FOR ARISTOLE ONLY

lovlyl

the_leadership_experience__ch02.pdf

Home >English homework help >FOR ARISTOLE ONLY

P A R T 2

Research Perspectives on Leadership Chapter 2 Traits, Behaviors, and Relationships

Chapter 3 Contingency Approaches

G e tt

y I m

a g

e s

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 3539681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 35 5/23/07 3:41:40 AM5/23/07 3:41:40 AM

Chapter 2 Chapter Outline 38 The Trait Approach

43 Behavior Approaches

52 Individualized Leadership

In the Lead

42 Jeff Immelt, General Electric

45 Stephen McDonnell, Applegate Farms

46 Col. Joe D. Dowdy and Maj. Gen. James Mattis, U.S. Marine Corps

49 TruServ and North Jackson Elementary School

56 University Public Schools

Leader’s Self-Insight

42 Rate Your Self-Confidence

47 What’s Your Leadership Orientation?

55 Your “LMX” Relationship

Leader’s Bookshelf

40 Know-How: The 8 Skills That Separate People Who Perform From Those Who Don’t

Leadership at Work

58 Your Ideal Leader Traits

Leadership Development: Cases for Analysis

58 Consolidated Products

59 D. L. Woodside, Sunshine Snacks

Your Leadership Challenge After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Identify personal traits and characteristics that are associated with effective leaders.

• Recognize autocratic versus democratic leadership behavior and the impact of each.

• Know the distinction between people-oriented and task-oriented leadership behavior and when each should be used.

• Understand how the theory of individualized leadership has broadened the understanding of relationships between leaders and followers.

• Recognize how to build partnerships for greater effectiveness.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 3639681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 36 5/23/07 3:41:50 AM5/23/07 3:41:50 AM

Traits, Behaviors, and Relationships Imagine slogging through near-freezing water up to your waist, or walking for miles and then discovering you’re only 100 yards closer to your destination. That’s what happened when Robert Swan led a team to the North Pole and the ice cap melted beneath their feet. Swan’s carefully planned expedition, made up of eight people from seven countries, became a nightmare when the ice cap began to melt in April—four months earlier than usual.

The group survived—barely—because of teamwork and Swan’s extra- ordinary leadership. Swan’s honesty, as well as his ability to maintain his poise, self-confi dence, and sense of purpose amid life-threatening and con- stantly changing conditions, helped to nourish the spirit and motivation of the team. With the completion of the journey, Swan became the fi rst person ever to walk to both the North and the South Poles. Today, he recounts his adventures to groups around the world, including businesspeople hungry to learn what it means to be a leader in a dangerous and hostile environment.

Swan had dreamed of walking to the South Pole, tracing the route taken by Robert Falcon Scott in 1912, since he was a child. As a young adult, he spent seven years working as a taxi driver, a tree cutter, a gardener, and a hotel dishwasher to earn money, all the while selling the dream to others to help raise funds. His fi rst expedition to Antarctica in 1986 changed his life completely. Motivated by fi rsthand observation of the destruction of the ozone layer and the waste and pollution he encountered, Swan be- came deeply committed to environmental issues. He took on the diffi cult challenge of raising money for his second expedition, to the North Pole, inspired primarily by a vision of helping to save the polar regions from human destruction.

From an organizational viewpoint, Swan’s stories of courage, adventure, determination, and risk taking are good metaphors for what many leaders feel in today’s complex and challenging world.1

Robert Swan is a world-renowned explorer who is infl uencing young people, world leaders, businesspeople, and organizations around the globe. He works tirelessly for what he believes in and has inspired others to be- come more actively involved. Those who participate in his expeditions take what they learn back to their organizations, further extending Swan’s infl u- ence. Several personal attributes contribute to Swan’s leadership. He had the courage, self-confi dence, and determination to try something that ev- eryone told him couldn’t be done. He had the drive and the commitment to work for years in menial jobs to make his dream a reality, and he con- tinues to raise money for the causes he believes in. His poise and ability to maintain a positive attitude have helped team members survive harrowing conditions.

In considering Swan’s infl uence, it seems evident that characteristics such as courage, self-confi dence, drive, determination, and a willingness to take risks are part of the personality that make him a good leader. Indeed, personal traits are what captured the imagination of the earliest leadership researchers. Many leaders possess traits that researchers be- lieve affect their leadership impact. For example, four-star Army General John Abizaid, who leads U.S. forces in the Middle East, is known for his intelligence, honesty, and ease in coping with uncertainty and chaos.2 An example from the business world is Julia Stewart, whose fi rst job was serving food at an International House of Pancakes (IHOP) in San Diego.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 3739681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 37 5/23/07 3:41:52 AM5/23/07 3:41:52 AM

38 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

Traits such as ambition, persistence, responsibility, and enthusiasm have helped Stewart through a series of jobs since then, eventually landing her in the CEO’s chair at IHOP.3

Leaders display traits through patterns in their behavior. Consequently, many researchers have examined the behavior of leaders to determine what be- havioral features comprise leadership style and how particular behaviors relate to effective leadership. Later research specifi ed behavior between a leader and each distinct follower, differentiating one-on-one behavior from leader-to-group behavior.

This chapter provides an overview of the initial leadership research in the twentieth century. We examine the evolution of the trait approach and the be- havior approach, and introduce the theory of individualized leadership. The path illuminated by the research into leader traits and behaviors is a foundation for the fi eld of leadership studies and still enjoys remarkable dynamism for explaining leader success or failure.

The Trait Approach Early efforts to understand leadership success focused on the leader’s personal traits. Traits are the distinguishing personal characteristics of a leader, such as intelligence, honesty, self-confi dence, and appearance. Research early in the twen- tieth century examined leaders who had achieved a level of greatness, and hence became known as the Great Man approach. Fundamental to this theory was the idea that some people are born with traits that make them natural leaders. The Great Man approach sought to identify the traits leaders possessed that distinguished them from people who were not leaders. Generally, research found only a weak relationship between personal traits and leader success.4 Indeed, the diversity of traits that effective leaders possess indicates that leadership ability is not neces- sarily a genetic endowment.

Nevertheless, with the advancement of the fi eld of psychology during the 1940s and 1950s, trait approach researchers expanded their examination of personal attributes by using aptitude and psychological tests. These early studies looked at personality traits such as creativity and self-confi dence, physical traits such as age and energy level, abilities such as knowledge and fl uency of speech, social characteristics such as popularity and sociability, and work- related char- acteristics such as the desire to excel and persistence against obstacles. Effec- tive leaders were often identifi ed by exceptional follower performance, or by a high status position within an organization and a salary that exceeded that of peers.5

In a 1948 literature review,6 Stogdill examined more than 100 studies based on the trait approach. He uncovered several traits that appeared con- sistent with effective leadership, including general intelligence, initiative, inter- personal skills, self-confi dence, drive for responsibility, and personal integrity. Stogdill’s fi ndings also indicated, however, that the importance of a particular trait was often relative to the situation. Initiative, for example, may contribute to the success of a leader in one situation, but it may be irrelevant to a leader in another situation. Thus, possessing certain personal characteristics is no guar- antee of success.

Many researchers desisted their efforts to identify leadership traits in light of Stogdill’s 1948 fi ndings and turned their attention to examining leader behavior

Traits the distinguishing personal characteristics of a leader, such as intelligence, honesty, self- confi dence, and appearance

Great Man approach a leadership perspective that sought to identify the inherited traits leaders possessed that distinguished them from people who were not leaders

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 3839681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 38 5/23/07 3:41:53 AM5/23/07 3:41:53 AM

and leadership situations. However, others continued with expanded trait lists and research projects. Stogdill’s subsequent review of 163 trait studies conducted between 1948 and 1970 concluded that some personal traits do indeed seem to contribute to effective leadership.7 The study identifi ed many of the same traits found in the 1948 survey, along with several additional characteristics, including aggressiveness, independence, and tolerance for stress. However, Stogdill again cautioned that the value of a particular trait or set of traits varies with the orga- nizational situation.

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in examining leader- ship traits. A review by Kirkpatrick and Locke identifi ed a number of personal traits that distinguish leaders from non-leaders, including some pinpointed by Stogdill.8 Other studies have focused on followers’ perceptions and indicate that certain traits are associated with individuals’ perceptions of who is a leader. For example, one study found that the traits of intelligence, masculinity, and domi- nance were strongly related to how individuals perceived leaders.9 In summary, trait research has been an important part of leadership studies throughout the twentieth century and continues into the twenty-fi rst. Many researchers still con- tend that some traits are essential to effective leadership, but only in combination with other factors.10 Infl uential business consultant Ram Charan says successful leaders are those who apply their personal traits to develop leadership know-how, as discussed in the Leader’s Bookshelf.

Exhibit 2.1 presents some of the traits and their respective categories that have been identifi ed through trait research over the years. Some of the traits considered important are optimism and self-confi dence, honesty and integrity, and drive.

Optimism and Self-Confidence Emerging research points to a positive out- look as key to effective leadership.11 Optimism refers to a tendency to see the positive side of things and expect that things will turn out well. Numerous surveys indicate that the one characteristic most common to top executives, for example, is an optimistic attitude. People rise to the top because they have the ability to see opportunities where others see problems and can instill in others a sense of hope for the future. Leaders at all levels need a degree of optimism to see possibilities even through the thickest fog and rally people around a vision for a better tomorrow. One leadership researcher has gone so far as to say that “The opposite of a leader isn’t a follower. The opposite of a leader is a pessimist.”12

A related characteristic is having a positive attitude about oneself, which doesn’t mean being arrogant and prideful. Leaders who know themselves develop self-confi dence, which is assurance in one’s own judgments, decision mak- ing, ideas, and capabilities. A leader with a positive self-image who displays cer- tainty about his or her own ability fosters confi dence among followers, gains respect and admiration, and meets challenges. The confi dence a leader displays and develops creates motivation and commitment among followers for the mis- sion at hand.

