguished by motivating intrinsically, creative thinking, strategic planning, tolerance of ambiguity, and being able to read people, and management was distinguished by rule orientation, short- term planning, motivating extrinsically, orderliness, safety concerns, and timeliness.

Approaching the issue from a narrower viewpoint, Zaleznik (1977) went so far as to argue that leaders and managers themselves are distinct, and that they are basically different types of people. He contended that managers are reactive and prefer to work with people to solve problems but do so with low emotional involvement. They act to limit choices. Zaleznik suggested that leaders, on the other hand, are emotionally active and involved. They seek to shape ideas instead of responding to them and act to expand the available options to solve long-standing problems. Leaders change the way people think about what is possible.

Although there are clear differences between management and leadership, the two constructs overlap. When managers are involved in influencing a group to meet its goals, they are involved in leadership. When leaders are involved in planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, they are involved in management. Both processes involve influencing a group of individuals toward goal attainment. For purposes of our discussion in this book, we focus on the leadership process. In our examples and case studies, we treat the roles of managers and leaders similarly and do not emphasize the differences between them.

55

Plan of the Book

This book is user-friendly. It is based on substantive theories but is written to emphasize practice and application. Each chapter in the book follows the same format. The first section of each chapter briefly describes the leadership approach and discusses various research studies applicable to the approach. The second section of each chapter evaluates the approach, highlighting its strengths and criticisms. Special attention is given to how the approach contributes or fails to contribute to an overall understanding of the leadership process. The next section uses case studies to prompt discussion of how the approach can be applied in ongoing organizations. Finally, each chapter provides a leadership questionnaire along with a discussion of how the questionnaire measures the reader’s leadership style. Each chapter ends with a summary and references.

56

Summary

Leadership is a topic with universal appeal; in the popular press and academic research literature, much has been written about leadership. Despite the abundance of writing on the topic, leadership has presented a major challenge to practitioners and researchers interested in understanding the nature of leadership. It is a highly valued phenomenon that is very complex.

Through the years, leadership has been defined and conceptualized in many ways. The component common to nearly all classifications is that leadership is an influence process that assists groups of individuals toward goal attainment. Specifically, in this book leadership is defined as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.

Because both leaders and followers are part of the leadership process, it is important to address issues that confront followers as well as issues that confront leaders. Leaders and followers should be understood in relation to each other.

In prior research, many studies have focused on leadership as a trait. The trait perspective suggests that certain people in our society have special inborn qualities that make them leaders. This view restricts leadership to those who are believed to have special characteristics. In contrast, the approach in this text suggests that leadership is a process that can be learned, and that it is available to everyone.

Two common forms of leadership are assigned and emergent. Assigned leadership is based on a formal title or position in an organization. Emergent leadership results from what one does and how one acquires support from followers. Leadership, as a process, applies to individuals in both assigned roles and emergent roles.

Related to leadership is the concept of power, the potential to influence. There are two major kinds of power: position and personal. Position power, which is much like assigned leadership, is the power an individual derives from having a title in a formal organizational system. It includes legitimate, reward, information, and coercive power. Personal power comes from followers and includes referent and expert power. Followers give it to leaders because followers believe leaders have something of value. Treating power as a shared resource is important because it de-emphasizes the idea that leaders are power wielders.

While coercion has been a common power brought to bear by many individuals in charge, it should not be viewed as ideal leadership. Our definition of leadership stresses using influence to bring individuals toward a common goal, while coercion involves the use of threats and punishment to induce change in followers for the sake of the leaders. Coercion runs counter to leadership because it does not treat leadership as a process that emphasizes

57

working with followers to achieve shared objectives.

Leadership and management are different concepts that overlap. They are different in that management traditionally focuses on the activities of planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, whereas leadership emphasizes the general influence process. According to some researchers, management is concerned with creating order and stability, whereas leadership is about adaptation and constructive change. Other researchers go so far as to argue that managers and leaders are different types of people, with managers being more reactive and less emotionally involved and leaders being more proactive and more emotionally involved. The overlap between leadership and management is centered on how both involve influencing a group of individuals in goal attainment.

In this book, we discuss leadership as a complex process. Based on the research literature, we describe selected approaches to leadership and assess how they can be used to improve leadership in real situations.

Sharpen your skills with SAGE edge at edge.sagepub.com/northouse8e

58

References Aritz, J., Walker, R., Cardon, P., & Zhang, L. (2017). Discourse of leadership: The power

of questions in organizational decision making. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(2), 161–181. doi:10.1177/2329488416687054

Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London, UK: SAGE.

Bryman, A., Collinson, D., Grint, K., Jackson, G., & Uhl-Bien, M. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of leadership. London, UK: SAGE.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Copeland, N. (1942). Psychology and the soldier. Harrisburg, PA: Military Service Publications.

Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (Eds.). (2012). The nature of leadership (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62.

Ellis, D. G., & Fisher, B. A. (1994). Small group decision making: Communication and the group process (4th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Fairhurst, G. T. (2007). Discursive leadership: In conversation with leadership psychology.

59

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Fayol, H. (1916). General and industrial management. London, UK: Pitman.

Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B. (1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(4), 245–287.

French, J. R., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 259–269). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.

Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York, NY: Free Press.

Heller, T., & Van Til, J. (1983). Leadership and followership: Some summary propositions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18, 405–414.

Hemphill, J. K. (1949). Situational factors in leadership. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.

Hickman, G. R. (Ed.). (2016). Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184–200.

Hollander, E. P. (1992). Leadership, followership, self, and others. The Leadership Quarterly, 3(1), 43–54.

Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3), 315–336.

Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

60

Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management. New York, NY: Free Press.

Krasikova, D. V., Green, S. G., & LeBreton, J. M. (2013). Destructive leadership: A theoretical review, integration, and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1308–1338.

Moore, B. V. (1927). The May conference on leadership. Personnel Journal, 6, 124–128.

Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. New York, NY: Warner Books.

Posner, B. Z. (2015). An investigation into the leadership practices of volunteer leaders. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(7), 885–898.

Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. In I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychology (pp. 371–382). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Praeger.

Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2017). Communication: Sine qua non of organizational leadership theory and practice. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(1), 12–30.

Seeman, M. (1960). Social status and leadership. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.

Simonet, D. V., & Tett, R. P. (2012). Five perspectives on the leadership-management relationship: A competency-based evaluation and integration. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(2), 199–213.

61

Smith, J. A., & Foti, R. J. (1998). A pattern approach to the study of leader emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(2), 147–160.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York, NY: Free Press.

Watson, C., & Hoffman, L. R. (2004). The role of task-related behavior in the emergence of leaders. Group & Organization Management, 29(6), 659–685.

Zaleznik, A. (1977, May–June). Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, 55, 67–78.

