Leadership Exploration Project - The Best Leader

leadership_-_chapter_6.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Leadership Exploration Project - The Best Leader

Chapter 6 Leadership Traits and Skills Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

• Understand how leader traits and skills are related to effective leadership. • Understand the types of research methods used to study leadership traits and skills. • Understand what traits and skills are most relevant for effective leadership. • Understand what traits and skills best predict success in a managerial career. • Understand how the relevance of a trait or skill depends on the situation. • Understand the limitations of the trait approach.

One of the earliest approaches to studying leadership was the trait approach, which involved a search for traits and skills that predict whether a person will attain positions of leadership and be effective in these positions. This chapter reviews research on the individual attributes of successful leaders. The emphasis is on traits and skills that contribute to managerial effectiveness and advancement, rather than on traits that predict who will emerge as a leader in an informal group. The chapter begins with an explanation of basic concepts and research methods in the trait approach. Then major findings about traits and skills related to effective leadership are reviewed, and some situations that affect the relevance of the skills are described. The chapter ends with several guidelines for managers based on the findings.

PRINTED BY: Joshua Lafriniere <[email protected]>. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Introduction to the Trait Approach The constructs used most often in the trait approach include traits, skills, and values of individual leaders. Each type of construct and the major types of research in the trait approach are explained briefly in this section of the chapter.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Individual Attributes Relevant for Leadership The term trait refers to a variety of individual attributes, including aspects of personality, temperament, needs, motives, and values. Personality traits are relatively stable dispositions to behave in a particular way. Examples include self-confidence, extroversion, emotional maturity, and energy level. Needs (or motives) are another type of trait that involves a desire for particular types of stimuli or experiences. Psychologists usually differentiate between physiological needs (e.g., hunger, thirst) and social motives such as achievement, esteem, affiliation, power, and independence. Needs and motives are important because they influence attention to information and events, and they guide, energize, and sustain behavior. Considerable evidence shows that most traits are jointly determined by learning and by an inherited capacity to gain satisfaction from particular types of stimuli or experiences (Bouchard, Lykken, McGue, Segal, & Tellegen, 1990; Zhang, Ilies, & Arvey, 2009). Some traits (e.g., social needs) are probably more influenced by learning than others (temperament, physiological needs).

Values are internalized attitudes about what is right and wrong, ethical and unethical, moral and immoral. Examples include fairness and justice, honesty, freedom, equality, altruism, loyalty, civility (courtesy and politeness), pragmatism, and performance orientation (excellence). Values are important because they influence a person’s preferences, perception of problems, and choice of behavior. Values relevant for ethical leadership are discussed in Chapter 13 , and values studied in cross-cultural research are discussed in Chapter 14 .

Self-concepts, self-identities, and social identities involve values and beliefs about a person’s occupation, relationships to others, and worthwhile roles and activities. It is usually assumed that people are intrinsically motivated to defend their self-esteem and to maintain consistency among their core values, social identities, and behavior.

The term skill refers to the ability to do something in an effective manner. Like traits, skills are determined jointly by learning and heredity (Arvey, Zhang, Avolio, & Krueger, 2007). Skills may be defined at different levels of abstraction, ranging from general, broadly-defined abilities (e.g., intelligence, interpersonal skill) to narrower, more specific abilities (verbal reasoning, persuasive ability).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

The term competency may involve traits or skills, and competencies often include a combination of related skills and traits. Competencies are often used to describe qualities considered relevant for managers in a particular organization or profession, in which case they are more useful for consultants than for researchers.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Types of Research on Leader Traits and Skills Several types of research have been used in the trait approach. In the first type of study, researchers seek to discover traits and skills that predict whether a person will pursue a leadership career or emerge as an informal leader in a group (Lord, DeVader, & Alliger, 1986; Stogdill, 1974). Some studies compare leaders to non-leaders in the same profession in terms of their scores on measures of traits and skills. Other studies examine the traits and skills of individuals who emerge as leaders in a group problem-solving exercise.

The second type of research seeks to discover how the traits and skills of managers are related to measures of leadership effectiveness in their current management positions (Bass, 1990; Boyatzis, 1982). Measures of traits and skills are obtained using tests, coded critical incidents, leader self-ratings, or ratings by other people; then these measures are correlated with measures of leadership effectiveness (e.g., subordinate satisfaction or performance, unit performance, ratings of leader effectiveness by bosses). Meta-analyses of a large number of these studies can provide an estimate of the relationship between each type of trait or skill and leadership effectiveness (e.g., Judge, Piccolo, & Kosalka, 2009).

The third type of research uses longitudinal studies conducted over a period of several years to discover traits and skills that predict advancement to higher levels of management. Relevant traits and skills are measured with tests, interviews, and biographical information collected during the selection process or in assessment centers used to identify promising candidates for promotion. These measures are correlated with the rate of advancement to higher level management positions and other indicators of eventual career success (e.g., Bray, Campbell, & Grant, 1974; Howard & Bray, 1988; McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982; Miner, 1978).

A fourth type of research compares managers who advanced successfully to top management to managers who initially advanced but then “derailed” in their careers because they were dismissed, opted for early retirement, or simply reached a “plateau” without any chance of further advancement (McCall & Lombardo, 1983a; McCartney & Campbell, 2006). Information about the traits, skills, and career experiences of each manager are collected and analyzed to identify similarities and differences for derailed and successful managers. In another version of this research, executives and middle managers

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

rated the extent to which various flaws are likely to derail a management career in the United States and Europe (Lombardo & McCauley, 1988; Van Velsor & Leslie, 1995).

Overview of Findings in the Trait Research Hundreds of studies were conducted over a period of several decades to examine how traits and skills are related to leadership emergence, effectiveness, and career advancement. The initial conclusions reached in Stogdill’s (1974) literature review were confirmed by subsequent reviews and meta-analyses (Bass, 1990, 2008; Judge et al., 2009; Zaccaro, 2007). Some traits and skills increase the likelihood that a leader will be effective, but they do not guarantee effectiveness. A leader with certain traits can be effective in one situation but ineffective in a different situation. Furthermore, two leaders with a different pattern of traits can be successful in the same situation. With regard to different criteria, such as advancement, unit performance, subordinate satisfaction, management of crises, the pattern of traits and skills that best predicts the criterion varies somewhat from one criterion to another.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Findings in Research on Derailed Managers Research at the Center for Creative Leadership on managers who succeed or derail in their careers provides some interesting insights about traits and skills that determine advancement to top management. Most of the managers had strong technical skills; they had a string of prior successes; and they were initially viewed by others as “fast risers” in their company. Every manager had both strengths and weaknesses; none of the successful executives had all of the strengths, and none of the derailed managers had all of the weaknesses. Sometimes the reason for derailing was obvious, but other times it appeared to be just a matter of bad luck involving events beyond a manager’s control (e.g., unfavorable economic conditions or losing political battles). Sometimes the importance of a success factor seemed to depend in part on the organization culture. For example, derailment often involved weak interpersonal skills, but this factor was more important in some organizations than in others.

The researchers used a mix of traits, skills, and other competencies (e.g., ability to build and lead a team, ability to adapt to change) to describe their interpretation of the descriptive data they collected. Managers who derailed were less able to handle pressure. They were more prone to moodiness, angry outbursts, and inconsistent behavior, which undermined their interpersonal relationships with subordinates, peers, and superiors. In contrast, the successful managers were calm, confident, and predictable during crises.

