Paper Assignment
yueyuehou
MGT501Lesson7Presentation.pptxMGT 501 Lesson 7
Leadership
Objectives of This Presentation
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
Difference between the Work of Leadership and Management Work
The Work of Leadership
Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership
Segue to Lesson 8
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
In Lesson 1 the notion that an organization was a machine with human beings as “movable parts” was introduced.
Over the past few weeks we have come to see just how complicated these moving parts can be...
*Note: If we are motivated to look good, then, to the extent that our jobs give us the opportunity to “look good,” we will exert effort to that outcome.
3
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
Let’s consider the outcome of Lesson 6 more closely...
Being “rational,” we make our decisions based on
Our values, assumptions, and interests
Our beliefs about the values, assumptions, and interests of the people we are dealing with
Our beliefs about the context—what we think is “going on” in the present moment, and what the events of that present moment might mean for the future
Based on our beliefs, our decisions are aimed at optimizing two fundamental values...
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
Economic Values
We want to pay our bills
We want security
Identity Values
We want to be respected
We want to be acknowledged for doing good work
...and especially when we are young, we want to see ourselves as “becoming.”
Our preference for “looking good”
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
In the absence of “identity” objectives, people will supply enough productive effort to stay in the “safety zone.” (Akerlof and Kranton [2010])*
Akerlof and Kranton argued that people will exert effort above and beyond what they could “get by with” if in so doing they accomplish “identity” objectives—i.e., if they can “look good” to themselves by exerting the extra effort, even if they aren’t paid for it.
So, the problem for management is to appeal to people’s economic and identity objectives so that
They do the “right things” because they believe them to be the “right things” to do.
They would do these “right things” on their own, without surveillance and force.
*Note: In one of the most influential business books written in the 1980s, In Search of Excellence, Tom Peters and Robert Waterman (1982) commented on a contemporary article in Fortune magazine celebrating the achievements of Honda. They wrote, “One of our favorite stories in support of Fortune’s analysis is about a Honda worker who, on his way home each evening, straightens up windshield wiper blades on all the Hondas he passes. He just can’t stand to see a flaw in a Honda!” (1982 p. 37) Apparently, there had been a batch of Hondas in which the wiper blades had been incorrectly applied, and this man had taken it upon himself to fix that problem every time he saw it, even when he was walking home from work, not under the surveillance of his boss, and not getting paid for it.
6
The Organizational “Machine” and Its Human “Parts”
Since we aren’t really “machines,” but rather, are “rational” agents, the way to make a change like this seems to be...
To convince people that doing what the organization needs is also optimal for them.
Herbert Simon (1945) suggested that this could occur if the beliefs on which these rational decisions are made were changed.
Difference between Leadership and Management “Work”
To accomplish this, our beliefs about the context of our work—what we think is “going on” in the present moment—may have to be changed.
The way we think about the “context of our work” makes a difference. Consider the following example...
Drucker (1955): The difference between “laying bricks” and “building a cathedral.”*
*Note: Drucker actually used “stone-cutting” in his example, which can be found on p. 151 of Drucker (1955).
8
Difference between Leadership and Management “Work”
Management is the work of setting goals, designing processes, monitoring performance, and evaluating outcomes (designing the cathedral, sequencing the operations for building it, measuring outcomes, verifying quality, etc.)
Once this management work is done, leadership is the work of securing the commitment of people to those goals and processes.
Let’s take a closer look at what “commitment” means here...
The Work of Leadership
To say the people are “committed” to an organization’s goals means that their “inner force” drives them to make and execute decisions that serve those goals.
To accomplish this, those decisions have to be experienced as their personal decisions.
If you are a manager and want this to happen, they have to
...see what you see
...believe what you believe (and have supporting information for that)
...and want to attain the same outcomes as you do, because they see that it is good for the business, and good for them.*
*Note: “Good for them” means that they see accomplishing the goals of an organization as both their economic interests and their “identity” interests. Bill Pollard, former CEO of Service Masters, told me that part of every business plan in that organization involved talking to people, all the way down to the bottom of the organization, about what they are “becoming.” The idea was to make their work experience not only productive for the company, but “growthful” for them.
11
The Work of Leadership
This week’s reading assignment (Chapter 12 of Robbins and Judge) contains a number of different approaches to the work of leadership.
Of these approaches—you should review them all, as the reading is fairly easy—the ones that seem to be the most effective at securing the commitment of employees (“followers”) are variants of “transformational” leadership (“Full Range of Leadership Model,” “Servant” leadership).
If we look at human history, we see that people who have been regarded as “great leaders” seem to be “charismatic.” So, let’s start with that, and see why such leaders were effective...