62

2 Trait Approach

63

Description

Of interest to scholars throughout the 20th century, the trait approach was one of the first systematic attempts to study leadership. In the early 20th century, leadership traits were studied to determine what made certain people great leaders. The theories that were developed were called “great man” theories because they focused on identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social, political, and military leaders (e.g., Catherine the Great, Mohandas Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc, and Napoleon Bonaparte). It was believed that people were born with these traits, and that only the “great” people possessed them. During this time, research concentrated on determining the specific traits that clearly differentiated leaders from followers (Bass, 2008; Jago, 1982).

In the mid-20th century, the trait approach was challenged by research that questioned the universality of leadership traits. In a major review, Stogdill (1948) suggested that no consistent set of traits differentiated leaders from nonleaders across a variety of situations. An individual with leadership traits who was a leader in one situation might not be a leader in another situation. Rather than being a quality that individuals possess, leadership was reconceptualized as a relationship between people in a social situation. Personal factors related to leadership continued to be important, but researchers contended that these factors were to be considered as relative to the requirements of the situation.

The trait approach has generated much interest among researchers for its explanation of how traits influence leadership (Bryman, 1992). For example, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) went so far as to claim that effective leaders are actually distinct types of people. Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986) found that traits were strongly associated with individuals’ perceptions of leadership. More recently, Dinh and Lord (2012) examined the relationship between leadership effectiveness and followers’ perception of leadership traits.

The trait approach has earned new interest through the current emphasis given by many researchers to visionary and charismatic leadership (see Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Jacquart & Antonakis, 2015; Nadler & Tushman, 2012; Zaccaro, 2007; Zaleznik, 1977). Charismatic leadership catapulted to the forefront of public attention with the 2008 election of the United States’ first African American president, Barack Obama, who is perceived by many to be charismatic, among many other attributes. In a study to determine what distinguishes charismatic leaders from others, Jung and Sosik (2006) found that charismatic leaders consistently possess traits of self-monitoring, engagement in impression management, motivation to attain social power, and motivation to attain self-actualization. In short, the trait approach is alive and well. It began with an emphasis on identifying the qualities of great persons, shifted to include the impact of situations on leadership, and, currently, has shifted back to reemphasize the critical role of traits in effective leadership.

64

Although the research on traits spanned the entire 20th century, a good overview of this approach is found in two surveys completed by Stogdill (1948, 1974). In his first survey, Stogdill analyzed and synthesized more than 124 trait studies conducted between 1904 and 1947. In his second study, he analyzed another 163 studies completed between 1948 and 1970. By taking a closer look at each of these reviews, we can obtain a clearer picture of how individuals’ traits contribute to the leadership process.

Stogdill’s first survey identified a group of important leadership traits that were related to how individuals in various groups became leaders. His results showed that an average individual in a leadership role is different from an average group member with regard to the following eight traits: intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability.

The findings of Stogdill’s first survey also indicated that an individual does not become a leader solely because that individual possesses certain traits. Rather, the traits that leaders possess must be relevant to situations in which the leader is functioning. As stated earlier, leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in another situation. Findings showed that leadership was not a passive state but resulted from a working relationship between the leader and other group members. This research marked the beginning of a new approach to leadership research that focused on leadership behaviors and leadership situations.

Stogdill’s second survey, published in 1974, analyzed 163 new studies and compared the findings of these studies to the findings he had reported in his first survey. The second survey was more balanced in its description of the role of traits and leadership. Whereas the first survey implied that leadership is determined principally by situational factors and not traits, the second survey argued more moderately that both traits and situational factors were determinants of leadership. In essence, the second survey validated the original trait idea that a leader’s characteristics are indeed a part of leadership.

Similar to the first survey, Stogdill’s second survey identified traits that were positively associated with leadership. The list included the following 10 characteristics:

1. drive for responsibility and task completion; 2. vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals; 3. risk taking and originality in problem solving; 4. drive to exercise initiative in social situations; 5. self-confidence and sense of personal identity; 6. willingness to accept consequences of decision and action; 7. readiness to absorb interpersonal stress; 8. willingness to tolerate frustration and delay; 9. ability to influence other people’s behavior; and

10. capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand.

65

Mann (1959) conducted a similar study that examined more than 1,400 findings regarding traits and leadership in small groups, but he placed less emphasis on how situational factors influenced leadership. Although tentative in his conclusions, Mann suggested that certain traits could be used to distinguish leaders from nonleaders. His results identified leaders as strong in the following six traits: intelligence, masculinity, adjustment, dominance, extraversion, and conservatism.

Lord et al. (1986) reassessed Mann’s (1959) findings using a more sophisticated procedure called meta-analysis. Lord et al. found that intelligence, masculinity, and dominance were significantly related to how individuals perceived leaders. From their findings, the authors argued strongly that traits could be used to make discriminations consistently across situations between leaders and nonleaders.

Both of these studies were conducted during periods in American history where male leadership was prevalent in most aspects of business and society. In Chapter 15, we explore more contemporary research regarding the role of gender in leadership, and we look at whether traits such as masculinity and dominance still bear out as important factors in distinguishing between leaders and nonleaders.

Yet another review argues for the importance of leadership traits: Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991, p. 59) contended that “it is unequivocally clear that leaders are not like other people.” From a qualitative synthesis of earlier research, Kirkpatrick and Locke postulated that leaders differ from nonleaders on six traits: drive, motivation, integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge. According to these writers, individuals can be born with these traits, they can learn them, or both. It is these six traits that make up the “right stuff” for leaders. Kirkpatrick and Locke asserted that leadership traits make some people different from others, and this difference should be recognized as an important part of the leadership process.

Table 2.1 Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics

Stogdill (1948)

Mann (1959)

Stogdill (1974)

Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986)

Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991)

Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (2017)

intelligence

alertness intelligence

achievement

persistence

insight drive

cognitive ability

extraversion

conscientiousness

emotional

66

insight

responsibility

initiative

persistence

self- confidence

sociability

masculinity

adjustment

dominance

extraversion

conservatism

initiative

self-confidence

responsibility

cooperativeness

tolerance

influence

sociability

intelligence

masculinity

dominance

motivation

integrity

confidence

cognitive ability

task knowledge

stability

openness

agreeableness

motivation

social intelligence

self-monitoring

emotional intelligence

problem solving Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. P. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper and Row; Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader (2004).

In the 1990s, researchers began to investigate the leadership traits associated with “social intelligence,” which is characterized as the ability to understand one’s own and others’ feelings, behaviors, and thoughts and act appropriately (Marlowe, 1986). Zaccaro (2002) defined social intelligence as having such capacities as social awareness, social acumen, self- monitoring, and the ability to select and enact the best response given the contingencies of the situation and social environment. A number of empirical studies showed these capacities to be a key trait for effective leaders. Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (2017) included such social abilities in the categories of leadership traits they outlined as important leadership attributes (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 provides a summary of the traits and characteristics that were identified by researchers from the trait approach. It illustrates clearly the breadth of traits related to leadership. Table 2.1 also shows how difficult it is to select certain traits as definitive leadership traits; some of the traits appear in several of the survey studies, whereas others appear in only one or two studies. Regardless of the lack of precision in Table 2.1, however, it represents a general convergence of research regarding which traits are leadership traits.