Active leaders need self-confi dence and optimism. How many of us willingly follow someone who is jaded and pessimistic, or someone who obviously doesn’t believe in him or herself? Leaders initiate changes and they often must make deci- sions without adequate information. Problems are solved continuously. Without the confi dence to move forward and believe things will be okay, even if an occa- sional decision is wrong, leaders could be paralyzed into inaction. Setbacks have to be overcome. Risks have to be taken. Competing points of view have to be

Optimism a tendency to see the positive side of things and expect that things will turn out well

Self-confi dence assurance in one’s own judgments, decision making, ideas, and capabilities

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 39

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 3939681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 39 5/23/07 3:41:53 AM5/23/07 3:41:53 AM

managed, with some people left unsatisfi ed. Optimism and self-confi dence enables a leader to face all these challenges.13

Honesty and Integrity Positive attitudes have to be tempered by strong ethics or leaders can get into trouble. Consider Jeffrey Skilling, former CEO of Enron, who was convicted and sent to jail on 19 crim-

inal charges related to the largest corporate fraud case in history. As a leader, Skilling displayed strong self-confi dence and optimism. The problem was that he didn’t have strong ethics to match. Ethics refers to a code of moral principles and values that governs a person’s behavior with respect to what is right or wrong. In today’s world, effective leaders are ethical leaders.

What does it take to be a great leader? Executive con- sultant Ram Charan admits that it can help to possess traits such as intelligence, self-confidence, energy, and enthusiasm, but in his book Know-How: The 8 Skills That Separate People Who Perform From Those Who Don’t, he emphasizes that traits alone are not enough. “A per- son may possess the entire panoply of personal traits that everyone admires, but without the know-hows of running a business,” Charan contends, “that person can be a recipe for disaster.” Charan has applied the understanding he’s gained from three decades of hands-on experience with leaders in diverse industries to identify key skills that are the bedrock of leadership success.

DEVELOP THE KNOW-HOW TO BE A GREAT LEADER Leaders are made, not born, Charan says, and they’re made by hard work and commitment to personal devel- opment. He describes eight essential skills that all great leaders share, and he emphasizes that anyone can develop these leadership know-hows, no matter what their person- ality traits. Here are a few of the essential leadership skills:

1. Learn how to judge people accurately. Great lead- ers are people experts, which enables them to put the right people in the right jobs. Leaders carefully observe patterns of behavior, actions, and decisions, and they learn how to ask the right questions to judge people’s capabilities, needs, and interests.

2. Mold a team of leaders. Judging people accurately enables leaders to put together a team of people who submerge their own agendas for the sake of common goals. An effective team in which everyone acts like a

Leader’s Bookshelf G

e tt

y Im

ag e

s e

by Ram Charan

leader, Charan says, “is a huge multiplier of your capabil- ity for making better decisions and getting things done.”

3. Manage the social system. For any organization to succeed, people have to work together smoothly. Great leaders invest time and energy in shaping and reinforc- ing collaborative working relationships. They identify areas where interaction is needed and make sure there are mechanisms in place to bring the right people together for the sharing of ideas and information.

4. Set the right goals. Poorly chosen goals is a com- mon problem in struggling organizations. Too often, leaders simply take last year’s goal and add some incremental improvement to it, rather than taking a fresh look at current conditions. Charan uses the example of General Motors, where leaders are strug- gling under a misguided goal of winning back U.S. market share rather than looking at the reality of a critical need to improve profitability.

Don’t Let Traits Get in the Way Charan says anyone can become a better leader by “con- sciously working to improve these skills and becoming aware of how your own personality affects them.” He cautions that some personality traits can get in the way. Optimism can be a positive characteristic for a leader, for example, but if a leader is overly optimistic, his or her assessments of people will be distorted, and goals may be unrealistic. The key, Charan says, is to be self-aware and consider personality traits that might be holding you back from fully developing leadership know-how.

Know-How: The 8 Skills That Separate People Who Perform From Those Who Don’t, by Ram Charan, is published by Crown Business.

Action Memo Do you believe you have the self-confi dence

to be a strong and effective leader? Complete the questionnaire in Leader’s

Self-Insight 2.1 on page 42 to assess your

level of self-confi dence.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4039681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 40 5/23/07 3:41:54 AM5/23/07 3:41:54 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 41

One aspect of being an ethical leader is being honest with followers, custom- ers, shareholders, and the public, and maintaining one’s integrity. Honesty refers to truthfulness and non-deception. It implies an openness that followers welcome. Integrity means that a leader’s character is whole, integrated, and grounded in solid moral principles, and he or she acts in keeping with those principles. When leaders model their convictions through their daily actions, they command admiration, respect, and loyalty. These virtues are the foundation of trust between leaders and followers.

In the wake of widespread corporate scandals, trust is sorely lacking in many organizations. Leaders need the traits of ethics, honesty, and integrity to rebuild trusting and productive relationships. People today are wary of authority and the deceptive use of power, and they are hungry for leaders who hold high standards and reinforce them through everyday actions. Successful leaders have also been found to be highly consistent, doing exactly what they say they will do when they say they will do it. Successful leaders are easy to trust. They have basic principles and consistently apply them. One survey of 1,500 managers asked the values most desired in leaders. Integrity was the most important characteristic. The authors concluded:

Honesty is absolutely essential to leadership. After all, if we are willing to follow someone, whether it be into battle or into the boardroom, we fi rst want to assure ourselves that the person is worthy of our trust. We want to know that he or she is being truthful, ethical, and principled. We want to be fully confi dent in the integrity of our leaders.14

Drive Another characteristic considered essential for effective leadership is drive. Leaders often are responsible for initiating new projects as well as guiding proj- ects to successful completion. Drive refers to high motivation that creates a high effort level by a leader. Leaders with drive seek achievement, have energy and

Honesty truthfulness and nondeception

Integrity the quality of being whole, integrated, and acting in accordance with solid moral principles

Honesty truthfulness and nondeception

Integrity the quality of being whole, integrated, and acting in accordance with solid moral principles

Drive high motivation that creates a high effort level by a leader

Exhibit 2.1 Personal Characteristics of Leaders

Sources: Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Management Applications, 3rd ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1990), pp. 80–81; and S. A. Kirkpatrick and E. A. Locke, “Leadership: Do Traits Matter?” Academy of Management Executive 5, no. 2 (1991), pp. 48–60.

Personal Characteristics

Energy Physical stamina

Intelligence and Ability

Intelligence, cognitive ability Knowledge Judgment, decisiveness

Personality

Optimism Self-confidence Honesty and integrity Enthusiasm Desire to lead Independence

Social Characteristics

Sociability, interpersonal skills Cooperativeness Ability to enlist cooperation Tact, diplomacy

Work-Related Characteristics

Drive, desire to excel Responsibility in pursuit of goals Persistence against obstacles, tenacity

Social Background

Education Mobility

Action Memo

As a lea der, you

can de velop th

e perso nal

traits o f self-co

nfi denc e, integ

rity, and drive,

which a re impo

rtant fo r succe

ssful le adershi

in every organiz

ation an d situat

ion. You can

work to keep a

n optim istic att

itude an d be

ethical in your

decisio ns and

actions .

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4139681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 41 5/23/07 3:41:55 AM5/23/07 3:41:55 AM

tenacity, and are frequently seen to have ambition and initiative to achieve their goals. If people don’t strive to achieve something, they rarely do. Leaders actively pursue goals. Ambition enables them to set challenging goals and take initiative to reach them.15

A strong drive is associated with high energy. Leaders work long hours over many years. They have stamina and are vigorous and full of life in order to handle the pace, the demands, and the challenges of leadership. Jeff Immelt, CEO of General Electric, provides an excellent example of strong drive, as well as several other traits listed in Exhibit 2.1 that are associated with successful leaders.

Jeff Immelt, General Electric

“There are 24 hours in a day, and you can use them all,” says Jeff Immelt. Immelt claims he’s been working 100 hours a week for nearly a quarter of a century, long before he took over the top job at General Electric. “You have to have real stamina,” he says.

Immelt has shown a drive for achievement since his days at Harvard Business School, which he says he approached like a job. That’s where he began budget- ing his time with steely discipline and pursuing goals with gritty determination.

Leader’s Self-Insight 2.1 This questionnaire is designed to assess your level of self-confidence as reflected in a belief in your ability to accomplish a desired outcome. There are no right or wrong answers. Please indicate your personal feelings about whether each statement is Mostly False or Mostly True by checking the answer that best describes your attitude or feeling.

Mostly False

Mostly True

1. When I make plans, I am cer- tain I can make them work. _______ _______

2. One of my problems is that I often cannot get down to work when I should. _______ _______

3. When I set important goals for myself, I rarely achieve them. _______ _______

4. I often give up on things before completing them. _______ _______

5. I typically put off facing difficult situations. _______ _______

6. If something looks too compli- cated, I may not even bother to try it. _______ _______

7. When I decide to do something, I go right to work on it. _______ _______

8. When an unexpected problem occurs, I often don’t respond well. _______ _______

9. Failure just makes me try harder. _______ _______

10. I consider myself a self-reliant person. _______ _______

Scoring and Interpretation Give yourself one point for checking Mostly True for items 1,7,9, and 10. Also give yourself one point for checking Mostly False for items 2,3,4,5,6, and 8. Enter your score here: _______. If your score is 8 or higher, it may mean that you are high on self confidence. If your score is 3 or less, your self confidence may be low. If your score is low, what can you do to increase your self-confidence?

Source: This is part of the general self-efficacy subscale of the self- efficacy scale published in M. Sherer, J. E. Maddux, B. Mercadante, S. Prentice-Dunn, B. Jacobs, and R. W. Rogers, “The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and Validation,” Psychological Reports 51 (1982), pp. 663–671. Used with permission.