Managers who derailed were more likely to be defensive about weaknesses and failures. They reacted by attempting to cover up mistakes or blame other people. The successful managers admitted mistakes, accepted responsibility, and then took action to fix the problem. Moreover, having dealt with the problem, they did not continue to dwell on it, but turned their attention to other things. In the more recent studies, the ability to learn and adapt to change was an especially important success factor.

The successful managers were more focused on the immediate task and the needs of subordinates than on competing with rivals or impressing superiors. In contrast, many of the derailed managers were too ambitious about advancing their career at the expense of others, and they were more likely to betray a trust or break a promise. McCall and Lombardo (1983b, p. 28) gave the following example: “One executive didn’t implement a decision as promised, causing conflicts between marketing and production that reverberated down through four levels of frustrated subordinates.”

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Managers who derailed were usually weaker in interpersonal skills. The most common reason for derailment was insensitivity, which was reflected in abrasive or intimidating behavior toward others. This flaw had been tolerated when the person was a lower-level manager, especially when the manager had outstanding technical skills, but at higher levels technical skills could not compensate for being insensitive. Some of the derailed managers could be charming when they wanted to, but over time it became evident that beneath the facade of charm and concern for others was a selfish, inconsiderate, and manipulative person. In contrast, the successful managers were more sensitive, tactful, and considerate. They were able to understand and get along with all types of people, and they developed a larger network of cooperative relationships. When they disagreed with someone they were direct but diplomatic, whereas the derailed managers were more likely to be outspoken and offensive. These interpersonal skills are especially relevant for building and leading a cooperative team, which was a key success factor in the recent studies.

For most managers who derailed, their technical brilliance was a source of successful problem solving and technical achievement at lower levels of management where their expertise was usually greater than that of subordinates. However, at higher levels this strength could become a weakness if it led to overconfidence and arrogance, causing the manager to reject sound advice, to offend others by acting superior, and to micromanage subordinates who had more expertise. Some managers were unable to shift from a focus on technical problems to the more strategic perspective needed at a higher level of management. Some derailed managers had technical expertise only in a narrow functional area, and they advanced too quickly to learn skills needed to perform higher-level jobs effectively. Successful managers usually had experience in a variety of different types of situations where they acquired a broader perspective and expertise in dealing with different types of problems.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Personality Traits and Effective Leadership Over a period of several decades, the four methods described earlier were used to examine a variety of different personality traits related to managerial effectiveness and advancement. The choice of traits and the labels used for them have varied from study to study, but the results have been fairly consistent across different research methods. This section summarizes and integrates the findings regarding the most relevant aspects of personality for effective leadership by

Table 6-1 Specific Traits Related to Leadership Effectiveness • High energy level and stress tolerance • Internal locus of control orientation • Emotional maturity • Personal integrity • Socialized power motivation • Moderately high achievement orientation • Moderately high self-confidence • Moderately low need for affiliation

managers and administrators in large organizations (see also Table 6-1 ). The relevance of traits and skills is explained by linking them back to behaviors described in earlier chapters.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Energy Level and Stress Tolerance The trait research finds that energy level, physical stamina, and stress tolerance are associated with managerial effectiveness (Bass, 1990; Howard & Bray, 1988). High energy level and stress tolerance help managers cope with the hectic pace, long hours, and unrelenting demands of most managerial jobs. Physical vitality and emotional resilience make it easier to cope with stressful interpersonal situations, such as a punitive boss, a troubled subordinate, an uncooperative peer, or a hostile client. Effective problem solving requires an ability to remain calm and stay focused on a problem rather than panicking, denying the problem exists, or attempting to shift responsibility to someone else. In addition to making better decisions, a leader with high stress tolerance and composure is more likely to stay calm and provide confident, decisive direction to subordinates in a crisis.

Managerial jobs often have a high level of stress due to the pressure to make important decisions without adequate information and the need to resolve role conflicts and satisfy incompatible demands made by different parties. Tolerance of stress is especially important for executives who must deal with adverse situations where the leader’s reputation and career, or the lives and jobs of subordinates, may hang in the balance. Bill George describes the pressures he felt as CEO of Medtronics (George, 2003, p. 16):

I felt it every day as problems mounted or sales lagged. I knew that the livelihood of tens of thousands of employees, the health of millions of patients, and the financial fortunes of millions of investors rested on my shoulders and those of our executive team. At the same time I was well aware of the penalties for not performing, even for a single quarter. No CEO wants to appear on CNBC to explain why his company missed the earnings projections, even by a penny.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Self-Confidence The term self-confidence is defined in a general way to include several related concepts such as self- esteem and self-efficacy. Most studies on leader self-confidence or self-efficacy found that it is related positively to effectiveness and advancement (see Bass, 1990). Self-confidence differentiated between effective and ineffective managers in a study of critical incidents by Boyatzis (1982), and self-confidence predicted subsequent advancement to higher levels of management in the assessment center research at AT&T (Howard & Bray, 1988). Other research finds that self-confidence is essential for charismatic leadership (see Chapter 12 ).

The relationship of self-confidence to leadership effectiveness can be understood by examining how this trait affects a leader’s behavior. Without strong self-confidence, a leader is less likely to make influence attempts, and if an influence attempt is made, it is less likely to be successful. Leaders with high self- confidence are more likely to attempt difficult tasks and to set challenging objectives for themselves. Confident leaders take more initiative to solve problems and introduce desirable changes (Paglis & Green, 2002). Leaders who have high expectations for themselves are likely to have high expectations for subordinates as well (Kouzes & Posner, 1987). These leaders are more persistent in pursuit of difficult objectives, despite initial problems and setbacks. Their optimism and persistence in efforts to accomplish a task or mission are likely to increase commitment by subordinates, peers, and superiors to support the effort. Leaders with self-confidence are likely to be more decisive in a crisis, where success often depends on the perception by subordinates that the leader has the knowledge and courage necessary to deal with the crisis effectively. Finally, self-confidence is related to an action-oriented approach for dealing with problems. Leaders with low self-confidence are more likely to put off dealing with difficult problems or to shift responsibility to someone else (Kipnis & Lane, 1962).

There are some clear advantages of having self-confidence, but if it becomes excessive some dysfunctional behaviors may occur. Excessive self-confidence may make a leader overly optimistic about the likely success of a risky venture, and it may result in rash decisions and denial of evidence that a plan is flawed. A manager with extremely high self-confidence is inclined to be arrogant, autocratic, and intolerant of dissenting viewpoints, especially if the manager is not emotionally mature. Because the manager is unresponsive to ideas and concerns expressed by others, the benefits of participative leadership are unlikely to be realized. Thus, in situations where the leader does not have vastly superior

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

expertise than subordinates, a moderately high amount of self-confidence may be better than either extremely high self-confidence or low self-confidence.