Table 2.2 Major Leadership Traits

• Intelligence

• Self-confidence

• Determination

• Integrity

• Sociability

67

What, then, can be said about trait research? What has a century of research on the trait approach given us that is useful? The answer is an extended list of traits that individuals might hope to possess or wish to cultivate if they want to be perceived by others as leaders. Some of the traits that are central to this list include intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (Table 2.2).

68

Intelligence

Intelligence or intellectual ability is positively related to leadership (Sternberg, 2004). Based on their analysis of a series of recent studies on intelligence and various indices of leadership, Zaccaro et al. (2017) found support for the finding that leaders tend to have higher intelligence than nonleaders. Having strong verbal ability, perceptual ability, and reasoning appears to make one a better leader (Jacquart & Antonakis, 2015). Although it is good to be bright, if the leader’s IQ is very different from that of the followers, it can have a counterproductive impact on leadership. Leaders with higher abilities may have difficulty communicating with followers because they are preoccupied or because their ideas are too advanced for their followers to accept.

In a study of the relationship between intelligence and perceived leadership in midlevel leaders from multinational companies, Antonakis, House, and Simonton (2017) found that the optimal IQ for perceived leadership appeared to be just above one standard deviation above the mean IQ of the group membership. Their study found a curvilinear relationship between IQ and perceived leadership—that is, as IQ increased, so did perceived leadership to a point, and then the IQ had a negative impact on leadership. Stated another way, it is good for leaders to be intelligent, but if their intelligence scores become too high, the benefits appear to taper off and can become negative.

An example of a leader for whom intelligence was a key trait was Steve Jobs, founder and CEO of Apple who died in 2011. Jobs once said, “I have this really incredible product inside me and I have to get it out” (Sculley, 2011, p. 27). Those visionary products, first the Apple II and Macintosh computers and then the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, revolutionized the personal computer and electronic device industry, changing the way people play and work.

In the next chapter of this text, which addresses leadership from a skills perspective, intelligence is identified as a trait that significantly contributes to a leader’s acquisition of complex problem-solving skills and social judgment skills. Intelligence is described as having a positive impact on an individual’s capacity for effective leadership.

69

Self-Confidence

Self-confidence is another trait that helps one to be a leader. Self-confidence is the ability to be certain about one’s competencies and skills. It includes a sense of self-esteem and self- assurance and the belief that one can make a difference. Leadership involves influencing others, and self-confidence allows the leader to feel assured that his or her attempts to influence others are appropriate and right.

Again, Steve Jobs is a good example of a self-confident leader. When Jobs described the devices he wanted to create, many people said they weren’t possible. But Jobs never doubted his products would change the world, and despite resistance, he did things the way he thought best. “Jobs was one of those CEOs who ran the company like he wanted to. He believed he knew more about it than anyone else, and he probably did,” said a colleague (Stone, 2011, p. 40).

70

Determination

Many leaders also exhibit determination. Determination is the desire to get the job done and includes characteristics such as initiative, persistence, dominance, and drive. People with determination are willing to assert themselves, are proactive, and have the capacity to persevere in the face of obstacles. Being determined includes showing dominance at times and in situations where followers need to be directed.

Dr. Paul Farmer has shown determination in his efforts to secure health care and eradicate tuberculosis for the very poor of Haiti and other third world countries. He began his efforts as a recent college graduate, traveling and working in Cange, Haiti. While there, he was accepted to Harvard Medical School. Knowing that his work in Haiti was invaluable to his training, he managed to do both: spending months traveling back and forth between Haiti and Cambridge, Massachusetts, for school. His first effort in Cange was to establish a one- room clinic where he treated “all comers” and trained local health care workers. Farmer found that there was more to providing health care than just dispensing medicine: He secured donations to build schools, houses, and communal sanitation and water facilities in the region. He spearheaded vaccinations of all the children in the area, dramatically reducing malnutrition and infant mortality. In order to keep working in Haiti, he returned to America and founded Partners In Health, a charitable foundation that raises money to fund these efforts. Since its founding, PIH not only has succeeded in improving the health of many communities in Haiti but now has projects in Haiti, Lesotho, Malawi, Peru, Russia, Rwanda, and the United States, and supports other projects in Mexico and Guatemala (Kidder, 2004; Partners In Health, 2017).

71

Integrity

Integrity, another of the important leadership traits, is the quality of honesty and trustworthiness. People who adhere to a strong set of principles and take responsibility for their actions are exhibiting integrity. Leaders with integrity inspire confidence in others because they can be trusted to do what they say they are going to do. They are loyal, dependable, and not deceptive. Basically, integrity makes a leader believable and worthy of our trust.

In our society, integrity has received a great deal of attention in recent years. For example, as a result of two situations—the position taken by President George W. Bush regarding Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction and the impeachment proceedings during the Bill Clinton presidency—people are demanding more honesty of their public officials. Similarly, scandals in the corporate world (e.g., Enron and WorldCom) have led people to become skeptical of leaders who are not highly ethical. In the educational arena, new K–12 curricula are being developed to teach character, values, and ethical leadership. (For instance, see the Character Counts! program developed by the Josephson Institute of Ethics in California at www.charactercounts.org, and the Pillars of Leadership program taught at the J. W. Fanning Institute for Leadership Development in Georgia at www.fanning.uga.edu.) In short, society is demanding greater integrity of character in its leaders.

72

Sociability

A final trait that is important for leaders is sociability. Sociability is a leader’s inclination to seek out pleasant social relationships. Leaders who show sociability are friendly, outgoing, courteous, tactful, and diplomatic. They are sensitive to others’ needs and show concern for their well-being. Social leaders have good interpersonal skills and create cooperative relationships with their followers.

An example of a leader with great sociability skills is Michael Hughes, a university president. Hughes prefers to walk to all his meetings because it gets him out on campus where he greets students, staff, and faculty. He has lunch in the dorm cafeterias or student union and will often ask a table of strangers if he can sit with them. Students rate him as very approachable, while faculty say he has an open-door policy. In addition, he takes time to write personal notes to faculty, staff, and students to congratulate them on their successes.

Although our discussion of leadership traits has focused on five major traits (i.e., intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability), this list is not all- inclusive. While other traits indicated in Table 2.1 are associated with effective leadership, the five traits we have identified contribute substantially to one’s capacity to be a leader.