G e

tt y

Im ag

e s

IN T

H E

L E

A D

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4239681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 42 5/23/07 3:41:56 AM5/23/07 3:41:56 AM

As CEO of GE, Immelt is known as a demanding boss who isn’t afraid to push aside his own hand-picked managers if they don’t meet performance standards. However, Immelt is also praised by employees (which he calls teammates) for his pleasant, approachable manner. His optimism about GE’s future is infectious; despite a slowdown in the company’s sales and a slide in the stock price, Immelt helps people see a world of promising opportunities that can make GE as central to this new century as it was to the previous one.

For such a hard-charging leader, Immelt can seem surprisingly relaxed, almost serene, partly due to his confi dence in his abilities and his belief in GE’s superior capabilities and quality people. Yet, as Fortune magazine put it, “his apparent seren- ity masks rigor, toughness, and a white-hot desire to win.”16

Working 100-hour weeks certainly isn’t necessary for effective leadership, but all leaders have to display drive and energy to be successful. Clearly, various traits such as drive, self-confi dence, optimisim, and honesty have great value for leaders. One study of 600 executives by Hay Group, a global organizational and human resources consulting fi rm, found that 75 percent of the successful executives stud- ied possessed the characteristics of self-confi dence and drive.17 This chapter’s Consider This box presents the notion that personal characteristics of the leader are ultimately responsible for leadership outcomes. In Chapter 4, we will fur- ther consider individual characteristics and qualities that play a role in leadership effectiveness. However, as indicated earlier, traits alone cannot defi ne effective leadership. The inability of researchers to defi ne effective leadership based solely on personal traits led to an interest in looking at the behavior of leaders and how it might contribute to leadership success or failure.

Behavior Approaches Rather than looking at an individual’s personal traits, the behavior approach says that anyone who adopts the appropriate behavior can be a good leader. Diverse research programs on leadership behavior have sought to uncover the

The quality of the leader determines the quality of the organization.

A leader who lacks intelligence, virtue, and experience cannot hope for success.

In any conflict, the circumstances affect the outcome. Good leaders can succeed in adverse conditions. Bad leaders can lose in favorable conditions. Therefore, good leaders constantly strive to perfect themselves, lest their shortcom-

ings mar their endeavors. When all other factors are equal, it is the character of the leader that determines the

outcome.

Source: Excerpt from page 66 [“Leader Qualities”] from Everyday Tao: Living with Balance and Harmony by Deng Ming-Dao. Copyright © 1996 by Deng Ming-Dao. Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Leader Qualities G

e tt

y Im

ag e

Consider This!

IN T

H E

L E

A D

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4339681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 43 5/23/07 3:41:58 AM5/23/07 3:41:58 AM

44 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

behaviors that leaders engage in rather than what traits a leader possesses. Behaviors can be learned more readily than traits, enabling leadership to be accessible to all.

Autocratic Versus Democratic Leadership

One study that served as a precursor to the behavior approach recognized au- tocratic and democratic leadership styles. An autocratic leader is one who tends to centralize authority and derive power from position, control of rewards, and coercion. A democratic leader delegates authority to others, encourages participa- tion, relies on subordinates’ knowledge for completion of tasks, and depends on subordinate respect for infl uence.

The fi rst studies on these leadership behaviors were conducted at the Uni- versity of Iowa by Kurt Lewin and his associates.18 The research included groups of children, each with its own designated adult leader who was instructed to act in either an autocratic or democratic style. These experiments produced some interesting fi ndings. The groups with autocratic leaders performed highly so long as the leader was present to supervise them. However, group members were displeased with the close, autocratic style of leadership, and feelings of hostil- ity frequently arose. The performance of groups who were assigned democratic leaders was almost as good, and these groups were characterized by positive feel- ings rather than hostility. In addition, under the democratic style of leadership, group members performed well even when the leader was absent. The participa- tive techniques and majority-rule decision making used by the democratic leader trained and involved the group members so that they performed well with or without the leader present. These characteristics of democratic leadership may partly explain why the empowerment of employees is a popular trend in com- panies today.

This early work implied that leaders were either autocratic or democratic in their approach. However, further work by Tannenbaum and Schmidt indicated that leadership behavior could exist on a continuum refl ecting different amounts of employee participation.19 Thus, one leader might be autocratic (boss-centered), another democratic (subordinate-centered), and a third a mix of the two styles. Exhibit 2.2 illustrates the leadership continuum.

Tannenbaum and Schmidt also suggested that the extent to which leaders should be boss-centered or subordinate-centered depended on organizational circumstances, and that leaders might adjust their behaviors to fi t the circum- stances. For example, if there is time pressure on a leader or if it takes too long for subordinates to learn how to make decisions, the leader will tend to use

an autocratic style. When subordinates are able to learn decision-making skills readily, a participative style can be used. Also, the greater the skill difference, the more autocratic the leader approach, be- cause it is diffi cult to bring subordinates up to the leader’s exper- tise level.20

Jack Hartnett, president of D. L. Rogers Corp. and franchise owner of 54 Sonic drive-in restaurants, provides an example of the autocratic leadership style.21 The style works well in the fast-food res- taurant business where turnover is typically high and many employees are young and low-skilled. In contrast, the CEO of Applegate Farms, a purveyor of organic and natural meats, is an extreme example of a democratic leader.

Autocratic a leader who tends to centralize authority and derive power from position, control of rewards, and coercion

Democratic a leader who delegates authority to others, encourages participation, relies on subordinates’ knowledge for completion of tasks, and depends on subordinate respect for infl uence

Autocratic a leader who tends to centralize authority and derive power from position, control of rewards, and coercion

Democratic a leader who delegates authority to others, encourages participation, relies on subordinates’ knowledge for completion of tasks, and depends on subordinate respect for infl uence

Action Memo As a leader, you can use a democratic

leadership style to help followers develop

decision-making skills and perform well

without close supervision. An autocratic

style might be appropriate when there is time pressure or followers have low

skill levels.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4439681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 44 5/23/07 3:41:58 AM5/23/07 3:41:58 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 45

Stephen McDonnell, Applegate Farms

For most of Applegate Farms’ history, its CEO hasn’t even been in the offi ce. When Stephen McDonnell bought a struggling meat products company (then called Jugtown Mountain Smokehouse) nearly 20 years ago, he spent the fi rst six months working full-time on-site, but since then he’s been working mostly from home.

From his experience at other companies, McDonnell had observed that most organizational problems were more easily diagnosed, and more effectively solved, within specifi c teams or work groups rather than by top managers. He decided that the best way to get a company running smoothly was to give everyone constant access to relevant information, empower them with the freedom and responsibility to act on it, and then stay out of the way.

What’s most interesting about the whole story is that McDonnell is a self- confessed control-freak boss, full of anxiety and obsessed with meeting goals and moving on quickly. He realized that working mostly from home was the best way to protect the company from his tendency to micromanage. McDonnell goes into the offi ce only on Wednesdays, when he does everything from taste-test new products, observe twice-a-day team “huddles” (10-minute stand-up meetings to discuss key problems or issues), meet with senior staff members to discuss stra- tegic issues, and deal with any staff problems that might threaten the company’s smooth functioning.

Applegate is thriving under this system of extreme democratic leadership. The company has grown to sales of more than $35 million. Profi ts and productivity go up every year. To McDonnell, a hands-off leadership style “doesn’t mean they don’t need you—it means they need you looking ahead.”22

The fi ndings about autocratic and democratic leadership in the original Uni- versity of Iowa studies indicated that leadership behavior had a defi nite effect on outcomes such as follower performance and satisfaction. Equally important was the recognition that effective leadership was refl ected in behavior, not simply by what personality traits a leader possessed. The Stephen McDonnell example above

IN T

H E

L E

A D

Exhibit 2.2 Leadership Continuum

Source: Harvard Business Review. An exhibit from Robert Tannenbaum and Warren Schmidt, “How to Choose a Leadership Pattern” (May–June 1973). Copyright 1973 by the president and Fellows of Harvard College.

Subordinate-Centered Leadership

Boss-Centered Leadership

Manager makes decision and announces it

Manager “sells” decision

Manager presents ideas and invites questions

Manager presents tentative decision subject to change

Manager presents problem, gets suggestions, makes decision

Manager defines limits, asks group to make decision

Manager permits subordinates to function within limits defined by superior

Use of authority by manager

Area of freedom for subordinates

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4539681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 45 5/23/07 3:41:59 AM5/23/07 3:41:59 AM

46 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

indicates that leaders can adopt behaviors that are almost in direct opposition to their natural traits when its necessary. Jay Vogt, a consultant to Applegate, says of McDonnell: “If he’s at the company on some days he might do more harm than good, and he knows that. How many CEOs have that self-awareness?”23

Ohio State Studies The idea that leadership is refl ected in behavior and not just personal traits pro- vided a focus for subsequent research. One early series of studies on leadership behavior was conducted at the Ohio State University. Researchers conducted sur- veys to identify specifi c dimensions of leader behavior. Narrowing a list of nearly 2,000 leader behavirs into a questionnaire containing 150 examples of defi nitive leader behaviors, they developed the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) and administered it to employees.24 Hundreds of employees responded to behavior examples according to the degree to which their leaders engaged in the various behaviors. The analysis of ratings resulted in two wide-ranging categories of leader behavior types, later called consideration and initiating structure.

Consideration describes the extent to which a leader cares about subordinates, respects their ideas and feelings, and establishes mutual trust. Showing apprecia- tion, listening carefully to problems, and seeking input from subordinates regard- ing important decisions are all examples of consideration behaviors.

Initiating structure describes the extent to which a leader is task oriented and directs subordinates’ work activities toward goal achievement. This type of leader behavior includes directing tasks, getting people to work hard, planning, provid- ing explicit schedules for work activities, and ruling with an iron hand.

Although many leaders fall along a continuum that includes both con- sideration and initiating structure behaviors, these behavior categories are independent of one another. In other words, a leader can display a high degree of both behavior types, or a low degree of both behavior types. Additionally, a leader might demonstrate high consideration and low initiating structure, or low consideration and high initiating structure behavior. Research indicates that all four of these leader style combinations can be effective.25 The following ex- amples describe two U.S. Marine leaders who display different types of leader- ship behavior that correlate to the consideration and initiating structure styles. Sometimes these styles clash.