The arrogance and know-it-all attitude associated with excessive self-confidence has another negative side effect. An arrogant manager will have difficulty in developing cooperative relationships with people who are not dependent on the manager’s specialized expertise. Acting arrogant toward people who have more expertise than the manager may create enemies who are able to derail the manager’s career.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Internal Locus of Control Another trait that appears to be relevant to managerial effectiveness is called the locus of control orientation, which is measured with a personality scale developed by Rotter (1966). People with a strong internal locus of control orientation (called “internals”) believe that events in their lives are determined more by their own actions than by chance or uncontrollable forces. In contrast, people with a strong external control orientation (called “externals”) believe that events are determined mostly by chance or fate and they can do little to improve their lives.

Because internals believe that they can influence their own destiny, they take more responsibility for their own actions and for the performance of their organization. Internals have a more future-oriented perspective, and they are more likely to proactively plan how to accomplish objectives. They take more initiative than externals in discovering and solving problems. They are confident in their ability to influence people and are more likely to use persuasion rather than coercive or manipulative influence tactics (Goodstadt & Hjelle, 1973). They are more flexible, adaptive, and innovative in their response to a problem and in their management strategies (Miller, Kets de Vries, & Toulouse, 1982). When setbacks or failures occur, they are more likely to learn from them rather than just dismissing them as bad luck.

Research on the relationship of this trait to managerial effectiveness is still limited, but the results suggest that a strong internal locus of control orientation is positively associated with managerial effectiveness. For example, Miller and Toulouse (1986) conducted a study of chief executive officers in 97 firms and found that internals were more effective than externals in terms of objective criteria such as profitability and sales growth. The relationship was stronger for firms in dynamic environments where it is more important to have major product innovations. Howell and Avolio (1993) conducted a study of 76 executives in a large financial institution and found that internals had better business-unit performance than externals for the year following the measurement of personality.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Emotional Stability and Maturity The term emotional maturity may be defined broadly to encompass several interrelated motives, traits, and values. A person who is emotionally mature is well adjusted and does not suffer from severe psychological disorders. Emotionally mature people have a more self-awareness of strengths and weaknesses, and they are oriented toward self-improvement instead of denying weaknesses and fantasizing success. People with high emotional maturity are less self-centered (they care about other people), they have more self-control (are less impulsive, more able to resist hedonistic temptations), they have more stable emotions (are not prone to extreme mood swings or outbursts of anger), and they are less defensive (are more receptive to criticism, more willing to learn from mistakes). They are more likely to be at a high level of cognitive moral development (see Chapter 13 ). As a result, leaders with high emotional maturity maintain more cooperative relationships with subordinates, peers, and superiors. The following description (George, 2003, p. 15) includes many of these attributes:

I too have struggled in getting comfortable with my weaknesses—my tendency to intimidate others with an overly challenging style, my impatience, and my occasional lack of tact. Only recently have I realized that my strengths and weaknesses are two sides of the same coin. By challenging others in business meetings, I am able to get quickly to the heart of the issues, but my approach unnerves and intimidates less confident people. My desire to get things done fast leads to superior results, but it exposes my impatience with people who move more slowly. Being direct with others gets the message across clearly but often lacks tact. Over time I have moderated my style and adapted my approach to make sure that people are engaged and empowered and that their voices are fully heard.

Most of the empirical research on traits shows that key components of emotional maturity are associated with managerial effectiveness and advancement (Bass, 1990). A study by McCauley and Lombardo (1990) with a measure called Benchmarks found that managers with good self-awareness and a desire to improve had higher advancement. Self-objectivity and general adjustment predicted advancement in the AT&T research by Howard and Bray (1988). Other research has found that effective executives have a good understanding of their own strengths and weaknesses, and they are oriented toward self- improvement rather than being defensive (e.g., Bennis & Nanus, 1985; Tichy & Devanna, 1986). The research on socialized and personalized power orientation also provides evidence about the importance of emotional maturity for effective leadership.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Power Motivation Someone with a high need for power enjoys influencing people and events and is more likely to seek positions of authority. Most studies find a strong relationship between need for power and advancement to higher levels of management in large organizations (e.g., Howard & Bray, 1988; McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982; Stahl, 1983). People with a strong need for power seek positions of authority and power, and they are likely to be more attuned to the power politics of organizations.

A strong need for power is relevant to managerial role requirements involving the use of power and influence. Managers in large organizations must exercise power to influence subordinates, peers, and superiors. People who are low in need for power usually lack the desire and assertiveness necessary to organize and direct group activities, to negotiate favorable agreements, to lobby for necessary resources, to advocate and promote desirable changes, and to impose necessary discipline. A person who finds such behavior difficult and emotionally disturbing or who believes it is wrong to exercise power over others is unlikely to satisfy the role requirements of a managerial job (Miner, 1985).

A strong need for power is desirable, but a manager’s effectiveness also depends on how this need finds expression. The empirical research indicates that a socialized power orientation is more likely to result in effective leadership than a personalized power orientation (Boyatzis, 1982; House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991; McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982; McClelland & Burnham, 1976). Only a few studies have examined the behaviors associated with each power orientation, but the results indicate significant differences (McClelland, 1975, 1985).

Managers with a personalized power orientation use power to aggrandize themselves and satisfy their strong need for esteem and status. They have little inhibition or self-control, and they exercise power impulsively. According to McClelland and Burnham (1976, p. 103), “They are more rude to other people, they drink too much, they try to exploit others sexually, and they collect symbols of personal prestige such as fancy cars or big offices.” Personalized power leaders seek to dominate subordinates by keeping them weak and dependent. Authority for making important decisions is centralized in the leader, information is restricted, and rewards and punishments are used to manipulate and control subordinates. The leader tries to play off different individuals or factions against each other to keep them weak. Assistance and advice to a subordinate is done in a way that demonstrates personal superiority

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

and the inferiority and dependence of the subordinate. Sometimes personalized power leaders are able to inspire subordinate loyalty and team spirit, but adverse consequences are more likely to occur. When problems are encountered in the work, subordinates are reluctant to take any initiative in solving them. Instead of acting quickly to deal with a problem, they ignore it or wait for explicit directions from the leader. Any subordinate loyalty that may occur is to the leader rather than to the organization, and when the leader departs, there is likely to be disorder and a breakdown in team spirit.

Managers with a socialized power orientation are more emotionally mature. They exercise power more for the benefit of others, are hesitant about using power in a manipulative manner, are less egoistic and defensive, accumulate fewer material possessions, have a longer-range view, and are more willing to take advice from people with relevant expertise. Their strong need for power is expressed by using influence to build up the organization and make it successful. Because of their orientation toward building organizational commitment, this kind of leader is more likely to use a participative, coaching style of managerial behavior and is less likely to be coercive and autocratic. Such leaders “help make their subordinates feel strong and responsible, bind them less with petty rules, help produce a clear organizational structure, and create pride in belonging to the unit” (McClelland, 1975, p. 302).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Personal Integrity Integrity means that a person’s behavior is consistent with espoused values, and the person is honest, ethical, and trustworthy. Integrity is a primary determinant of interpersonal trust. Unless one is perceived to be trustworthy, it is difficult to retain the loyalty of followers or to obtain cooperation and support from peers and superiors. Moreover, a major determinant of expert and referent power is the perception by others that a person is trustworthy. Values related to integrity include honesty, loyalty, fairness, justice, and altruism.