Until recently, most reviews of leadership traits have been qualitative. In addition, they have lacked a common organizing framework. However, the research described in the following section provides a quantitative assessment of leadership traits that is conceptually framed around the five-factor model of personality. It describes how five major personality traits are related to leadership.

73

Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership

Over the past 25 years, a consensus has emerged among researchers regarding the basic factors that make up what we call personality (Goldberg, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1987). These factors, commonly called the Big Five, are neuroticism, extraversion (surgency), openness (intellect), agreeableness, and conscientiousness (dependability) (Table 2.3).

To assess the links between the Big Five and leadership, Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002) conducted a major meta-analysis of 78 leadership and personality studies published between 1967 and 1998. In general, Judge et al. found a strong relationship between the Big Five traits and leadership. It appears that having certain personality traits is associated with being an effective leader.

Specifically, in their study, extraversion was the factor most strongly associated with leadership. It is the most important trait of effective leaders. Extraversion was followed, in order, by conscientiousness, openness, and low neuroticism. The last factor, agreeableness, was found to be only weakly associated with leadership. In a more recent study, Sacket and Walmsley (2014) found that conscientiousness had the highest correlation with overall job performance, task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior (negative correlation). It was found to be the most frequently assessed trait in job interviews for a variety of occupations.

Table 2.3 Big Five Personality Factors

Neuroticism The tendency to be depressed, anxious, insecure, vulnerable, and hostile

Extraversion The tendency to be sociable and assertive and to have positive energy

Openness The tendency to be informed, creative, insightful, and curious

Agreeableness The tendency to be accepting, conforming, trusting, and nurturing

Conscientiousness The tendency to be thorough, organized, controlled, dependable, and decisive

Source: Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.

74

Strengths and Leadership

Very closely related to the traits approach is the more contemporary emphasis on strengths and leadership. The idea behind strengths leadership is that everyone has talents in which they excel or thrive and leaders are able to recognize and capitalize on not only their own strengths but those of their followers as well. A strength is defined as an attribute or quality of an individual that accounts for successful performance. Strength researchers (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Rath, 2007) suggest that strengths are the ability to consistently demonstrate exceptional work.

The seminal research in this area has been undertaken by the Gallup organization, which has spent more than 40 years identifying and assessing individual strengths or “themes of human talent” and designing and publishing the StrengthsFinder profile, now called CliftonStrengths assessment, an online assessment of people’s talents and potential strengths. Talents are similar to personality traits—they are relatively stable, fixed characteristics that are not easily changed. From talents, strengths emerge. Strengths are derived from having certain talents and then further developing those talents by gaining additional knowledge, skills, and practice (Rath, 2007).

In the strengths perspective, extraordinary individuals are “distinguished less by their impressive ‘raw power’ than by their ability to identify their strengths and then exploit them” (Gardner, 1997, p. 15). MacKie (2016) suggests that our leadership capability is enhanced when we are able to discover our fully utilized strengths, underutilized strengths, and weaknesses.

75

Emotional Intelligence

Another way of assessing the impact of traits on leadership is through the concept of emotional intelligence, which emerged in the 1990s as an important area of study in psychology. It has been widely studied by researchers, and has captured the attention of many practitioners (Caruso & Wolfe, 2004; Goleman, 1995, 1998; Mayer & Salovey, 1995, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000; Shankman & Allen, 2015).

As the two words suggest, emotional intelligence has to do with our emotions (affective domain) and thinking (cognitive domain), and the interplay between the two. Whereas intelligence is concerned with our ability to learn information and apply it to life tasks, emotional intelligence is concerned with our ability to understand emotions and apply this understanding to life’s tasks. Specifically, emotional intelligence can be defined as the ability to perceive and express emotions, to use emotions to facilitate thinking, to understand and reason with emotions, and to effectively manage emotions within oneself and in relationships with others (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000).

There are different ways to measure emotional intelligence. One scale is the Mayer-Salovey- Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000). The MSCEIT measures emotional intelligence as a set of mental abilities, including the abilities to perceive, facilitate, understand, and manage emotion.

Goleman (1995, 1998) takes a broader approach to emotional intelligence, suggesting that it consists of a set of personal and social competencies. Personal competence consists of self- awareness, confidence, self-regulation, conscientiousness, and motivation. Social competence consists of empathy and social skills such as communication and conflict management.

Shankman and Allen (2015) developed a practice-oriented model of emotionally intelligent leadership, which suggests that leaders must be conscious of three fundamental facets of leadership: context, self, and others. In the model, emotionally intelligent leaders are defined by 21 capacities to which a leader should pay attention, including group savvy, optimism, initiative, and teamwork.

There is a debate in the field regarding how big a role emotional intelligence plays in helping people be successful in life. Some researchers, such as Goleman (1995), suggested that emotional intelligence plays a major role in whether people are successful at school, home, and work. Others, such as Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso (2000) and Antonakis (2009), made softer claims for the significance of emotional intelligence in meeting life’s challenges.

As a leadership ability or trait, emotional intelligence appears to be an important construct.

76

The underlying premise suggested by this framework is that people who are more sensitive to their emotions and the impact of their emotions on others will be leaders who are more effective. As more research is conducted on emotional intelligence, the intricacies of how emotional intelligence relates to leadership will be better understood.

77

How does the Trait Approach Work?

The trait approach is very different from the other approaches discussed in subsequent chapters because it focuses exclusively on the leader, not on the followers or the situation. This makes the trait approach theoretically more straightforward than other approaches. In essence, the trait approach is concerned with what traits leaders exhibit and who has these traits.

The trait approach does not lay out a set of hypotheses or principles about what kind of leader is needed in a certain situation or what a leader should do, given a particular set of circumstances. Instead, this approach emphasizes that having a leader with a certain set of traits is crucial to having effective leadership. It is the leader and the leader’s traits that are central to the leadership process.

The trait approach suggests that organizations will work better if the people in managerial positions have designated leadership profiles. To find the right people, it is common for organizations to use trait assessment instruments. The assumption behind these procedures is that selecting the right people will increase organizational effectiveness. Organizations can specify the characteristics or traits that are important to them for particular positions and then use trait assessment measures to determine whether an individual fits their needs.

The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development. By analyzing their own traits, managers can gain an idea of their strengths and weaknesses, and can get a feel for how others in the organization see them. A trait assessment can help managers determine whether they have the qualities to move up or to move to other positions in the company.

A trait assessment gives individuals a clearer picture of who they are as leaders and how they fit into the organizational hierarchy. In areas where their traits are lacking, leaders can try to make changes in what they do or where they work to increase their traits’ potential impact.

Near the end of the chapter, a leadership instrument is provided that you can use to assess your leadership traits. This instrument is typical of the kind of assessments that companies use to evaluate individuals’ leadership potential. As you will discover by completing this instrument, trait measures are a good way to assess your own characteristics.