Col. Joe D. Dowdy and Maj. Gen. James Mattis, U.S. Marine Corps

Only a few weeks into the war in Iraq, Marine Col. Joe D. Dowdy had both ac- complished a grueling military mission and been removed from his command by Maj. Gen. James Mattis. The complicated and confl icting tales of why Col. Dowdy was dismissed are beyond the scope of this text, but one issue that came under examination was the differing styles of Col. Dowdy and Gen. Mattis, as well as the diffi cult, age-old wartime tension of “men versus mission.”

Gen. Mattis has been referred to as a “warrior monk,” consumed with the study of battle tactics and whose own battle plans in Iraq were considered brilliant. Gen. Mattis saw speed as integral to success in the early days of the Iraqi war, pushing for regiments to move quickly to accomplish a mission despite signifi cant risks. For Col. Dowdy, some risks seemed too high, and he made decisions that delayed his mission, but better protected his Marines. Col. Dowdy was beloved by his fol- lowers because he was deeply concerned about their welfare, paid attention to them as inviduals, and treated them as equals, going so far as to decline certain privileges that were available only to offi cers.

Consideration the extent to which a leader is sensitive to subordinates, respects their ideas and feelings, and establishes mutual trust

Initiating Structure the extent to which a leader is task oriented and directs subordinates’ work activities toward goal achievement

IN T

H E

L E

A D

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4639681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 46 5/23/07 3:42:00 AM5/23/07 3:42:00 AM

Despite their different styles, both leaders were highly respected by followers. When asked about Gen. Mattis, Gunnery Sgt. Robert Kane, who has served under both leaders, says he would certainly “follow him again.” However, when he learned that Col. Dowdy had been dismissed, Sgt. Kane says he “wanted to go with him. If [he] had said ‘Get your gear, you’re coming with me,’ I would’ve gone, even if it meant the end of my career.26

Gen. Mattis might be considred highly task-oriented, refl ecting an initiating structure approach, while Col. Dowdy seems more people-oriented, refl ecting a consideration behavioral style. Whereas Gen. Mattis typically put the mission fi rst, combined with a concern for the Marines under his command, Col. Dowdy typi- cally put Marines fi rst, even though he also gave his all to accomplish the mission.

Additional studies that correlated the two leader behavior types and impact on subordinates initially demonstrated that “considerate” supervisors had a more positive impact on subordinate satisfaction than did “structuring” supervisors.27 For example, when leader effec- tiveness was defi ned by voluntary turnover or amount of grievances fi led by subordinates, considerate leaders generated less turnover and grievances. But research that utilized performance criteria, such as group output and productivity, showed initiating structure behavior was rated more effective. Other studies involving aircraft commanders

IN T

H E

L E

A D

Action Memo

Discove r your l

eaders hip orie

ntation related

to cons ideratio

n and i nitiatin

g struc ture by

comple ting the

self-as sessme

nt exer cise in

Leader ’s Self-

Insight 2.2.

The questions below ask about your personal leadership orientation. Each item describes a specific kind of behav- ior but does not ask you to judge whether the behavior is desirable or undesirable.

Read each item carefully. Think about how frequently you engage in the behavior described by the item in a work or school group. Please indicate whether each statement is Mostly False or Mostly True by checking the answer that best describes your behavior.

Mostly False

Mostly True

1. I put into operation suggestions agreed to by the group. _______ _______

2. I treat everyone in the group with respect as my equal. _______ _______

3. I back up what other people in the group do. _______ _______

4. I help others with their per- sonal problems. _______ _______

5. I bring up how much work should be accomplished. _______ _______

6. I help assign people to specific tasks. _______ _______

Leader’s Self-Insight 2.2

7. I frequently suggest ways to fix problems. _______ _______

8. I emphasize deadlines and how to meet them. _______ _______

Scoring and Interpretation Consideration behavior score—count the number of checks for Mostly True for items 1–4. Enter your consid- eration score here ________.

A higher score (3 or 4) suggests a relatively strong orientation toward consideration-oriented behavior by you as a leader. A low score (2 or less) suggests a relatively weak consideration orientation.

Initiating structure behavior score—count the number of checks for Mostly True for items 5–8. Enter your initi- ating structure score here ________.

A higher score (3 or 4) suggests a relatively strong orientation toward initiating structure-oriented behavior by you as a leader. A low score (2 or less) suggests a rela- tively weak orientation toward initiating structure behavior.

Source: Sample items adapted from: Edwin A Fleishman’s Leadership Opinion Questionnaire. (Copyright 1960, Science Research Associates, Inc., Chicago, IL.) This version is based on Jon L. Pierce and John W. Newstrom, Leaders and the Leadership Process: Readings, Self-Assessments & Applications, 2nd edition (Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill, 2000).

What’s Your Leadership Orientation?

G e

tt y

Im ag

e s

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4739681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 47 5/23/07 3:42:01 AM5/23/07 3:42:01 AM

48 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

and university department heads revealed that leaders rated effective by subordi- nates exhibited a high level of both consideration and initiating structure behaviors, whereas leaders rated less effective displayed low levels of both behavior styles.28

University of Michigan Studies Studies at the University of Michigan took a different approach by directly com- paring the behavior of effective and ineffective supervisors.29 The effectiveness of leaders was determined by productivity of the subordinate group. Initial fi eld studies and interviews at various job sites gave way to a questionnaire not unlike the LBDQ, called the Survey of Organizations.30

Over time, the Michigan researchers established two types of leadership behav- ior, each type consisting of two dimensions.31 First, employee-centered leaders display a focus on the human needs of their subordinates. Leader support and interaction facilitation are the two underlying dimensions of employee-centered behavior. This means that in addition to demonstrating support for their subordinates, employee- centered leaders facilitate positive interaction among followers and seek to minimize confl ict. The employee-centered style of leadership roughly corresponds to the Ohio State concept of consideration. Because relationships are so important in today’s work environment, many organizations are looking for leaders who can facilitate positive interaction among others. Damark International, a general merchandise catalogue company, even has a position designed to help people get along better. Although his offi cial title is director of leadership and team development, Mark Johansson calls himself a “relationship manager.” Johansson works with managers throughout the organization to help them improve their relationship and interper- sonal skills and become more employee-centered.32

In contrast to the employee-centered leader, the job-centered leader directs ac- tivities toward scheduling, accomplishing tasks, and achieving effi ciency. Goal emphasis and work facilitation are dimensions of this leadership behavior. By fo- cusing on reaching task goals and facilitating the structure of tasks, job-centered behavior approximates that of initiating structure.

However, unlike the consideration and initiating structure styles defi ned by the Ohio State studies, Michigan researchers considered employee-centered lead- ership and job-centered leadership to be distinct styles in opposition to one an- other. A leader is identifi able by behavior characteristic of one or the other style, but not both. Another hallmark of later Michigan studies is the acknowledg- ment that often the behaviors of goal emphasis, work facilitation, support, and interaction facilitation can be meaningfully performed by a subordinate’s peers, rather than only by the designated leader. Other people in the group could supply these behaviors, which enhanced performance.33

In addition, while leadership behavior was demonstrated to affect the perfor- mance and satisfaction of subordinates, performance was also infl uenced by other factors related to the situation within which leaders and subordinates worked. The situation will be explored in the next chapter.

The Leadership Grid Blake and Mouton of the University of Texas proposed a two-dimensional lead- ership theory called The Leadership Grid that builds on the work of the Ohio State and Michigan studies.34 Based on a week-long seminar, researchers rated leaders on a scale of one to nine according to two criteria: the concern for people and the concern for production. The scores for these criteria are plotted on a grid with an axis corresponding to each concern. Exhibit 2.3 depicts the two-dimensional model and fi ve of the seven major leadership styles.

Employee-centered a leadership behavior that displays a focus on the human needs of subordinates

Job-centered leadership behavior in which leaders direct activities toward effi ciency, cost-cutting, and scheduling, with an emphasis on goals and work facilitation

The Leadership Grid a two-dimensional leadership model that describes major leadership styles based on measuring both concern for people and concern for production

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4839681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 48 5/23/07 3:42:02 AM5/23/07 3:42:02 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 49

Team management (9,9) often is considered the most effective style and is recommended because organization members work together to accomplish tasks. Country club management (1,9) occurs when primary emphasis is given to people rather than to work outputs. Authority-compliance management (9,1) occurs when effi ciency in operations is the dominant orientation. Middle-of-the-road management (5,5) refl ects a moderate amount of concern for both people and production. Impoverished management (1,1) means the absence of a leadership philosophy; leaders exert little effort toward interpersonal relationships or work accomplishment. Consider these examples:

TruServ and North Jackson Elementary School

When Pamela Forbes Lieberman learned that her subordinates called her the dragon lady, she embraced the moniker and hung a watercolor of a dragon in her offi ce. Lieberman makes no apologies for her hard-driving management style. Her emphasis on tough goals and bottom-line results is helping to restore the health of hard- ware cooperative TruServ, which supplies inventory to True Value hardware stores. As soon as Lieberman became CEO, she began slashing costs and setting tough performance targets. “If [people] succeed, they will be rewarded, but if they don’t, then we’re going to have to look for new people sitting in their chairs,” Lieberman says. Despite her hard-nosed approach, Lieberman also believes in the importance of keeping morale high. She’s been known to join in karaoke nights, and she uses

High

Low

Low HighConcern for Results

C o n c e rn

f o r

P e o p le

1,9 9,9

5,5 Middle-of-the-Road Management Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level.

9,1

Authority-Compliance Management Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.

1,1

Impoverished Management Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership.

Country Club Management Thoughtful attention to the needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a com- fortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo.