Several types of behaviors are related to integrity. One important indicator of integrity is the extent to which one is honest and truthful rather than deceptive. Leaders lose credibility when people discover that they have lied or made claims that are grossly distorted. Another indicator of integrity is keeping promises. People are reluctant to negotiate agreements with a leader who cannot be trusted to keep promises. A third indicator of integrity is the extent to which a leader fulfills the responsibility of service and loyalty to followers. The trust of followers will be lost if they discover the leader exploited or manipulated them in pursuit of self-interest. A fourth indicator of integrity is the extent to which a leader can be trusted not to indiscriminately repeat something said in the utmost confidence. People will not pass on important but sensitive information to a leader who cannot be trusted to keep a secret. A key determinant of perceived integrity is the extent to which a leader’s behavior is consistent with values articulated repeatedly to followers. A leader who hopes to inspire others to support an ideology or vision must set an example in his or her own behavior. Finally, integrity also means taking responsibility for one’s actions and decisions. Leaders appear weak and undependable when they make a decision or take a position on an issue, then try to deny responsibility later if the decision is unsuccessful or the position becomes controversial.

Integrity was mentioned as an important value by most of the 45 British chief executives in a study by Cox and Cooper (1989). The CCL research described earlier found that lack of integrity was common among the managers whose career derailed, whereas managers who succeeded were regarded as having strong integrity. The successful managers were honest and dependable, as reflected in the following precept (McCall & Lombardo, 1983b, p. 30): “I will do exactly what I say I will do when I say I will do it. If I change my mind, I will tell you well in advance so you will not be harmed by my actions.”

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Integrity is an important aspect of ethical, authentic, and spiritual leadership, and it is discussed in more detail in Chapter 13 .

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Narcissism Narcissism is a personality syndrome that includes several traits relevant to effective leadership, such as a strong need for esteem (e.g., prestige, status, attention, admiration, adulation), a strong personalized need for power, low emotional maturity, and low integrity. This personality syndrome can be measured with a self-report scale called the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Raskin & Hall, 1981).

Researchers with a background in clinical psychology and psychoanalysis have described the origins of narcissism and the behaviors associated with it (Kets de Vries & Miller, 1984, 1985; Raskin, Novacek, & Hogan, 1991). People whose parents have been emotionally unresponsive and rejecting may come to believe that they cannot depend on anyone’s love or loyalty. In an effort to cope with their inner loneliness and fear, these extreme narcissists become preoccupied with establishing their power, status, and control. They have fantasies of success and power. They have a grandiose, exaggerated sense of their own self-importance and unique talents. To support this self-deception, they seek continuous attention and admiration from others.

Because they are so preoccupied with their own ego needs, narcissists have little empathy or concern for the feelings and needs of others. They exploit and manipulate others to indulge their desire for self- aggrandizement without feeling any remorse. They expect special favors from others without feeling any need for reciprocity. Narcissists tend to oversimplify human relationships and motives and see everything in extreme good and bad terms. People are viewed either as loyal supporters or as enemies. Narcissists are very defensive and view criticism by others as a sign of rejection and disloyalty. Narcissists can be charming and helpful when they want to impress someone who is important, but they are likely to be aggressive and cruel with people who have little power, especially someone who opposes them or stands in their way. The following example describes a narcissistic manager:

He was very talented in handling technical problems, but his remarkable results were achieved at a horrible cost to others. He was moody, volatile, and completely devoid of sensitivity, kindness, or patience. Any subordinate who made a serious mistake was loudly criticized in front of others with scathing remarks or questions such as “How could you be so stupid?” He did not tolerate any disagreement, and subordinates were afraid to suggest changes that would make the unit more effective. Ironically, he could be charming and pleasant when it suited his purpose, which was usually when interacting with top management.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

The research on narcissism provides additional insights into the difficulties encountered by leaders with low emotional maturity and a personalized power orientation (House & Howell, 1992; Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006). Narcissists in leadership positions have a number of characteristic flaws (Glad, 2002; Kets de Vries & Miller, 1984, 1985). They surround themselves with subordinates who are loyal and uncritical. They make decisions without gathering adequate information about the environment. In the belief that they alone are sufficiently informed and talented to decide what is best, objective advice is not sought or accepted from subordinates and peers. They tend to undertake ambitious, grandiose projects to glorify themselves, but in the absence of an adequate analysis of the situation, the projects are likely to be risky and unrealistic. When a project is not going well, they tend to ignore or reject negative information, thereby missing the opportunity to correct problems in time to avert a disaster. When failure is finally evident, the narcissistic leader refuses to admit any responsibility, but instead finds scapegoats to blame. Finally, because they exploit the organization to compensate for their own sense of inadequacy, extreme narcissists are unable to plan for an orderly succession of leadership. They see themselves as indispensable and cling to power, in contrast to emotionally mature executives who are able to retire gracefully when their job is done and it is time for new leadership.

Despite the many negative aspects of narcissism, this personality syndrome may also have some positive aspects, at least in limited situations (Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006). Research on U.S. presidents (Deluga, 1998) and CEOs of computer and software companies (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007) found that some of the most and least successful leaders were narcissistic. The strong self- confidence and optimism of narcissistic leaders facilitates their efforts to influence others to pursue bold, innovative objectives, which may or may not prove to be feasible and worthwhile. Despite questionable motives for proposing risky new initiatives, a narcissistic person is sometimes successful in leading an organization’s response to serious threats or unusual opportunities. Of course, this potential benefit does not mean that a narcissistic leader is more effective than a leader who has strong self-confidence and optimism combined with a socialized power orientation and high emotional maturity.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Achievement Orientation Achievement orientation includes a set of related needs and values, including need for achievement, willingness to assume responsibility, performance orientation, and concern for task objectives. Many studies have been conducted on the relationship of achievement orientation to managerial advancement and effectiveness (see Bass, 1990). However, the results have not been consistent for different criteria (e.g., advancement, effectiveness) and for different types of managerial positions (e.g., entrepreneurial managers, corporate general managers, technical managers).

The relationship of achievement motivation to managerial effectiveness is complex. Some studies find a positive relationship between achievement motivation and effectiveness (e.g., Stahl, 1983; Wainer & Rubin, 1969), but other studies find a negative relationship (House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991) or no evidence of a strong, significant relationship (Miller & Toulouse, 1986). One possible explanation for these inconsistent findings is that the relationship of achievement motivation to managerial effectiveness is curvilinear rather than linear. In other words, managers with a moderately high amount of achievement motivation are more effective than managers with low achievement motivation, or managers with very high achievement motivation.

Research on the behavioral correlates of achievement orientation is still limited, but some relationships appear likely. Compared to managers with a weak achievement orientation, managers with a strong achievement orientation are likely to have a strong concern for task objectives; they are more willing to assume responsibility for solving task-related problems; they are more likely to take the initiative in discovering these problems and acting decisively to solve them; and they prefer solutions that involve moderate levels of risk rather than solutions that are either very risky or very conservative. These managers are likely to engage in task behaviors such as setting challenging but realistic goals and deadlines, developing specific action plans, determining ways to overcome obstacles, organizing the work efficiently, and emphasizing performance when talking to others (Boyatzis, 1982). In contrast, a manager with a weak achievement orientation is not motivated to seek opportunities involving challenging objectives and moderate risks and is less willing to take the initiative to identify problems and to assume responsibility for solving them.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

A strong achievement orientation may also result in behavior that undermines managerial effectiveness. If need for achievement is the dominant motive for a manager, it is likely that the manager’s efforts will be directed toward his or her own individual achievement and advancement rather than toward the achievements of the team or work unit headed by the manager. The manager tries to accomplish everything alone, is reluctant to delegate, and fails to develop a strong sense of responsibility and task commitment among subordinates (McClelland & Burnham, 1976; Miller & Toulouse, 1986). It is especially difficult for this type of person to function effectively in a management team in which leadership responsibility is shared.