78

Strengths

The trait approach has several identifiable strengths. First, the trait approach is intuitively appealing. It fits clearly with our notion that leaders are the individuals who are out front and leading the way in our society. The image in the popular press and community at large is that leaders are a special kind of people—people with gifts who can do extraordinary things. The trait approach is consistent with this perception because it is built on the premise that leaders are different, and their difference resides in the special traits they possess. People have a need to see their leaders as gifted people, and the trait approach fulfills this need.

A second strength of the trait approach is that it has a century of research to back it up. No other theory can boast of the breadth and depth of studies conducted on the trait approach. The strength and longevity of this line of research give the trait approach a measure of credibility that other approaches lack. Out of this abundance of research has emerged a body of data that points to the important role of various traits in the leadership process.

Another strength, more conceptual in nature, results from the way the trait approach highlights the leader component in the leadership process. Leadership is composed of leaders, followers, and situations, but the trait approach is devoted to only the first of these —leaders. Although this is also a potential weakness, by focusing exclusively on the role of the leader in leadership the trait approach has been able to provide us with a deeper and more intricate understanding of how the leader and the leader’s traits are related to the leadership process.

Last, the trait approach has given us some benchmarks for what we need to look for if we want to be leaders. It identifies what traits we should have and whether the traits we do have are the best traits for leadership. Based on the findings of this approach, trait assessment procedures can be used to offer invaluable information to supervisors and managers about their strengths and weaknesses and ways to improve their overall leadership effectiveness.

79

Criticisms

In addition to its strengths, the trait approach has several weaknesses. First and foremost is the failure of the trait approach to delimit a definitive list of leadership traits. Although an enormous number of studies have been conducted over the past 100 years, the findings from these studies have been ambiguous and uncertain at times. Furthermore, the list of traits that has emerged appears endless. This is obvious from Table 2.1, which lists a multitude of traits. In fact, these are only a sample of the many leadership traits that were studied.

Another criticism is that the trait approach has failed to take situations into account. As Stogdill (1948) pointed out more than 60 years ago, it is difficult to isolate a set of traits that are characteristic of leaders without also factoring situational effects into the equation. People who possess certain traits that make them leaders in one situation may not be leaders in another situation. Some people may have the traits that help them emerge as leaders but not the traits that allow them to maintain their leadership over time. In other words, the situation influences leadership. It is therefore difficult to identify a universal set of leadership traits in isolation from the context in which the leadership occurs.

A third criticism, derived from the prior two criticisms, is that this approach has resulted in highly subjective determinations of the most important leadership traits. Because the findings on traits have been so extensive and broad, there has been much subjective interpretation of the meaning of the data. This subjectivity is readily apparent in the many self-help, practice-oriented management books. For example, one author might identify ambition and creativity as crucial leadership traits; another might identify empathy and calmness. In both cases, it is the author’s subjective experience and observations that are the basis for the identified leadership traits. These books may be helpful to readers because they identify and describe important leadership traits, but the methods used to generate these lists of traits are weak. To respond to people’s need for a set of definitive traits of leaders, authors have set forth lists of traits, even if the origins of these lists are not grounded in strong, reliable research.

Research on traits can also be criticized for failing to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes. This research has emphasized the identification of traits, but has not addressed how leadership traits affect group members and their work. In trying to ascertain universal leadership traits, researchers have focused on the link between specific traits and leader emergence, but they have not tried to link leader traits with other outcomes such as productivity or employee satisfaction. For example, trait research does not provide data on whether leaders who have high intelligence and strong integrity have better results than leaders without these traits. The trait approach is weak in describing how leaders’ traits affect the outcomes of groups and teams in organizational settings.

80

A final criticism of the trait approach is that it is not a useful approach for training and development for leadership. Even if definitive traits could be identified, teaching new traits is not an easy process because traits are not easily changed. For example, it is not reasonable to send managers to a training program to raise their IQ or to train them to become extraverted. The point is that traits are largely fixed psychological structures, and this limits the value of teaching and leadership training.

81

Application

Despite its shortcomings, the trait approach provides valuable information about leadership. It can be applied by individuals at all levels and in all types of organizations. Although the trait approach does not provide a definitive set of traits, it does provide direction regarding which traits are good to have if one aspires to a leadership position. By taking trait assessments and other similar questionnaires, people can gain insight into whether they have certain traits deemed important for leadership, and they can pinpoint their strengths and weaknesses with regard to leadership.

As we discussed previously, managers can use information from the trait approach to assess where they stand in their organization and what they need to do to strengthen their position. Trait information can suggest areas in which their personal characteristics are very beneficial to the company and areas in which they may want to get more training to enhance their overall approach. Using trait information, managers can develop a deeper understanding of who they are and how they will affect others in the organization.

82

Case Studies In this section, three case studies (Cases 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3) are provided to illustrate the trait approach and to help you understand how the trait approach can be used in making decisions in organizational settings. The settings of the cases are diverse—directing research and development at a large snack food company, running an office supply business, and being head of recruitment for a large bank—but all of the cases deal with trait leadership. At the end of each case, you will find questions that will help in analyzing the cases.

83

Case 2.1: Choosing a New Director of Research Sandra Coke is vice president for research and development at Great Lakes Foods (GLF), a large snack food company that has approximately 1,000 employees. As a result of a recent reorganization, Sandra must choose the new director of research. The director will report directly to Sandra and will be responsible for developing and testing new products. The research division of GLF employs about 200 people. The choice of directors is important because Sandra is receiving pressure from the president and board of GLF to improve the company’s overall growth and productivity.

Sandra has identified three candidates for the position. Each candidate is at the same managerial level. She is having difficulty choosing one of them because each has very strong credentials. Alexa Smith is a longtime employee of GLF who started part-time in the mailroom while in high school. After finishing school, Alexa worked in as many as 10 different positions throughout the company to become manager of new product marketing. Performance reviews of Alexa’s work have repeatedly described her as being very creative and insightful. In her tenure at GLF, Alexa has developed and brought to market four new product lines. Alexa is also known throughout GLF as being very persistent about her work: When she starts a project, she stays with it until it is finished. It is probably this quality that accounts for the success of each of the four new products with which she has been involved.

A second candidate for the new position is Kelsey Metts, who has been with GLF for five years and is manager of quality control for established products. Kelsey has a reputation for being very bright. Before joining GLF, she received her MBA at Harvard, graduating at the top of her class. People talk about Kelsey as the kind of person who will be president of her own company someday. Kelsey is also very personable. On all her performance reviews, she received extra-high scores on sociability and human relations. There isn’t a supervisor in the company who doesn’t have positive things to say about how comfortable it is to work with Kelsey. Since joining GLF, Kelsey has been instrumental in bringing two new product lines to market.