Team Management Work accomplishment is from committed people; interdependence through a “common stake” in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Exhibit 2.3 The Leadership Grid® Figure

Source: The Leadership Grid figure from Leadership Dilemma—Grid Solutions by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse (formerly the Managerial Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton). Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, p. 29. Copyright 1991 by Scientific Methods, Inc. Reproduced by permission of the owners.

IN T

H E

L E

A D

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 4939681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 49 5/23/07 3:42:02 AM5/23/07 3:42:02 AM

50 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

humor and stories to lighten up intense meetings. At the end of every meeting to outline new tasks or performance targets, she plays the song, “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now” to keep people motivated and focused on goals.

Compare Lieberman’s approach as a new CEO at TruServ to Joyce Pully’s approach as the new principal of North Jackson Elementary School in Jackson, Mississippi. Pully had a vision of transforming North Jackson into a model of creative learning. However, she didn’t make any changes at all during the fi rst year, working instead to build trust with teachers, staff, and students. She listened carefully to teachers’ concerns and began involving them closely in decision making. When she presented ideas for new ways of teaching and learning, Pully assured people she’d provide them with the training they needed to succeed. When teachers realized that Pully respected them and truly valued their input, they became more involved in planning the future of the school. Today, rote teaching and rote learning are gone at North Jackson, replaced by a vibrant educational process that relies on innova- tion and discovery. Pully believes the change was possible only because the staff, teachers, and students played an active role in making it happen.35

The leadership of Pamela Forbes Lieberman is characterized by high concern for tasks and production and low-to-moderate concern for people. Joyce Pully, in contrast, is high on concern for people and moderate on concern for production. In each case, both concerns shown in the Leadership Grid are present, but they are integrated at different levels.

Theories of a “High-High” Leader The leadership styles described by the researchers at Ohio State, University of Michigan, and University of Texas pertain to variables that roughly correspond to one another: consideration and initiating structure; employee-centered and job- centered; concern for people and concern for production, as illustrated in Exhibit 2.4. The research into the behavior approach culminated in two predominate types of leadership behaviors—people-oriented and task-oriented.

The fi ndings about two underlying dimensions and the possibility of lead- ers rated high on both dimensions raise four questions to think about. The fi rst

is whether these two dimensions are the most important behaviors of leader- ship. Certainly, these two behaviors are important. They capture fundamental, underlying aspects of human behavior that must be considered for organizations to succeed. One reason why these two dimensions are compelling is that the fi ndings are based on empirical research, which means that researchers went into the fi eld to study real leaders across a variety of settings. When independent streams of fi eld research reach similar conclusions, they probably represent a fun- damental theme in leadership behavior. One recent review of 50 years

of leadership research, for example, identifi ed task-oriented behavior and people-oriented behavior as primary categories related to effective

Action Memo As a leader, you can succeed in a variety

of situations by showing concern for both

tasks and people. People-oriented behavior

is related to higher follower satisfaction,

and task-oriented behavior is typically associated with higher productivity.

Exhibit 2.4 Themes of Leader Behavior Research

People-Oriented Task-Oriented

Ohio State University Consideration Initiating Structure University of Michigan Employee-Centered Job-Centered University of Texas Concern for People Concern for Production

IN T

H E

L E

A D

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5039681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 50 5/23/07 3:42:03 AM5/23/07 3:42:03 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 51

leadership in numerous studies.36 Concern for tasks and concern for people must be shown toward followers at some reasonable level, either by the leader or by other people in the system. Although these are not the only important behaviors, as we will see throughout this book, they certainly require attention.

The second question is whether people orientation and task orientation exist together in the same leader, and how. The Grid theory argues that yes, both are present when people work with or through others to accomplish an activity. Al- though leaders may be high on either style, there is considerable belief that the best leaders are high on both behaviors. John Fryer, superintendent of Florida’s Duvall County Schools, provides an example of a leader who succeeds on both dimensions. A former U.S. Air Force offi cer, Fryer developed a strategic plan for the school system, set high performance standards for both teachers and students, and directed everyone toward the accomplishment of specifi c tasks and goals. At fi rst skeptical of the new superintendent, teachers were won over by his genuine concern for their ideas and their anxieties. He gained commitment by involving teachers in the planning process and learning what they needed to succeed. “We fi nally got a superintendent who will listen,” said Terrie Brady, president of the teachers’ union.37

How does a leader achieve both behaviors? Some researchers argue that “high-high” leaders alternate the type of behavior from one to the other, show- ing concern one time and task initiation another time.38 Another approach says that effective “high-high” leaders encompass both behaviors simultaneously in a fundamentally different way than people who behave in one way or the other. For example, Fryer sets challenging goals for student performance and also works closely with teachers to provide the tools and training they feel they need to achieve those goals. A task-oriented leader might set diffi cult goals and simply pressure subordinates to improve quality. On the other hand, a person-oriented leader might ignore student achievement scores and goal attainment and simply seek to improve schools by consulting with teachers and building positive rela- tionships with them. The “high-high” leaders seem to have a knack for displaying concern for both people and production in the majority of their behaviors.39

The third question is whether a “high-high” leadership style is universal or situational. Universal means that the behavior will tend to be effective in every situation, whereas situational means the behavior succeeds only in cer- tain settings. Research has indicated some degree of universality with respect to people-oriented and task-oriented behavior. In other words, the leader behavior of concern for people tended to be related to higher employee satisfaction and fewer personnel problems across a wide variety of situations. Likewise, task- oriented behavior was associated with higher productivity across a large num- ber of situations.

The fourth question concerns whether people can actually change themselves into leaders high on people and/or task-orientation. In the 1950s and 1960s, when the Ohio State and Michigan studies were underway, the assumption of research- ers was that the behaviors of effective leaders could be emulated by anyone wish- ing to become an effective leader. In general it seems that people can indeed learn new leader behaviors. There is a belief that “high-high” leadership is a desirable quality, because the leader will meet both needs simultaneously. Although “high- high” leadership is not the only effective style, researchers have looked to this kind of leader as a candidate for success in a wide variety of situations. However, as we will see in the next chapter, the next generation of leadership studies refi ned the understanding of situations to pinpoint more precisely when each type of leadership behavior is most effective.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5139681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 51 5/23/07 3:42:04 AM5/23/07 3:42:04 AM

52 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

Individualized Leadership Traditional trait and behavior theories assume that a leader adopts a general leadership style that is used with all group members. A more recent approach to leadership behavior research, individualized leadership, looks instead at the specifi c relationship between a leader and each individual member.40 Individualized leadership is based on the notion that a leader develops a unique relationship with each subordinate or group member, which determines how the leader behaves toward the member and how the member responds to the leader. In this view, lead- ership is a series of dyads, or a series of two-person interactions.

Sometimes called dyadic theory, individualized leadership examines why leaders have more infl uence over and greater impact on some members than on others. To understand leadership, then, a closer look at the specifi c relationship in each leader-member dyad is necessary.41 The dyadic view focuses on the concept of exchange, what each party gives to and receives from the other. Leaders can meet followers’ emotional needs and offer a sense of support for the follower’s self-worth, whereas followers provide leaders with commitment and high perfor- mance. Some dyads might be “rich,” meaning there is a high level of both giving and receiving by both partners in the exchange, whereas others are “poor,” refl ect- ing little giving and receiving by dyadic partners.42

The fi rst individualized leadership theory was introduced more than 25 years ago and has been steadily revised ever since. Exhibit 2.5 illustrates the devel- opment of this viewpoint. The fi rst stage was the awareness of a relationship between a leader and each individual, rather than between a leader and a group of subordinates. The second stage examined specifi c attributes of the exchange relationship. The third stage explored whether leaders could intentionally develop

Individualized leadership a theory based on the notion that a leader develops a unique relationship with each subordinate or group member, which determines how the leader behaves toward the member and how the member responds to the leader

Exhibit 2.5 Stages of Development of Individualized Leadership

Sources: Based on Fred Danereau, “A Dyadic Approach to Leadership: Learning and Nurturing This Approach Under Fire,” Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 4 (1995), pp. 479–490, and George B. Graen and Mary Uhl-Bien, “Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership Over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-level, Multi-domain Approach,” Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 2 (1995), pp. 219–247.

1. Vertical Dyad Linkage Leaders’ behaviors and traits have different impacts across followers, creating in-groups and out-groups.

2. Leader–Member Exchange Leadership is individualized for each subordinate. Each dyad involves a unique exchange independent of other dyads.

3. Partnership Building Leaders can reach out to create a positive exchange with every subordinate. Doing so increases performance.

4. Systems and Networks Leader dyads can be created in all directions across levels and boundaries to build networks that enhance performance.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5239681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 52 5/23/07 3:42:05 AM5/23/07 3:42:05 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 53

partnerships with each group member, and the fourth stage expanded the view of dyads to include larger systems and networks.

Vertical Dyad Linkage Model The Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) model argues for the importance of the dyad formed by a leader with each member of the group. Initial fi ndings indicated that sub- ordinates provided very different descriptions of the same leader. For example, some subordinates reported a leader, and their relationship with the leader, as having a high degree of mutual trust, respect, and obligation. These high-quality relationships might be characterized as high on both people and task orientation. Other subordinates reported a low-quality relationship with the same leader, such as having a low degree of trust, respect, and obligation. These subordinates per- ceived the leader as being low on important leadership behaviors.

Based on these two extreme exchange patterns, subordinates were found to exist in either an in-group or an out-group in relation to the leader. Exhibit 2.6 delineates the differences in leader behavior toward in-group versus out-group members. Most of us who have had experience with any kind of group, whether it be a college class, an athletic team, or a work group, recognize that some lead- ers may spend a disproportionate amount of time with certain people, and that these “insiders” are often highly trusted and may obtain special privileges. In the terminology of the VDL model, these people would be considered to participate in an in-group exchange relationship with the leader, whereas other members of the group who did not experience a sense of trust and extra consideration would participate in an out-group exchange.