The way in which achievement orientation finds expression in a manager’s behavior depends on the overall motive pattern of the manager. Achievement motivation enhances leadership effectiveness only if it is subordinated to a stronger need for socialized power, so that the manager’s efforts are directed toward building a successful team. When combined with a personalized need for power, strong achievement motivation may be focused on career advancement at any cost. This type of manager will neglect task objectives and the development of subordinates in an effort to build a personal reputation as a fast-rising star. Task decisions will be guided by a desire for short-term achievements, even though unit performance may suffer in the longer run. The manager is likely to take personal control over promising, highly visible projects and will take most of the credit for success. A manager who is very competitive may refuse to cooperate with peers who are viewed as potential rivals. As found in the CCL study, the result is likely to be initial advancement but eventual derailment when a manager with overriding personal ambition and excessive competitiveness makes too many powerful enemies.

Additional insights are provided by research on the Type A personality, which appears to combine a strong achievement orientation with a strong need for control over events (Baron, 1989; Nahavandi, Mizzi, & Malekzadeh, 1992; Strube, Turner, Cerro, Stevens, & Hinchey, 1984). Managers with this personality syndrome have high expectations for themselves and are very competitive. They set high performance objectives, compare themselves with others, and want to win any contest. Type A managers are also highly concerned about time; they feel rushed much of the time, try to do more than one thing at a time, and are impatient with delays. They prefer to maintain control over all aspects of their work, which makes them poor delegators and reluctant to work in a team (Miller, Lack, & Asroff, 1985). Finally, Type A managers tend to be more angry and inclined to express their hostility when unable to control events. They are demanding, intolerant of mistakes, and critical of people who are not as

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

intensely dedicated. This behavior pattern makes it more difficult for them to maintain cooperative relationships.

Need for Affiliation As noted earlier in this chapter, people with a strong need for affiliation receive great satisfaction from being liked and accepted by others, and they enjoy working with people who are friendly and cooperative. Most studies find a negative correlation between need for affiliation and managerial effectiveness. The ineffectiveness of managers with a high need for affiliation can be understood by examining the typical pattern of behavior for such managers. These managers are concerned primarily about interpersonal relationships rather than the task, and they are unwilling to allow the work to interfere with harmonious relationships (Litwin & Stringer, 1966; McClelland, 1975). They seek to avoid conflicts or smooth them over rather than confront genuine differences. They avoid making necessary but unpopular decisions. They dispense rewards in a way designed to gain approval, rather than rewarding effective performance. They show favoritism to personal friends in making assignments and allowing exceptions to rules. This pattern of behavior often leaves subordinates feeling “weak, irresponsible, and without a sense of what might happen next, of where they stand in relation to their manager, or even of what they ought to be doing” (McClelland & Burnham, 1976, p. 104).

It is clearly undesirable for a manager to have a strong need for affiliation, but a very low need for affiliation may also have undesirable consequences. A person with low need for affiliation tends to be a “loner” who does not like to socialize with others, except perhaps the immediate family or a few close friends. This type of person may lack the motivation to engage in the many social and public relations activities that are essential for a manager, including those involved in establishing effective interpersonal relationships with subordinates, superiors, and peers. As a result, this type of person may fail to develop effective interpersonal skills and may lack confidence in being able to influence others. Thus, it is likely that the optimal level of affiliation motivation is moderately low rather than either high or extremely low.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

The Big Five Personality Traits Describing leaders in terms of their individual profiles would be easier if there was an integrative conceptual framework with a small number of meta-categories that encompass all of the relevant traits. The proliferation of personality traits identified over the past century has resulted in efforts to find a smaller number of broadly defined categories that would simplify the development of trait theories. One such effort that appears promising is referred to as the five-factor model of personality or the “Big Five” model (e.g., Digman, 1990; Hough, 1992). The five broadly defined personality traits in the taxonomy have somewhat different labels from one version to another. The traits include surgency (or extroversion), dependability (or conscientiousness), adjustment (or neuroticism), intellectance (or openness to experience), and agreeableness.

In recent years, leadership scholars have shown increasing interest in using this taxonomy to facilitate interpretation of results in the massive and confusing literature on leadership traits (e.g., Goodstein & Lanyon, 1999; Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994). Table 6-2 shows how the five broad trait categories correspond to many of the specific traits found relevant for leadership emergence, advancement, or effectiveness in the trait studies reviewed earlier in this chapter.

Reviews and meta-analyses of studies on the five factors find that most of them are related to leader emergence, behavior, or effectiveness (e.g., Bono & Judge, 2004; Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002). Effective leaders had higher scores on extroversion, conscientiousness, and openness to learning from experience, and lower scores on neuroticism. However, the results were not consistent across studies or for different types of organizations. One likely reason for inconsistent results is the use of different measures to represent the five factors, including surrogate measures that do not adequately represent a factor. Another reason for inconsistent results may be the use of different criterion variables (e.g., leadership emergence, advancement, or effectiveness; subjective or objective measures).

Not all scholars agree that the Big Five model of personality is better than taxonomies with more specific traits (cf., Block, 1995; Hough, 1992). If both relevant and irrelevant traits

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Table 6-2 Correspondence of the Big Five Traits with Specific Traits Big Five Personality Traits Specific Traits

Surgency Extroversion (outgoing)

Energy/Activity Level

Need for Power (assertive)

Conscientiousness Dependability

Personal Integrity

Need for Achievement

Agreeableness Cheerful and Optimistic

Nurturance (sympathetic, helpful)

Need for Affiliation

Adjustment Emotional Stability

Self-Esteem

Self-Control

Intellectance Curious and Inquisitive

Open Minded

Learning Oriented

Based on Hogan et al. (1994)

are included in a broadly defined factor, the accuracy of prediction will be lower. Even when the component traits are all relevant, they may not have the same relationship with different criteria of leadership effectiveness. More research is needed to determine whether the big five traits predict and explain leadership effectiveness better than the specific component traits. Such research should be based on a theory that clearly describes how specific leader traits are related to specific types of behavior that mediate the effects of the traits on leadership effectiveness.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Skills and Effective Leadership The early research on leader characteristics identified several skills that are related to the advancement and effectiveness of leaders. Many different taxonomies have been proposed for classifying managerial skills, but the most useful and parsimonious taxonomy uses the three broadly defined skill categories shown in Table 6-3 . Similar versions of this taxonomy were proposed by Katz (1955) and Mann (1965). The technical skills are primarily concerned with things, the interpersonal skills (or “social skills”) are primarily concerned with people, and the conceptual skills (or “cognitive skills”) are primarily concerned with ideas and concepts.

Some writers differentiate a fourth category of skills (called administrative skills or strategic management skills) that includes selected aspects of the other three categories and are defined in terms of the ability to perform a particular type of managerial function or behavior such as planning, negotiating, and coaching (e.g., Hooijberg, Hunt, & Dodge, 1997; Hunt, 1991; Mumford, Campion, & Morgeson, 2007). These skills are discussed along with related behaviors relevant for strategic leadership in Chapter 11 .