Thomas Santiago, the third candidate, has been with GLF for 10 years and is often consulted by upper management regarding strategic planning and corporate direction setting. Thomas has been very involved in establishing the vision for GLF and is a company person all the way. He believes in the values of GLF, and actively promotes its mission. The two qualities that stand out above the rest in Thomas’s performance reviews are his honesty and integrity. Employees who have worked under his supervision consistently report that they feel they can trust Thomas to be fair and consistent. Thomas is highly respected at GLF. In his tenure at the company, Thomas has been involved in some capacity with the development of three new product lines.

The challenge confronting Sandra is to choose the best person for the newly established director’s position. Because of the pressure she feels from upper management, Sandra knows she must select the best leader for the new position.

84

Questions 1. Based on the information provided about the trait approach in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, if you were Sandra,

whom would you select? 2. In what ways is the trait approach helpful in this type of selection? 3. In what ways are the weaknesses of the trait approach highlighted in this case?

85

Case 2.2: A Remarkable Turnaround Carol Baines was married for 20 years to the owner of the Baines Company until he died in a car accident. After his death, Carol decided not to sell the business but to try to run it herself. Before the accident, her only involvement in the business was in informal discussions with her husband over dinner, although she has a college degree in business, with a major in management.

The Baines Company was one of three office supply stores in a city with a population of 200,000 people. The other two stores were owned by national chains. Baines was not a large company, and employed only five people. Baines had stable sales of about $200,000 a year, serving mostly the smaller companies in the city. The firm had not grown in a number of years and was beginning to feel the pressure of the advertising and lower prices of the national chains.

For the first six months, Carol spent her time familiarizing herself with the employees and the operations of the company. Next, she did a citywide analysis of companies that had reason to purchase office supplies. Based on her understanding of the company’s capabilities and her assessment of the potential market for their products and services, Carol developed a specific set of short-term and long-term goals for the company. Behind all of her planning, Carol had a vision that Baines could be a viable, healthy, and competitive company. She wanted to carry on the business that her husband had started, but more than that she wanted it to grow.

Over the first five years, Carol invested significant amounts of money in advertising, sales, and services. These efforts were well spent because the company began to show rapid growth immediately. Because of the growth, the company hired another 20 people.

The expansion at Baines was particularly remarkable because of another major hardship Carol had to confront. Carol was diagnosed with breast cancer a year after her husband died. The treatment for her cancer included two months of radiation therapy and six months of strong chemotherapy. Although the side effects included hair loss and fatigue, Carol continued to manage the company throughout the ordeal. Despite her difficulties, Carol was successful. Under the strength of her leadership, the growth at Baines continued for 10 consecutive years.

Interviews with new and old employees at Baines revealed much about Carol’s leadership. Employees said that Carol was a very solid person. She cared deeply about others and was fair and considerate. They said she created a family-like atmosphere at Baines. Few employees had quit Baines since Carol took over. Carol was devoted to all the employees, and she supported their interests. For example, the company sponsored a softball team in the summer and a basketball team in the winter. Others described Carol as a strong person. Even though she had cancer, she continued to be positive and interested in them. She did not get depressed about the cancer and its side effects, even though coping with cancer was difficult. Employees said she was a model of strength, goodness, and quality.

At age 55, Carol turned the business over to her two sons. She continues to act as the president but does not supervise the day-to-day operations. The company is doing more than $3.1 million in sales, and it outpaces the two chain stores in the city.

86

Questions 1. How would you describe Carol’s leadership traits? 2. How big a part did Carol’s traits play in the expansion of the company? 3. Would Carol be a leader in other business contexts?

87

Case 2.3: Recruiting for the Bank Pat Nelson is the assistant director of human resources in charge of recruitment for Central Bank, a large, full- service banking institution. One of Pat’s major responsibilities each spring is to visit as many college campuses as he can to interview graduating seniors for credit analyst positions in the commercial lending area at Central Bank. Although the number varies, he usually ends up hiring about 20 new people, most of whom come from the same schools, year after year.

Pat has been doing recruitment for the bank for more than 10 years, and he enjoys it very much. However, for the upcoming spring he is feeling increased pressure from management to be particularly discriminating about whom he recommends hiring. Management is concerned about the retention rate at the bank because in recent years as many as 25% of the new hires have left. Departures after the first year have meant lost training dollars and strain on the staff who remain. Although management understands that some new hires always leave, the executives are not comfortable with the present rate, and they have begun to question the recruitment and hiring procedures.

The bank wants to hire people who can be groomed for higher-level leadership positions. Although certain competencies are required of entry-level credit analysts, the bank is equally interested in skills that will allow individuals to advance to upper management positions as their careers progress.

In the recruitment process, Pat always looks for several characteristics. First, applicants need to have strong interpersonal skills, they need to be confident, and they need to show poise and initiative. Next, because banking involves fiduciary responsibilities, applicants need to have proper ethics, including a strong sense of the importance of confidentiality. In addition, to do the work in the bank, they need to have strong analytical and technical skills, and experience in working with computers. Last, applicants need to exhibit a good work ethic, and they need to show commitment and a willingness to do their job even in difficult circumstances.

Pat is fairly certain that he has been selecting the right people to be leaders at Central Bank, yet upper management is telling him to reassess his hiring criteria. Although he feels that he has been doing the right thing, he is starting to question himself and his recruitment practices.

88

Questions 1. Based on ideas described in the trait approach, do you think Pat is looking for the right characteristics in

the people he hires? 2. Could it be that the retention problem raised by upper management is unrelated to Pat’s recruitment

criteria? 3. If you were Pat, would you change your approach to recruiting?

Leadership Instrument

Organizations use a wide variety of questionnaires to measure individuals’ traits. In many organizations, it is common practice to use standard trait measures such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory or the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. These measures provide valuable information to the individual and the organization about the individual’s unique attributes for leadership and where the individual could best serve the organization.

In this section, the Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ) is provided as an example of a measure that can be used to assess your personal leadership characteristics. The LTQ quantifies the perceptions of the individual leader and selected observers, such as followers or peers. It measures an individual’s traits and points the individual to the areas in which he or she may have special strengths or weaknesses.

By taking the LTQ, you can gain an understanding of how trait measures are used for leadership assessment. You can also assess your own leadership traits.

89

Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ) Instructions: The purpose of this questionnaire is to measure personal characteristics of leadership. The questionnaire should be completed by the leader and five people who are familiar with the leader.

Make five additional copies of this questionnaire. This questionnaire should be completed by you and five people you know (e.g., roommates, coworkers, relatives, friends). Using the following scale, have each individual indicate the degree to which he or she agrees or disagrees with each of the 14 statements below. Do not forget to complete one for yourself.