In-group members, those who rated the leader highly, had developed close re- lationships with the leader and often became assistants who played key roles in the functioning of the work unit. Out-group members were not key players in the work unit. Because of these differences, individuals often fell into subgroups, which might be considered supporters and opponents of the leader. Some subordinates were getting their needs met, whereas others were not. These differences were based on the dyad between the leader and each subordinate. The in-group had high access

Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) Model a model of individualized leadership that argues for the importance of the dyad formed by a leader with each member of the group

Exhibit 2.6 Leader Behavior toward In-Group Versus Out-Group Members

Source: Based on Jean-François Manzoni and Jean-Louis Barsoux, “The Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome,” Harvard Business Review (March–April, 1988), pp. 101–113.

In-Group Out-Group

• Discusses objectives; gives • Gives employee specific employee freedom to use his or directives for how to accomplish her own approach in solving tasks and attain goals problems and reaching goals

• Listens to employee’s suggestions • Shows little interest in employee’s and ideas about how work is done comments and suggestions

• Treats mistakes as learning • Criticizes or punishes mistakes opportunities

• Gives employee interesting • Assigns primarily routine jobs and assignments; may allow employee monitors employee closely to choose assignment

• Sometimes defers to subordinate’s • Usually imposes own views opinion

• Praises accomplishments • Focuses on areas of poor performance

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5339681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 53 5/23/07 3:42:06 AM5/23/07 3:42:06 AM

54 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

to the leader, whereas the out-group members tended to be passive and did not have positions of infl uence or access to the leader. In-group members expressed greater mutual infl uence and collaborative effort with the leader, and they had opportunities to receive greater rewards and perform additional duties. Out-group members tended not to experience positive leader relationships and infl uence, and the leader was more likely to use formal authority and coercive behavior with these subordinates. In-group members typically received more attention, more approval, and probably more status, but they were also expected to be loyal, committed, and productive.

Thus, by focusing on the relationship between a leader and each individual, the Vertical Dyad Linkage research found great variance of leader style and im- pact within a group of subordinates.

Leader–Member Exchange Stage two in the development of the individual leadership theory explored the leader–member exchange (LMX) in more detail, discovering that the impact on outcomes depends on how the leader–member exchange process develops over time. Studies evaluating characteristics of the LMX relationship explored such things as commu- nication frequency, value agreement, characteristics of followers, job satisfaction, performance, job climate, and commitment. Leaders typically tend to establish in- group exchange relationships with individuals who have characteristics similar to those of the leader, such as similarity in background, interests, and values, and with those who demonstrate a high level of competence and interest in the job. Overall, studies have found that the quality of the leader–member exchange relationship is substantially higher for in-group members. LMX theory proposes that this higher- quality relationship will lead to higher performance and greater job satisfaction for in-group members, and research in general supports this idea.43 High-quality LMX relationships have been found to lead to very positive outcomes for leaders, followers, work units, and the organization. For followers, a high-quality exchange relationship may mean more interesting assignments, greater responsibility and au- thority, and tangible rewards such as pay increases and promotions. Leaders and organizations clearly benefi t from the increased effort and initiative of in-group participants to carry out assignments and tasks successfully.

LMX theorists identifi ed three stages dyad members go through in their working relationship. In the initial stage, the leader and follower, as strangers,

test each other to identify what kinds of behaviors are comfortable. The relationship is negotiated informally between each follower and the leader. The defi nition of each group member’s role defi nes what the member and leader expect the member to do. Next, as the leader and member become acquainted, they engage in shaping and refi ning the roles they will play together. Finally, in the third stage, as the roles reach maturity, the relationship attains a steady pattern of behavior. Leader-member exchanges are diffi cult to change at this

point. The exchange tends to determine in-group and out-group status.

Partnership Building In this third phase of research, the focus was on whether leaders could develop positive relationships with a large number of subordinates. Critics of early LMX theory pointed out the dangers of leaders establishing sharply differentiated in- group and out-group members, in that this may lead to feelings of resentment or even hostility among out-group participants.44 If leaders are perceived to be granting excessive benefi ts and advantages to in-group members, members of the out-group may rebel, which can damage the entire organization. Moreover, some

Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) individualized leadership model that explores how leader- member relationships develop over time and how the quality of exchange relationships impacts outcomes

Action Memo Answer the questions in Leader’s Self-

Insight 2.3 to understand how LMX theory

applies to your own work experience.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5439681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 54 5/23/07 3:42:06 AM5/23/07 3:42:06 AM

studies have found that leaders tend to categorize employees into in-groups and out-groups as early as fi ve days into their relationship.45

Thus, the third phase of research in this area focused on whether leaders could develop positive relationships with all subordinates, not just a few “favorites.” The emphasis was not on how or why discrimination among subordinates occurred, but rather on how a leader might work with each subordinate on a one-on-one basis to develop a partnership. The idea was that leaders could develop a unique, benefi cial relationship with each individual and provide all employees with access to high- quality leader-member exchanges, thereby providing a more equitable environment and greater benefi ts to leaders, followers, and the organization.

In this approach, the leader views each person independently, and may treat each individual in a different but positive way. Leaders strive to actively develop a positive relationship with each subordinate, although the positive relationship will have a different form for each person. For example, one person might be treated with “consideration,” another with “initiating structure,” depending on what fol- lowers need to feel involved and to succeed. Heather Coin, director of operations for Calabasas, California-based Cheesecake Factory, emphasizes that developing a personal, positive relationship with each employee is one of a restaurant manager’s most critical jobs because it enables each person to contribute his or her best to the organization. As a former general manager for several of the company’s restaurants, Coin practiced what she now preaches in leading a team of 11 managers and dozens of staff, helping keep turnover low and morale and performance high.46

What was the quality of your leader’s relationship with you? Think back to a job you held and recall your feelings toward your leader, or if currently employed use your supervisor. Please answer whether each item below was Mostly False or Mostly True for you.

Mostly False

Mostly True

1. I very much liked my supervisor as a person. _______ _______

2. My supervisor defended my work to people above him if I made a mistake. _______ _______

3. The work I did for my supervisor went well beyond what was required. _______ _______

4. I admired my supervisor’s professional knowledge and ability. _______ _______

5. My supervisor was enjoyable to work with. _______ _______

6. I applied extra effort to further the interests of my work group. _______ _______

Leader’s Self-Insight 2.3

7. My supervisor championed my case to others in the organization. _______ _______

8. I respected my supervisor’s management competence. _______ _______

Scoring and Interpretation LMX theory is about the quality of a leader’s relationship with subordinates. If you scored 6 or more Mostly True, your supervisor clearly had an excellent relationship with you, which is stage two in Exhibit 2.5. You had a success- ful dyad. If your supervisor had an equally good relation- ship with every subordinate, that is a stage three level of development (partnership building). If you scored 3 or fewer Mostly True, then your supervisor was probably at level one, perhaps with different relationships with sub- ordinates, some or all of which were unsucessful. What do you think accounted for the quality of your and other subordinates’ relationships (positive or negative) with your supervisor? Discuss with other students to learn why some supervisors have good LMX relationships.

Source: Based on Robert C. Liden and John M. Maslyn, Multidimen- sionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical Assessment through Scale Development, Journal of Management 24 (1998), pp. 43–72.

Your “LMX” Relationship

G e

tt y

Im ag

e s

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5539681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 55 5/23/07 3:42:07 AM5/23/07 3:42:07 AM

56 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

In the LMX research study, leaders were trained to offer the opportunity for a high-quality relationship to all group members, and the followers who responded to the offer dramtically improved their performance. As these relationships ma-

tured, the entire work group became more productive, and the payoffs were tremendous. Leaders could count on followers to provide the assistance needed for high performance, and followers participated in and infl uenced decisions. Leaders provided support, encourage- ment, and training, and followers responded with high performance. In some sense, leaders were meeting both the personal and work- related needs of each subordinate, one at a time. The implications of this fi nding are that true performance and productivity gains can be achieved by having the leader develop positive relationships one-on-

one with each subordinate.

Systems and Networks The fi nal stage of this work suggests that leader dyads can be expanded to larger systems. Rather than focusing on leaders and subordinates, a systems-level per- spective examines how dyadic relationships can be created across traditional boundaries to embrace a larger system. This larger network for the leader may cut across work unit, functional, divisional, and even organizational boundar- ies. In this view, leader relationships are not limited to subordinates, but include peers, teammates, and other stakeholders relevant to the work unit. To this point, there has been little systematic research on a broader systemic view of dy- adic relationships. But the theory suggests the need for leaders to build networks of one-on-one relationships and to use their traits and behaviors selectively to create positive relationships with as many people as possible. A large number of people thereby can be infl uenced by the leader, and these stakeholders will contribute to the success of the work unit.

One organization that is promoting the idea of creating partnerships across a larger system is University Public Schools in Stockton, California.

University Public Schools

Education has always been a service business, with each child highly individual- ized and needing a specifi c approach. However, many schools operate on an old- fashioned factory model that treats students like pieces of equipment. University Public Schools (UPS) of Stockton, California, takes a different approach.

UPS’s San Joaquin campus is a model of partnership. Leaders have established network linkages across traditional boundaries. Teachers at San Joaquin are ex- pected to develop partnerships with students, each other, parents, and other com- munity members. They are given an unprecedented amount of freedom to set their own goals and develop their own curriculum. If parents want something taught that isn’t being covered, they can request that it be included. “Parents can have a say about what’s important to them,” says Christina Cross, whose son attends UPS. “It’s nice to be involved in the education that goes on here.”