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Technical Skills Technical skills include knowledge about methods, processes, and equipment for conducting the specialized activities of the manager’s organizational unit. Technical skills also include factual knowledge about the organization (rules, structure, management systems, employee characteristics), and knowledge about the organization’s products and services (technical specifications, strengths, and limitations). This type of knowledge is acquired by a combination of formal education, training, and job experience. Acquisition of technical knowledge is facilitated by a

Table 6-3 Three-factor Taxonomy of Broadly Defined Skills Technical Skills: Knowledge about methods, processes, procedures, and techniques for conducting a specialized activity, and the ability to use tools and equipment relevant to that activity.

Interpersonal Skills: Knowledge about human behavior and interpersonal processes, ability to understand the feelings, attitudes, and motives of others from what they say and do (empathy, social sensitivity), ability to communicate clearly and effectively (speech fluency, persuasiveness), and ability to establish effective and cooperative relationships (tact, diplomacy, listening skill, knowledge about acceptable social behavior).

Conceptual Skills: General analytical ability, logical thinking, proficiency in concept formation and conceptualization of complex and ambiguous relationships, creativity in idea generation and problem solving, ability to analyze events and perceive trends, anticipate changes, and recognize opportunities and potential problems (inductive and deductive reasoning).

good memory for details and the ability to learn technical material quickly. Effective managers are able to obtain information and ideas from many sources and store it away in their memory for use when they need it.

Managers who supervise the work of others need extensive knowledge of the techniques and equipment used by subordinates to perform the work. Technical knowledge of products and processes is necessary to plan and organize work operations, to direct and train subordinates with specialized activities, and to monitor and evaluate their performance. Technical expertise is needed to deal with disruptions in the work due to equipment breakdowns, quality defects, accidents, insufficient materials, and coordination problems. Ample evidence indicates that technical skills are related to the effectiveness of civilian and military leaders, especially at lower levels of management (see Bass, 1990). The CCL study (McCall & Lombardo, 1983a) on derailed managers found that technical knowledge about products and work

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

processes is related to effectiveness and advancement at lower levels of management, but it becomes relatively less important at higher levels of management.

Technical knowledge is also relevant for entrepreneurial managers. The inspirational vision of a new product or service may seem to spring from out of nowhere, but it is actually the result of many years of learning and experience. Research on entrepreneurs who started successful companies or introduced important new products in established companies suggests that their technical knowledge is the fertile ground in which the seeds of inspiration take root to yield innovative products (Westley & Mintzberg, 1989). Some examples include Edwin Land, the inventor of the instant camera and founder of Polaroid Corporation; Steve Jobs, the cofounder of Apple Computer; and Mark Zukerberg, the cofounder of Facebook. It is not enough to have an intimate knowledge of the products and processes for which a manager is responsible. Managers also need to have extensive knowledge of the products and services provided by competitors. Strategic planning is unlikely to be effective unless a manager can make an accurate evaluation of the organization’s products (or services) in comparison to those of competitors (Peters & Austin, 1985).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Conceptual Skills In general terms, conceptual (or cognitive) skills involve good judgment, foresight, intuition, creativity, and the ability to find meaning and order in ambiguous, uncertain events. Specific conceptual skills that can be measured with aptitude tests include analytical ability, logical thinking, concept formation, inductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning. Cognitive complexity involves a combination of these specific skills and is defined as the ability to develop concepts and categories for describing things, the ability to identify patterns and understand complex relationships, and the ability to develop creative solutions to problems. A person with low cognitive complexity sees things in simplistic black and white terms and has difficulty in seeing how many diverse elements fit together to make a meaningful whole. A person with high cognitive complexity is able to see many shades of gray and is able to identify complex patterns of relationships and predict future events from current trends.

Conceptual skills are essential for effective planning, organizing, and problem solving. A major administrative responsibility is coordination of the separate, specialized parts of the organization. To accomplish effective coordination, a manager needs to understand how the various parts of the organization relate to each other and how changes in one part of the system affect the other parts. Managers must also be able to comprehend how changes in the external environment will affect the organization. Strategic planning requires considerable ability to analyze events and perceive trends, anticipate changes, and recognize opportunities and potential problems. A manager with high cognitive complexity is able to develop a better mental model of the organization to help understand the most critical factors and the relationships among them. A model is like a road map that depicts the terrain for a region, shows where things are located in relation to each other, and helps you decide how to get from one place to another. Managers with weak conceptual skills tend to develop a simplistic mental model that is not especially useful because it is unable to describe the complex processes, causal relationships, and flow of events in the organization and external environment. In the CCL study described earlier, weak conceptual skills were one reason for managers who derailed (McCall & Lombardo, 1983b, p. 26): “The charming but not brilliant find that the job gets too big and the problems too complex to get by on interpersonal skills.”

Conceptual skills have been measured with a variety of different methods, including traditional aptitude tests, situational tests, interviews, critical incidents, and constructed response tasks. Research with

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

traditional pencil-and-paper measures of conceptual skills finds strong evidence that they are related to managerial effectiveness, especially in high-level managerial positions (Bass, 1990). Cognitive skills measured with incident interviews differentiated between effective and ineffective managers in a study by Boyatzis (1982). Cognitive skills measured in an assessment center predicted advancement to higher levels of management in a study at AT&T (Howard & Bray, 1988). In a longitudinal study of managers in four companies, cognitive complexity measured with an individual assessment interview predicted managerial advancement remarkably well 4–8 years later (Stamp, 1988). With constructed response tasks, leaders say how they would solve representative types of problems described in a set of scenarios, and then raters determine the level of skill demonstrated by the answers. In a large sample of army officers at different ranks, complex problem-solving skills that were measured in this way were related to career achievement (Connelly et al., 2000).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Interpersonal Skills Interpersonal (or social) skills include knowledge about human behavior and group processes, ability to understand the feelings, attitudes, and motives of others, and ability to communicate clearly and persuasively. Specific types of interpersonal skills such as empathy, social insight, charm, tact and diplomacy, persuasiveness, and oral communication ability are essential to develop and maintain cooperative relationships with subordinates, superiors, peers, and outsiders. Someone who is charming, tactful, and diplomatic will have more cooperative relationships than a person who is insensitive and offensive.

Interpersonal skills are essential for influencing people. Empathy is the ability to understand another person’s motives, values, and emotions, and social insight is the ability to understand what types of behavior are socially acceptable in a particular situation. Understanding what people want and how they perceive things makes it easier to select an appropriate influence strategy, and persuasiveness and oral communication influence attempts more successfully. Another interpersonal skill is the ability to use cues from others to understand one’s own behavior and how it affects other people. This skill is sometimes called “self-monitoring,” and it helps people adjust their behavior to fit the requirements of the situation (Snyder, 1974; Zaccaro, Foti, & Kenny, 1991). Influence tactics and impression management tactics (see Chapter 8 ) are used more effectively by people who have strong interpersonal skills.