______________________________________ (leader’s name) is

Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree

1. Articulate: Communicates effectively with others 1 2 3 4 5

2. Perceptive: Is discerning and insightful 1 2 3 4 5

3. Self-confident: Believes in himself/herself and his/her ability 1 2 3 4 5

4. Self-assured: Is secure with self, free of doubts 1 2 3 4 5

5. Persistent: Stays fixed on the goals, despite interference 1 2 3 4 5

6. Determined: Takes a firm stand, acts with certainty 1 2 3 4 5

7. Trustworthy: Is authentic and inspires confidence 1 2 3 4 5

8. Dependable: Is consistent and reliable 1 2 3 4 5

9. Friendly: Shows kindness and warmth 1 2 3 4 5

10. Outgoing: Talks freely, gets along well with others 1 2 3 4 5

11. Conscientious: Is thorough, organized, and controlled 1 2 3 4 5

12. Diligent: Is persistent, hardworking 1 2 3 4 5

13. Sensitive: Shows tolerance, is tactful and sympathetic 1 2 3 4 5

14. Empathic: Understands others, identifies with others 1 2 3 4 5

90

Scoring 1. Enter the responses for Raters 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the appropriate columns as shown in Example

2.1. The example provides hypothetical ratings to help explain how the questionnaire can be used. 2. For each of the 14 items, compute the average for the five raters and place that number in the

“average rating” column. 3. Place your own scores in the “self-rating” column.

91

Example 2.1 Leadership Traits Questionnaire Ratings

Rater 1

Rater 2

Rater 3

Rater 4

Rater 5 Average rating Self-rating

1. Articulate 4 4 3 2 4 3.4 4

2. Perceptive 2 5 3 4 4 3.6 5

3. Self-confident 4 4 5 5 4 4.4 4

4. Self-assured 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

5. Persistent 4 4 3 3 3 3.4 3

6. Determined 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

7. Trustworthy 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

8. Dependable 4 5 4 5 4 4.4 4

9. Friendly 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

10. Outgoing 5 4 5 4 5 4.6 4

11. Conscientious

2 3 2 3 3 2.6 4

12. Diligent 3 3 3 3 3 3 4

13. Sensitive 4 4 5 5 5 4.6 3

14. Empathic 5 5 4 5 4 4.6 3

92

Scoring Interpretation The scores you received on the LTQ provide information about how you see yourself and how others see you as a leader. The chart allows you to see where your perceptions are the same as those of others and where they differ.

The example ratings show how the leader self-rated higher than the observers did on the characteristic articulate. On the second characteristic, perceptive, the leader self-rated substantially higher than others. On the self-confident characteristic, the leader self-rated quite close to others’ ratings but lower. There are no best ratings on this questionnaire. The purpose of the instrument is to give you a way to assess your strengths and weaknesses and to evaluate areas where your perceptions are congruent with those of others and where there are discrepancies.

93

Summary

The trait approach has its roots in leadership theory that suggested that certain people were born with special traits that made them great leaders. Because it was believed that leaders and nonleaders could be differentiated by a universal set of traits, throughout the 20th century researchers were challenged to identify the definitive traits of leaders.

Around the mid-20th century, several major studies questioned the basic premise that a unique set of traits defined leadership. As a result, attention shifted to incorporating the impact of situations and of followers on leadership. Researchers began to study the interactions between leaders and their context instead of focusing only on leaders’ traits. More recently, there have been signs that trait research has come full circle, with a renewed interest in focusing directly on the critical traits of leaders.

From the multitude of studies conducted through the years on personal characteristics, it is clear that many traits contribute to leadership. Some of the important traits that are consistently identified in many of these studies are intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. In addition, researchers have found a strong relationship between leadership and the traits described by the five-factor personality model. Extraversion was the trait most strongly associated with leadership, followed by conscientiousness, openness, low neuroticism, and agreeableness. Another recent line of research has focused on emotional intelligence and its relationship to leadership. This research suggests that leaders who are sensitive to their emotions and to the impact of their emotions on others may be leaders who are more effective.

On a practical level, the trait approach is concerned with which traits leaders exhibit and who has these traits. Organizations use personality assessment instruments to identify how individuals will fit within their organizations. The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development because it allows managers to analyze their strengths and weaknesses and to gain a clearer understanding of how they should try to change to enhance their leadership.

There are several advantages to viewing leadership from the trait approach. First, it is intuitively appealing because it fits clearly into the popular idea that leaders are special people who are out front, leading the way in society. Second, a great deal of research validates the basis of this perspective. Third, by focusing exclusively on the leader, the trait approach provides an in-depth understanding of the leader component in the leadership process. Last, it has provided some benchmarks against which individuals can evaluate their own personal leadership attributes.

On the negative side, the trait approach has failed to provide a definitive list of leadership traits. In analyzing the traits of leaders, the approach has failed to take into account the

94

impact of situations. In addition, the approach has resulted in subjective lists of the most important leadership traits, which are not necessarily grounded in strong, reliable research.

Furthermore, the trait approach has not adequately linked the traits of leaders with other outcomes such as group and team performance. Last, this approach is not particularly useful for training and development for leadership because individuals’ personal attributes are largely stable and fixed, and their traits are not amenable to change.

Sharpen your skills with SAGE edge at edge.sagepub.com/northouse8e

95

References Antonakis, J. (2009). “Emotional intelligence”: What does it measure and does it matter for

leadership? In G. B. Graen (Ed.), LMX leadership—game-changing designs: Research- based tools (Vol. 11, pp. 163–192). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Antonakis, J., House, R. J., & Simonton, D. K. (2017, March 30). Can super smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior [Advance online publication]. Journal of Applied Psychology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000221

Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London, UK: SAGE.

Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. (2001). Now, discover your strengths. New York, NY: Free Press.

Caruso, D. R., & Wolfe, C. J. (2004). Emotional intelligence and leadership development. In D. V. Day, S. J. Zaccaro, & S. M. Halpin (Eds.), Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp. 237–266). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dinh, J. E., & Lord, R. G. (2012). Implications of dispositional and process views of traits for individual difference research in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 651–667.

French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1962). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (pp. 259–269). New York, NY: Harper and Row.

96

Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds: Portraits of exceptional individuals and an examination of our extraordinariness. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.

Jacquart, P., & Antonakis, J. (2015). When does charisma matter for top-level leaders? Effect of attributional ambiguity. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1051–1074.

Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3), 315–336.

Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780.

Jung, D., & Sosik, J. J. (2006). Who are the spellbinders? Identifying personal attributes of charismatic leaders. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12, 12–27.

Kidder, T. (2004). Mountains beyond mountains: The quest of Dr. Paul Farmer, a man who would cure the world. New York, NY: Random House.

Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive, 5, 48–60.

Lord, R. G., DeVader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 402–410.