Charismatic Leadership
The authors of the class text define (Sec. 12.4) the work of charismatic leaders as follows: They
Articulate a compelling vision that describes a better state than the status quo
Are willing to take high risks and self-sacrifice to achieve the vision
Are sensitive to follower needs
Are often unconventional: They engage in behaviors that are perceived to be novel and counter to norms
The Work of Leadership
The Work of Leadership
Of these attributes of charismatic leadership work, the first and third show up in almost all the models of effective leadership treated in Ch. 12. That is, effective leaders
...articulate a compelling vision
...are sensitive to the needs of their followers (recall the work of Joseph Kotter [1982]).
Compare these attributes with those of “transformational” and “servant” leader approaches...(Do this as an exercise to deepen your understanding)
Even if we don’t have the “gift” of natural charisma, we can approximate charismatic leadership by using those methods.
That is to say, they can be taught.
In order to articulate a compelling vision, you have to be believed, that is, trusted.
In this chapter, we find what can be called the “expanded trust conditions,” which include the ones we have already considered plus one other...
The followers have to believe that the leader
Has integrity (actions and words match)
Has principles (preferably shared with the followers)
Cares about the well-being of the followers*
Knows what he/she is talking about
Moral
Credibility
Technical
Credibility
The Work of Leadership
*Note: This, as you know, takes time and energy. The leader must invest effort (=time + energy) into developing relationships based on trust.
15
The Work of Leadership
The Leadership “Transform”
Stage “0”
Leadership Work
The “Cathedral”
Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership
Transactional leadership is something we all know about: The boss just tells us what we need to do. We may or may not see the gold “star” in the previous slide...typically, a transactional leader doesn’t see this as being of great importance.
The transactional leader tries to create alignment by rewards and punishments.
Transformational leadership seeks to inspire and align the followers around a compelling narrative that links their personal interests with the achievement of organizational goals and purposes.
The transformational leader tries to create alignment by informing people of the “Big Picture,” and providing a compelling narrative that connects their interests with it.
Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership is aimed at
Transforming an organization to a “higher state,” or
Transforming individuals (by coaching, training, and providing “growth” assignments)
...or both
Transactional leadership is aimed at
Accomplishing immediate objectives
Maintaining order and standardization
Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership
These styles are not mutually exclusive. One person can have the attributes of both. Once a group is aligned around goals and purposes, transactional leadership can and does occur.
Think of it this way:
Transformational leadership produces effective and lasting change
Transactional leadership produces and re-produces the status quo*
Robbins and Judge call the combination of these two approaches the “Full Range of Leadership Model” (see next slide).
*Note: I do not mean to imply that there is anything wrong with the status quo. The status quo might be a good thing. But transactional leadership will not, in general, produce change. Further, it will not, by itself, produce commitment to anything but a paycheck.
19
See discussion
In Robbins and
Judge, Sec.
12.4.3 p. 197
Segue to Lesson 8
There have always been transformational leaders—charismatic leaders have been with us since the beginning of time, and they are remembered because they were also transformational.
As we will see in Lesson 8, transformational leaders are able to produce an upward shift in an organization’s safety zone (see next slide) only by introducing a two-way* “conversation” that has a compelling theme (“it’s good for us and the business”).
*Note: The Fundamental Principle of Engagement states that “Each person should participate in the decision-making process, as regards his or her work methods, up to the level of his or her competence to do so. If a manager ignores the competence of people and is OK with “telling them how to do their work” even if they believe they know better, they may (and often will) reduce their productive effort supplies (by the Norm of Reciprocity) to punish their manager for “disrespecting” them. Even transformational leaders run this risk. In the text, the authors define one of the attributes of transformational leadership as follows: “Communicates high expectations, uses symbols to focus efforts, expresses important purposes in simple ways.” (Robbins and Judge [2018] p. 197) Transactional leaders “communicate high expectations,” too. A better way of saying this would be to say “negotiates high expectations.”
21
Safety Zone, t0
Safety Zone, t1
Transition Phase
Segue to Lesson 8
The effectiveness of transformational leadership, which is supported by current research (see the text for verification) is due to a breakthrough in behavioral science that occurred in the 1940s, as you will see in the next lesson.
You will also see what it takes to create the upward shift in the safety zone illustrated on the previous slide.
End of Lesson 7—
Thank You!
References
Akerlof, George A., and Rachel E. Kranton. (2010). Identity economics. Princeton: Princeton UP.
Drucker, Peter F. (1955). The practice of management. London: William Heinemann, Ltd.
Kotter, John P. The general managers (1982). New York: The Free Press.
Peters, Thomas, and Robert Waterman. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Warner Books.
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2018). Essentials of organizational behavior. New York, NY : Pearson
Simon, Herbert A. 1945. Administrative behavior. New York: The Free Press.