Interpersonal skills also enhance the effectiveness of relationship-oriented behaviors. Strong interpersonal skills help a manager listen in an attentive, sympathetic, and nonjudgmental way to somebody with a personal problem, complaint, or criticism. Empathy is important for understanding the needs and feelings of others and determining how to provide support and sympathy. Empathy is also useful for determining effective ways to resolve conflicts. Even managerial behaviors that are primarily task-oriented (e.g., making assignments and giving instructions) require considerable interpersonal skill to be enacted in a way that reflects a concern for people as well as task objectives. Some people have a misconception that interpersonal skill is nothing more than considerate behavior to be “turned on” in special situations. Katz (1955, p. 34) takes a different viewpoint:

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Real skill in working with others must become a natural, continuous activity, since it involves sensitivity not only at times of decision making but also in the day-by-day behavior of the individual. . . . Because everything a leader says and does (or leaves unsaid or undone) has an effect on his associates, his true self will, in time, show through. Thus, to be effective, this skill must be naturally developed and unconsciously, as well as consistently, demonstrated in the individual’s every action.

The trait research described earlier in this chapter shows consistently that interpersonal skills are important for managerial effectiveness and advancement (Bass, 1990). In the AT&T study, interpersonal skills predicted managerial advancement. In research on leadership competencies by Boyatzis (1982), interpersonal skills differentiated between effective and ineffective managers, regardless of the situation. In the CCL research, deficiencies in interpersonal skills were a major reason for managers who eventually derailed in their management careers. McCall and Lombardo (1983b, p. 28) describe an incident involving an abrasive manager who derailed:

The manager walked into the subordinate’s office, interrupting a meeting, and said, “I need to see you.” When the subordinate tried to explain that he was occupied, his boss snarled, “I don’t give a goddamn. I said I wanted to see you now.”

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Managerial Competencies Although competencies are commonly regarded as skills, they usually involve a combination of specific skills and complementary traits. Competencies are frequently used to describe desirable attributes for managers in a particular company or profession, but some scholars have proposed generally relevant competencies for managers. Examples include emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and learning ability. These competencies include some of the same skills and traits described earlier in the chapter, but they are defined and measured in unique ways.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Emotional Intelligence Emotions are strong feelings that demand attention and are likely to affect cognitive processes and behavior. Some examples of emotions include anger, fear, sadness, joy, shame, and surprise. Even after the intensity of an emotion fades, it is likely to linger as a positive or negative mood, which can also affect leadership behavior (George, 1995). Emotional intelligence includes several interrelated component skills. Empathy is the ability to recognize moods and emotions in others, to differentiate between genuine and false expression of emotions, and to understand how someone is reacting to your emotions and behavior. Self-regulation is the ability to channel emotions into behavior that is appropriate for the situation, rather than responding with impulsive behavior (e.g., lashing out at someone who made you angry, or withdrawing into a state of depression after experiencing disappointment). Emotional self- awareness is an understanding of one’s own moods and emotions, how they evolve and change over time, and the implications for task performance and interpersonal relationships. Another aspect of emotional intelligence that requires both self-awareness and communication skills is the ability to accurately express one’s feelings to others with language and nonverbal communication (e.g., facial expressions, gestures). Emotional intelligence can be learned, but a significant improvement probably requires intensive individual coaching, relevant feedback, and a strong desire for significant personal development (Goleman, 1995).

Emotional intelligence is relevant for leadership effectiveness in several ways (Goleman, 1995; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Mayer & Salovey, 1995). Leaders with a high level of emotional intelligence are more capable of solving complex problems, planning how to use their time effectively, adapting their behavior to the situation, and managing crises. Self-awareness makes it easier to understand one’s own needs and likely reactions if certain events occurred, thereby facilitating evaluation of alternative solutions. Self-regulation facilitates emotional stability and information processing in stressful situations, and it helps leaders maintain their own optimism and enthusiasm about a project or mission in the face of obstacles and setbacks. Empathy is associated with strong social skills that are needed to develop cooperative interpersonal relationships. Examples include the ability to listen attentively, communicate effectively, and express appreciation and positive regard. The ability to understand and influence emotions in others will help a leader who is attempting to arouse enthusiasm and optimism for a proposed activity or change. A leader with high emotional intelligence will have more

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

insight about the type of rational or emotional appeal that is most likely to be effective in a particular situation.

In research on the consequences of emotional intelligence, some studies use a self-report measure (e.g., Wong & Law, 2002), but other studies use a performance-based measure (e.g., Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). As yet there is only a limited amount of research to support the proposition that emotional intelligence enhances leadership effectiveness (see Joseph & Newman, 2010). The extent to which emotional intelligence can improve the prediction of leadership effectiveness beyond measures of cognitive intelligence and other traits has not been clearly determined. There is a continuing controversy about the usefulness of emotional intelligence. Some critics claim that it uses well-known traits and skills and adds no important new insights about effective leadership (e.g., Landy, 2005; Locke, 2005).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Social Intelligence Social intelligence is defined as the ability to determine the requirements for leadership in a particular situation and select an appropriate response (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987; Ford, 1986; Zaccaro, Gilbert, Thor, & Mumford, 1991). The two primary components of social intelligence are social perceptiveness and behavioral flexibility.

Social perceptiveness is the ability to understand the functional needs, problems, and opportunities that are relevant for a group or organization, and the member characteristics, social relationships, and collective processes that will enhance or limit attempts to influence the group or organization. A leader with high social perceptiveness understands what needs to be done to make a group or organization more effective and how to do it. Social perceptiveness involves the conceptual skills and specific knowledge needed for strategic leadership, including the ability to identify threats and opportunities that are jointly determined by environmental events and the core competencies of the organization, and the ability to formulate an appropriate response. Social perceptiveness also involves interpersonal skills (e.g., empathy, social sensitivity, understanding of group processes) and knowledge of the organization (structure, culture, power relationships), which jointly determine whether it is feasible to initiate change and the best way to do it.

Behavioral flexibility is the ability and willingness to vary one’s behavior to accommodate situational requirements. A leader with high behavioral flexibility knows how to use a variety of different behaviors and is able to evaluate his or her behavior and modify it as needed. High behavioral flexibility implies a mental model with fine distinctions among different types of leadership behavior rather than a simplistic taxonomy. The person must have a large repertoire of skilled behaviors from which to select, as well as knowledge about the effects and limiting conditions for each type of behavior. Behavioral flexibility is facilitated by self-monitoring, because leaders who are high on self-monitoring are more aware of their own behavior and how it affects others. Whether social intelligence is used primarily to achieve collective rather than personal objectives probably depends on the leader’s emotional maturity and socialized power motivation.

Considerable overlap is apparent between social intelligence and emotional intelligence, although the latter construct seems to be more narrowly defined (Kobe, Reiter-Palmon, & Rickers, 2001; Salovey &

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Mayer, 1990). Social intelligence also appears to include political skill, which is the ability to understand how decisions are made in organizations and how to use political tactics to influence decisions and events. More research is needed to clarify how social intelligence is related to emotional intelligence and political skill. More research is also needed to assess how each component skill in social intelligence is related to leadership effectiveness.