MacKie, D. (2016). Strength-based leadership coaching in organizations: An evidence-

97

based guide to positive leadership development. London, UK: Kogan Page.

Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241–270.

Marlowe, H. A. (1986). Social intelligence: Evidence for multidimensionality and construct independence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 52–58.

Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: The case for ability scales. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 320–342). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction and regulation of feelings. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 4, 197–208.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators (pp. 3–31). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 396–420). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90.

Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2012). What makes for magic leadership? In W. E. Rosenbach & R. L. Taylor (Eds.), Contemporary issues in leadership (7th ed., pp. 135–139). Boulder, CO: Westview.

Partners In Health. (2017). Our work. Retrieved from https://www.pih.org/programs

Rath, T. (2007). StrengthsFinder 2.0. New York, NY: Gallup Press.

98

Sacket, P. R., & Walmsley, P. T. (2014). Which personality attributes are most important in the workplace? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(5), 538–551.

Sculley, J. (2011, October 10). No bozos. Ever. Bloomberg Businessweek, 4249, 27.

Shankman, M. L., & Allen, S. J. (2015). Emotionally intelligent leadership: A guide for college students (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2004). International handbook of intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York, NY: Free Press.

Stone, B. (2011, October 10). The return. Bloomberg Businessweek, 4249, 40.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). Organizational leadership and social intelligence. In R. Riggio (Ed.), Multiple intelligence and leadership (pp. 29–54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 6–16.

Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2017). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership (3rd ed., pp. 29–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Zaleznik, A. (1977, May–June). Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, 55, 67–78.

99

3 Skills Approach

100

Description

Like the trait approach discussed in Chapter 2, the skills approach takes a leader-centered perspective on leadership. However, in the skills approach we shift our thinking from a focus on personality characteristics, which usually are viewed as innate and largely fixed, to an emphasis on skills and abilities that can be learned and developed. Although personality certainly plays an integral role in leadership, the skills approach suggests that knowledge and abilities are needed for effective leadership.

Researchers have studied leadership skills directly or indirectly for a number of years (see Bass, 2008, pp. 97–109). However, the impetus for research on skills was a classic article published by Robert Katz in the Harvard Business Review in 1955, titled “Skills of an Effective Administrator.” Katz’s article appeared at a time when researchers were trying to identify a definitive set of leadership traits. Katz’s approach was an attempt to transcend the trait problem by addressing leadership as a set of developable skills. More recently, a revitalized interest in the skills approach has emerged. Beginning in the early 1990s, a multitude of studies have been published that contend that a leader’s effectiveness depends on the leader’s ability to solve complex organizational problems. This research has resulted in a comprehensive skill-based model of leadership that was advanced by Mumford and his colleagues (Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000; Yammarino, 2000).

In this chapter, our discussion of the skills approach is divided into two parts. First, we discuss the general ideas set forth by Katz regarding three basic administrative skills: technical, human, and conceptual. Second, we discuss the recent work of Mumford and colleagues that has resulted in a skills-based model of organizational leadership.

101

Three-Skill Approach

Based on field research in administration and his own firsthand observations of executives in the workplace, Katz (1955, p. 34) suggested that effective administration (i.e., leadership) depends on three basic personal skills: technical, human, and conceptual. Katz argued that these skills are quite different from traits or qualities of leaders. Skills are what leaders can accomplish, whereas traits are who leaders are (i.e., their innate characteristics). Leadership skills are defined in this chapter as the ability to use one’s knowledge and competencies to accomplish a set of goals or objectives. This chapter shows that these leadership skills can be acquired and leaders can be trained to develop them.

Technical Skills

Technical skills are knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work or activity. They include competencies in a specialized area, analytical ability, and the ability to use appropriate tools and techniques (Katz, 1955). For example, in a computer software company, technical skills might include knowing software language and programming, the company’s software products, and how to make these products function for clients. Similarly, in an accounting firm, technical skills might include understanding and having the ability to apply generally accepted accounting principles to a client’s audit. In both these examples, technical skills involve a hands-on activity with a basic product or process within an organization. Technical skills play an essential role in producing the actual products a company is designed to produce.

As illustrated in Figure 3.1, technical skills are most important at lower and middle levels of management and less important in upper management. For leaders at the highest level, such as CEOs, presidents, and senior officers, technical competencies are not as essential. Individuals at the top level depend on skilled followers to handle technical issues of the physical operation.

Human Skills

Human skills are knowledge about and ability to work with people. They are quite different from technical skills, which have to do with working with things (Katz, 1955). Human skills are “people skills.” They are the abilities that help a leader to work effectively with followers, peers, and superiors to accomplish the organization’s goals. Human skills allow a leader to assist group members in working cooperatively as a group to achieve common goals. For Katz, it means being aware of one’s own perspective on issues and, at the same time, being aware of the perspective of others. Leaders with human skills adapt their own ideas to those of others. Furthermore, they create an atmosphere of trust where employees can feel comfortable and secure and where they can feel encouraged to become involved in

102

the planning of things that will affect them. Being a leader with human skills means being sensitive to the needs and motivations of others and taking into account others’ needs in one’s decision making. In short, human skills are the capacity to get along with others as you go about your work.

Figure 3.1 Management Skills Necessary at Various Levels of an Organization

Source: Adapted from “Skills of an Effective Administrator,” by R. L. Katz, 1955, Harvard Business Review, 33(1), pp. 33–42.

Figure 3.1 shows that human skills are important in all three levels of management. Although managers at lower levels may communicate with a far greater number of employees, human skills are equally important at middle and upper levels.

Conceptual Skills

Broadly speaking, conceptual skills are the ability to work with ideas and concepts. Whereas technical skills deal with things and human skills deal with people, conceptual skills involve the ability to work with ideas. A leader with conceptual skills is comfortable talking about

103

the ideas that shape an organization and the intricacies involved. He or she is good at putting the company’s goals into words and can understand and express the economic principles that affect the company. A leader with conceptual skills works easily with abstractions and hypothetical notions.

Conceptual skills are central to creating a vision and strategic plan for an organization. For example, it would take conceptual skills for a CEO in a struggling manufacturing company to articulate a vision for a line of new products that would steer the company into profitability. Similarly, it would take conceptual skills for the director of a nonprofit health organization to create a strategic plan that could compete successfully with for-profit health organizations in a market with scarce resources. The point of these examples is that conceptual skills have to do with the mental work of shaping the meaning of organizational or policy issues—understanding what a company stands for and where it is or should be going.

As shown in Figure 3.1, conceptual skills are most important at the top management levels. In fact, when upper-level managers do not have strong conceptual skills, they can jeopardize the whole organization. Conceptual skills are also important in middle management; as we move down to lower management levels, conceptual skills become less important.

Summary of the Three-Skill Approach

To summarize, the three-skill approach includes technica