Teachers’ pay raises are based on merit and tied to meeting both individual and team goals. Teachers sign one-year contracts and there is no notion of tenure. Despite the lack of job security, people are so willing to work at the Stockton school that some make a daily commute of nearly four hours. One reason is that teachers feel they are involved in a genuine partnership with the school system, one another, and the community. UPS is trying to build a system that empowers everyone to shape a new vision of learning and make a real difference in the lives of students and the larger world.47

IN T

H E

L E

A D

IN T

H E

L E

A D

Action Memo As a leader, you can build a positive,

individualized relationship with each follower to create an equitable work

environment and provide greater benefi ts to

yourself, followers, and the organization.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5639681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 56 5/23/07 3:42:08 AM5/23/07 3:42:08 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 57

Summary and Interpretation The point of this chapter is to understand the importance of traits and behaviors in the development of leadership theory and research. Traits include self- confi dence, honesty, and drive. A large number of personal traits and abilities distinguish successful leaders from nonleaders, but traits themselves are not suffi cient to guarantee effective leadership. The behavior approach explored autocratic versus democratic leadership, consideration versus initiating structure, employee- centered versus job-centered leadership, and concern for people versus concern for production. The theme of people versus tasks runs through this research, suggesting these are fundamental behaviors through which leaders meet followers’ needs. There has been some disagreement in the research about whether a specifi c leader is either people- or task-oriented or whether one can be both. Today, the consensus is that leaders can achieve a “high-high” leadership style.

Another approach is the dyad between a leader and each follower. Follow- ers have different relationships with the leader, and the ability of the leader to develop a positive relationship with each subordinate contributes to team perfor- mance. The leader-member exchange theory says that high-quality relationships have a positive outcome for leaders, followers, work units, and the organization. Leaders can attempt to build individualized relationships with each subordinate as a way to meet needs for both consideration and structure.

The historical development of leadership theory presented in this chapter intro- duces some important ideas about leadership. Although certain personal traits and abilities indicate a greater likelihood for success in a leadership role, they are not in themselves suffi cient to guarantee effective leadership. Rather, behaviors are equally signifi cant, as outlined by the research at several universities. Therefore, the style of leadership demonstrated by an individual greatly determines the outcome of the leadership endeavor. Often, a combination of styles is most effective. To understand the effects of leadership upon outcomes, the specifi c relationship behavior between a leader and each follower is also an important consideration.

Discussion Questions 1. Is the “Great Man’’ perspective on leadership still alive today? Think about some

recent popular movies that stress a lone individual as hero or savior. How about some business stories? Discuss.

2. Suggest some personal traits of leaders you have known. What traits do you believe are most valuable? Why?

3. What is the difference between trait theories and behavioral theories of leadership?

4. Would you prefer working for a leader who has a “consideration” or an “initiating- structure” leadership style? Discuss the reasons for your answer.

5. The Vertical Dyad Linkage model suggests that followers respond individually to the leader. If this is so, what advice would you give leaders about displaying people- oriented versus task-oriented behavior?

6. Does it make sense to you that a leader should develop an individualized relation- ship with each follower? Explain advantages and disadvantages to this approach.

7. Why would subordinates under a democratic leader perform better in the leader’s absence than would subordinates under an autocratic leader?

8. What type of leader—task-oriented or people-oriented—do you think would have an easier time becoming a “high-high” leader? Why?

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5739681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 57 5/23/07 3:42:09 AM5/23/07 3:42:09 AM

58 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

Leadership at Work

Your Ideal Leader Traits Spend some time thinking about someone you believe is an ideal leader. For the first part of the exercise, select an ideal leader you have heard about whom you don’t personally know. It could be someone like Mother Teresa, Rudolph Giuliani, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, or any national or international figure that you admire. Write the person’s name here: ______________________________ . Now, in the space below, write down three things you admire about the person, such as what he or she did or the quali- ties that person possesses.

For the second part of the exercise, select an ideal leader whom you know personally. This can be anyone from your life experiences. Write the person’s name here: _________ _____________________. Now, in the space below, write down three things you admire about the person, such as what he or she did or the qualities that person possesses.

The first leader you chose represents something of a projective test based on what you’ve heard or read. You imagine the leader has the qualities you listed. The deeds and qualities you listed say more about what you admire than about the actual traits of the leader you chose. This is something like an inkblot test, and it is important because the traits you assign to the leader are traits you are aware of, have the potential to develop, and indeed can develop as a leader. The qualities or achievements you listed are an indicator of the traits you likely will express as you develop into the leader you want to become.

The second leader you chose is someone you know, so it is less of a projective test and represents traits you have had direct experience with. You know these traits work for you and likely will become the traits you develop and express as a leader.

What is similar about the traits you listed for the two leaders? Different? Interview another student in class about traits he or she admires. What do the traits tell you about the person you are interviewing? What are the common themes in your list and the other student’s list of traits? To what extent do you display the same traits as the ones on your list? Will you develop those traits even more in the future?

Leadership Development: Cases for Analysis

Consolidated Products Consolidated Products is a medium-sized manufacturer of consumer products with nonunionized production workers. Ben Samuels was a plant manager for Consolidated Products for 10 years, and he was very well liked by the employees there. They were grateful for the fitness center he built for employees, and they enjoyed the social activities sponsored by the plant several times a year, including company picnics and holiday par- ties. He knew most of the workers by name, and he spent part of each day walking around the plant to visit with them and ask about their families or hobbies.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5839681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 58 5/23/07 3:42:10 AM5/23/07 3:42:10 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 59

Ben believed that it was important to treat employees properly so they would have a sense of loyalty to the company. He tried to avoid any layoffs when production demand was slack, figuring that the company could not afford to lose skilled workers that are so difficult to replace. The workers knew that if they had a special problem, Ben would try to help them. For example, when someone was injured but wanted to continue working, Ben found another job in the plant that the person could do despite having a disability. Ben believed that if you treat people right, they will do a good job for you without close supervision or prodding. Ben applied the same principle to his supervisors, and he mostly left them alone to run their departments as they saw fit. He did not set objectives and standards for the plant, and he never asked the supervisors to develop plans for improving productivity and product quality.

Under Ben, the plant had the lowest turnover among the company’s five plants, but the second worst record for costs and production levels. When the company was acquired by another firm, Ben was asked to take early retirement, and Phil Jones was brought in to replace him.

Phil had a growing reputation as a manager who could get things done, and he quickly began making changes. Costs were cut by trimming a number of activities such as the fitness center at the plant, company picnics and parties, and the human relations training programs for supervisors. Phil believed that human relations training was a waste of time; if employees don’t want to do the work, get rid of them and find somebody else who does.

Supervisors were instructed to establish high performance standards for their depart- ments and insist that people achieve them. A computer monitoring system was introduced so that the output of each worker could be checked closely against the standards. Phil told his supervisors to give any worker who had substandard performance one warning, and then if performance did not improve within two weeks, to fire the person. Phil believed that workers don’t respect a supervisor who is weak and passive. When Phil observed a worker wasting time or making a mistake, he would reprimand the person right on the spot to set an example. Phil also checked closely on the performance of his supervisors. Demanding objec- tives were set for each department, and weekly meetings were held with each supervisor to review department performance. Finally, Phil insisted that supervisors check with him first before taking any significant actions that deviated from established plans and policies.

As another cost-cutting move, Phil reduced the frequency of equipment maintenance, which required machines to be idled when they could be productive. Since the machines had a good record of reliable operation, Phil believed that the current maintenance schedule was excessive and was cutting into production. Finally, when business was slow for one of the product lines, Phil laid off workers rather than finding something else for them to do.

By the end of Phil’s first year as plant manager, production costs were reduced by 20 percent and production output was up by 10 percent. However, three of his seven super- visors left to take other jobs, and turnover was also high among the machine operators. Some of the turnover was due to workers who were fired, but competent machine opera- tors were also quitting, and it was becoming increasingly difficult to find any replacements for them. Finally, there was increasing talk of unionizing among the workers.

Source: Reprinted with permission from Gary Yukl, Leadership in Organizations, 4th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998), pp. 66–67.

QUESTIONS

1. Compare the leadership traits and behaviors of Ben Samuels and Phil Jones.

2. Which leader do you think is more effective? Why? Which leader would you prefer to work for?

3. If you were Phil Jones’ boss, what would you do now?

D. L. Woodside, Sunshine Snacks D. L. Woodside has recently accepted the position of research and development director for Sunshine Snacks, a large snack food company. Woodside has been assistant director of research at Skid’s, a competing company, for several years, but it became clear to him that

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 5939681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 59 5/23/07 3:42:10 AM5/23/07 3:42:10 AM

60 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

his chances of moving higher were slim. So, when Sunshine was looking for a new director, Woodside jumped at the chance.

At Skid’s, Woodside had worked his way up from the mail room, going to school at night to obtain first a bachelor’s degree and eventually a Ph.D. Management admired his drive and determination, as well as his ability to get along with just about anyone he came in contact with, and they gave him opportunities to work in various positions around the company over the years. That’s when he discovered he had a love for developing new products. He had been almost single-handedly responsible for introducing four new successful product lines at Skid’s. Woodside’s technical knowledge and understanding of the needs of the research and develop- ment department were excellent. In addition, he was a tireless worker—when he started a project he rarely rested until it was finished, and finished well.

Despite his ambition and his hard-charging approach to work, Woodside was consid- ered an easy-going fellow. He liked to talk and joke around, and whenever anyone had a problem they’d come to Woodside rather than go to the director. Woodside was always willing to listen to a research assistant’s personal problems. Besides that, he would often stay late or come in on weekends to finish an assistant’s work if the employee was hav- ing problems at home or difficulty with a particular project. Woodside knew the director was a hard taskmaster, and he didn’t want anyone getting into trouble over things they couldn’t help. In fact, he’d been covering the mistakes of George, an employee who had a drinking problem, ever since he’d been appointed assistant director. Well, George was on his own now. Woodside had his own career to think about, and the position at Sunshine was his chance to finally lead a department rather than play second fiddle.

At Sunshine, Woodside is replacing Henry Meade, who has been the director for almost 30 years. However, it seems clear that Meade has been slowing down over the past few years, turning more and more of his work over to his assistant, Harmon Davis. When Woodside was first introduced to the people in the research department at Sunshine, he sensed not only a loyalty to Davis, who’d been passed over for the top job because of his lack of technical knowledge, but also an undercurrent of resistance to his own selection as the new director.

Woodside knows he needs to build good relationships with the team, and especially with Davis, quickly. The company has made it clear that it wants the department to initi- ate several new projects as soon as possible. One reason they selected Woodside for the job was his successful track record with new product development at Skid’s.

Source: Based in part on “The Take Over,’’ Incident 52 in Bernard A. Deitzer and Karl A. Shilliff, Contemporary Management Incidents (Columbus, OH: Grid, Inc., 1977), pp. 161–162; and “Choosing a New Director of Research,’’ Case 2.1 in Peter G. Northouse, Leadership Theory and Practice, 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2001), pp. 25–26.

QUESTIONS

1. What traits does Woodside possess that might be helpful to him as he assumes his new position? What traits might be detrimental?

2. Would you consider Woodside a people-oriented or a task-oriented leader? Discuss which you think would be best for the new research director at Sunshine.

3. How might an understanding of individualized leadership theory be useful to Woodside in this situation? Discuss.

References 1 Curtis Sittenfeld, “Leader on the Edge,” Fast Company (October

1999), pp. 212–226. 2 Greg Jaffe, “A General’s New Plan to Battle Radical

Islam,” The Wall Street Journal (September 2–3, 2006), pp. A1, A4.

3 “IHOP’s CEO Has a Lot on Her Plate,” Fortune (March 31, 2003), p. 143.

4 G. A. Yukl, Leadership in Organizations (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1981); and S. C. Kohs and K. W. Irle, “Prophesying Army Promotion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 4 (1920), pp. 73–87.

5 Yukl, Leadership in Organizations, p. 254. 6 R. M. Stogdill, “Personal Factors Associated with Leadership: A Survey

of the Literature,” Journal of Psychology 25 (1948), pp. 35–71.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 6039681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 60 5/23/07 3:42:11 AM5/23/07 3:42:11 AM

CHAPTER 2: TRAITS, BEHAVIORS, AND RELATIONSHIPS 61

7 R. M. Stogdill, Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of the Literature (New York: Free Press, 1974); and Bernard M. Bass, Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications, 3rd ed. (New York: Free Press, 1990).

8 S. A. Kirkpatrick and E. A. Locke, “Leadership: Do Traits Matter?” The Academy of Management Executive 5, No. 2 (1991), pp. 48–60.

9 R. G. Lord, C. L. DeVader, and G. M. Alliger, “A Meta-Analysis of the Relation Between Personality Traits and Leadership Perceptions: An Application of Validity Generalization Procedures,” Journal of Applied Psychology 71 (1986), pp. 402–410.

10 Edwin Locke and Associates, The Essence of Leadership (New York: Lexington Books, 1991).

11 A summary of various studies and surveys is reported in Del Jones, “Optimism Puts Rose-Colored Tint in Glasses of Top Execs,” USA Today (December 15, 2005).

12 Marcus Buckingham, quoted in Jones, “Optimism Puts Rose-Colored Tint in Glasses of Top Execs.”

13 Shelley A. Kirkpatrick and Edwin A. Locke, “Leadership: Do Traits Matter?” Academy of Management Executive 5, No. 2 (1991), pp. 48–60.

14 James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner, Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People Demand It (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1993), p. 14.

15 This discussion is based on Kirkpatrick and Locke, “Leadership: Do Traits Matter?”

16 Geoffrey Colvin, “The Bionic Manager,” Fortune (September 19, 2005), pp. 88–100.

17 “Towards a More Perfect Match: Building Successful Leaders By Effectively Aligning People and Roles,” Hay Group Working Paper, 2004.

18 K. Lewin, “Field Theory and Experiment in Social Psychology: Concepts and Methods,” American Journal of Sociology 44 (1939), pp. 868–896; K. Lewin and R. Lippet, “An Experimental Approach to the Study of Autocracy and Democracy: A Preliminary Note,” Sociometry 1 (1938), pp. 292–300; and K. Lewin, R. Lippett, and R. K. White, “Patterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created Social Climates,” Journal of Social Psychology 10 (1939), pp. 271–301.

19 R. Tannenbaum and W. H. Schmidt, “How to Choose a Leadership Pattern,” Harvard Business Review 36 (1958), pp. 95–101.

20 F. A. Heller and G. A. Yukl, “Participation, Managerial Decision- Making and Situational Variables,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 4 (1969), pp. 227–241.

21 “Jack’s Recipe (Management Principles Used by Jack Hartnett, President of D. L. Rogers Corp.),” sidebar in Marc Ballon, “Equal Parts Old-Fashioned Dictator and New Age Father Figure, Jack Hartnett Breaks Nearly Every Rule of the Enlightened Manager’s Code,” Inc. (July 1998), p. 60.

22 Donna Fenn, “The Remote Control CEO,” Inc. Magazine (October 2005), pp. 96–101, 144–146.

23 Ibid. 24 J. K. Hemphill and A. E. Coons, “Development of the Leader Behavior

Description Questionnaire,” in Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement, Eds. R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research, 1957).

25 P. C. Nystrom, “Managers and the High-High Leader Myth,” Academy of Management Journal 21 (1978) pp. 325–331; and L. L. Larson, J. G. Hunt and Richard N. Osborn, “The Great High-High Leader Behavior Myth: A Lesson from Occam’s Razor,” Academy of Management Journal 19 (1976), pp. 628–641.

26 Christopher Cooper, “Speed Trap; How a Marine Lost His Command in Race to Baghdad,” The Wall Street Journal (April 5, 2004), pp. A1, A15.

27 E. W. Skinner, “Relationships Between Leadership Behavior Patterns and Organizational-Situational Variables,” Personnel Psychology 22 (1969), pp. 489–494; and E. A. Fleishman and E. F. Harris, “Patterns of Leadership Behavior Related to Employee Grievances and Turnover,” Personnel Psychology 15 (1962), pp. 43–56.

28 A. W. Halpin and B. J. Winer, “A Factorial Study of the Leader Behavior Descriptions,” in Leader Behavior: Its Descriptions and

Measurement, Eds. R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons, (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research, 1957); and J. K. Hemphill, “Leadership Behavior Associated with the Administrative Reputations of College Departments,” Journal of Educational Psychology 46 (1955), pp. 385–401.

29 R. Likert, “From Production- and Employee-Centeredness to Systems 1–4,” Journal of Management 5 (1979), pp. 147–156.

30 J. Taylor and D. Bowers, The Survey of Organizations: A Machine Scored Standardized Questionnaire Instrument (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1972).

31 D. G. Bowers and S. E. Seashore, “Predicting Organizational Effectiveness with a Four-Factor Theory of Leadership,” Administrative Science Quarterly 11 (1966), pp. 238–263.

32 Carol Hymowitz, “Damark’s Unique Post: A Manager Who Helps Work on Relationships,” (In the Lead column), The Wall Street Journal (September 7, 1999), p. B1.

33 Bowers and Seashore, “Predicting Organizational Effectiveness with a Four-Factor Theory of Leadership.”

34 Robert Blake and Jane S. Mouton, The Managerial Grid III (Houston: Gulf, 1985).

35 Jo Napolitano, “No, She Doesn’t Breathe Fire,” The New York Times (September 1, 2002), Section 3, p. 2; “The Transformed School,” segment in Sara Terry, “Schools That Think,” Fast Company (April 2000), pp. 304–320.

36 Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom Taber, “A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior: Integrating a Half Century of Behavior Research,” Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 15–32.

37 Stephanie Desmon, “Schools Chief an Executive, Not an Educator,” The Palm Beach Post (December 26, 1999), pp. 1A, 22A.

38 J. Misumi, The Behavioral Science of Leadership: An Interdisciplinary Japanese Research Program (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1985).

39 Fleishman and Harris, “Patterns of Leadership Behavior Related to Employee Grievances and Turnover”; and Misumi, The Behavioral Science of Leadership: An Interdisciplinary Japanese Research Program.

40 Francis J. Yammarino and Fred Dansereau, “Individualized Leadership,” Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 90–99.

41 This discussion is based on Fred Dansereau, “A Dyadic Approach to Leadership: Creating and Nurturing This Approach Under Fire,” Leadership Quarterly 6, No. 4 (1995), pp. 479–490; and George B. Graen and Mary Uhl-Bien, “Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership Over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-Level Multi-Domain Approach,” Leadership Quarterly 6, No. 2 (1995), pp. 219–247.

42 Yammarino and Dansereau, “Individualized Leadership.” 43 See A. J. Kinicki and R. P. Vecchio, “Influences on the Quality

of Supervisor-Subordinate Relations: The Role of Time Pressure, Organizational Commitment, and Locus of Control,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, (January 1994), pp. 75–82; R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, and D. Stilwell, “A Longitudinal Study on the Early Development of Leader-Member Exchanges,” Journal of Applied Psychology (August 1993), pp. 662–674; Yammarino and Dansereau, “Individualized Leadership”; and Jean-François Manzoni and Jean- Louis Baraoux, “The Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome,” Harvard Business Review (March-April 1998), pp. 101–113.

44 W. E. McClane, “Implications of Member Role Differentiation: Analysis of a Key Concept in the LMX Model of Leadership,” Group and Organization Studies 16 (1991), pp. 102–113; and Gary Yukl, Leadership in Organizations, 2nd ed. (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1989).

45 Manzoni and Barsoux, “The Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome.” 46 Bret Thorn, “Best GMs Must Have Heart, Be Smart to Succeed in

Business,” Nation’s Restaurant News (November 1, 2004), p. 42; and Susan Spielberg, “The Cheesecake Factory: Heather Coin,” Nation’s Restaurant News (January 26, 2004), p. 38.

47 “The Service School,” segment in Sara Terry, “Schools That Think,” Fast Company (April 2000), pp. 304–320.

39681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 6139681_02_ch02_p035-061.indd 61 5/23/07 3:42:11 AM5/23/07 3:42:11 AM