Learning Ability In a turbulent environment in which organizations must continually adapt, innovate, and reinvent themselves, leaders must be flexible enough to learn from mistakes, change their assumptions and beliefs, and refine their mental models. One of the most important competencies for successful leadership in changing situations is the ability to learn from experience and adapt to change (Argyris, 1991; Dechant, 1990; Marshall-Mies et al., 2000; Mumford & Connelly, 1991). This competency is distinct from other conceptual skills (e.g., verbal reasoning, creative thinking) and from social skills. It involves “learning how to learn,” which is the ability to introspectively analyze your own cognitive processes (e.g., the way you define and solve problems) and to find ways to improve them. It also involves self-awareness, which is an understanding of your own strengths and limitations (including both skills and emotions).

In a study of 1,800 high-level military officers, this competency predicted self-reported career achievements (Zaccaro et al., 1997). A study of military officers by Marshall-Mies et al. (2000) provides additional evidence that the ability to learn and adapt is important for leadership effectiveness. In research on derailment by civilian managers, this ability was considered an important success factor by American and European executives (Van Velsor & Leslie, 1995).

The ability to learn from experience and adapt to change probably involves traits as well as skills (Spreitzer, McCall, & Mahoney, 1997). Traits that appear relevant include achievement orientation, emotional stability, self-monitoring, and an internal locus of control orientation. Managers with these traits are motivated to achieve excellence; they are inquisitive and open-minded; they have the confidence and curiosity to experiment with new approaches; and they actively seek feedback about their strengths and weaknesses.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Situational Relevance of Skills Managers need many types of skills to fulfill their role requirements, but the relative importance of the various skills depends on the leadership situation. Relevant situational moderator variables include managerial level, type of organization, and the nature of the external environment.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Level of Management One aspect of the situation influencing skill importance is a manager’s position in the authority hierarchy of the organization (Boyatzis, 1982; Gentry, Harris, Baker, & Leslie, 2008; Jacobs & Jaques, 1987; Katz, 1955; Mann, 1965; Mumford & Connelly, 1991; Mumford, Marks, Connelly, Zaccaro, & Reiter- Palmon, 2000). Skill priorities at different levels of management are related to the differing role requirements at each level (see Chapter 2 ). Figure 6-1 shows the relative importance of the three broad skill categories to leadership effectiveness for low-level managers, middle-level managers, and top executives. Managerial level affects not only the relevance of the three broad categories of skills described earlier (i.e., conceptual, interpersonal, technical), but also the relative importance of specific types of skills within each category.

In general, higher levels of management have a greater number and variety of activities to be coordinated; the complexity of relationships that need to be understood and managed is greater; and the problems that need to be solved are more unique and ill-defined (Jacobs & Jaques, 1987, 1990; Jaques, 1989; Mumford & Connelly, 1991). Whereas a department supervisor may have to coordinate the work of employees with mostly similar jobs, a CEO must coordinate the diverse activities of several organizational units, each with large numbers of people. Increasing complexity as one ascends to higher levels in an organization is reflected in increased requirements for conceptual skills. Top executives need to analyze vast amounts of ambiguous and contradictory information about the environment in order to make strategic decisions and to interpret events for other members of the organization. Executives need to have a long-term perspective and the ability to comprehend complex relationships among variables relevant to the performance of the organization. A top executive must be able to anticipate future events and know how to plan for them. The quality of strategic decisions ultimately depends on conceptual skills, even

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Figure 6-1 Relative Importance of Skills for Different Levels of Management

though some technical knowledge is necessary to make these decisions, and interpersonal skills are necessary for developing relationships, obtaining information, and influencing subordinates to implement decisions (Katz & Kahn, 1978).

The role of middle-level managers is primarily one of supplementing existing structure and developing ways to implement policies and goals established at higher levels (Katz & Kahn, 1978). This role requires a roughly equal mix of technical, interpersonal, and conceptual skills. Low-level managers are mainly responsible for implementing policy and maintaining the work flow within the existing organizational structure; for these managers, technical skills are relatively more important than conceptual skills or interpersonal skills.

The skill requirements for managers at each level vary somewhat depending on the type of organization, its size, the organization structure, and the degree of centralization of authority (McLennan, 1967). For example, technical skills are more important for top executives in organizations where operating decisions are highly centralized. Likewise, more technical skill is needed by top executives who have functionally specialized roles (e.g., selling to key customers, product design) in addition to general

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

administrative responsibilities. More conceptual skills are needed by middle- and lower-level managers who are expected to participate in strategic planning, product innovation, and leading change.

Type of Organization An interesting question about managerial skills is the extent to which they are transferable from one type of organization to another. Writers generally agree that lower-level managers cannot easily transfer to a different functional specialty (e.g., from sales manager to engineering manager), because the technical skills needed at this level of management are so different across functions. However, less agreement is evident about the transferability of skills across organizations at the executive level.

Katz (1955) proposed that top-level managers with ample human relations and conceptual skills can be shifted from one industry to another with great ease and no loss of effectiveness. Some other writers contend that the transferability of skills for top executives is limited due to variations in ownership, traditions, organizational climate, and culture (Dale, 1960; Kotter, 1982; McLennan, 1967; Shetty & Peery, 1976). Different industries have unique economic, market, and technological characteristics. Familiarity with technical matters, products, personalities, and tradition is a type of knowledge that is acquired only through long experience in the organization. Only the general components of conceptual and technical skills can be used in a different situation; the unique knowledge component of these skills must be relearned. Moreover, an executive who moves to a different industry must develop a new network of external contacts, whereas the old network would still be relevant for a move to another organization in the same industry. In general, it seems to be more difficult for an executive to make a successful transition to a different industry or type of organization, especially if the new position requires extensive technical expertise and an extensive network of external contacts (Kotter, 1982; Shetty & Peery, 1976).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

External Environment Recent research and theory on how organizations evolve and adapt to a changing environment suggests that the mix of skills needed for effective leadership may change as the situation changes. The skills needed by an entrepreneurial manager to build a new organization are not identical to the skills needed by the chief executive of a large, established organization. The skills needed to lead an organization with a stable, supportive environment are not identical to the skills needed to lead an organization facing a turbulent, competitive environment (Hunt, 1991; Lord & Maher, 1991; Quinn, 1992).

As noted in Chapter 2 , unprecedented changes affecting organizations are changing the nature of managerial work. To cope with these changes, most managers may need more of the new competencies as well as the skills identified in earlier research. As the pace of globalization, technological development, and social change continues to increase, so will the premium on competencies such as cognitive complexity, empathy, self-awareness, cultural sensitivity, behavioral flexibility, systems thinking, and the ability to learn from experience and adapt to change (Conger, 1993; Gentry, Harris, Baker, & Leslie, 2008; Hunt, 1991; Nadkarni & Herrmann, 2010; Van Velsor & Leslie, 1995).

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Evaluation of the Trait Approach Considerable progress has been made in identifying traits and skills relevant for managerial effectiveness and advancement. Nevertheless, this line of research has been hindered by some methodological and conceptual limitations. Most trait studies are not guided by a theory that explains how traits are related to managerial effectiveness and advancement. It is difficult to interpret the relevance of abstract traits except by examining how they are expressed in the actual behavior of leaders and the types of influence processes related to leader decisions and actions. Few trait studies include mediating processes to explain why leadership traits and skills are relevant for predicting effectiveness in the current position or career success.

Another limitation of the trait approach is the lack of attention in many studies to the leadership context. As in the behavior research, the relevance of different traits and skills will depend in part on the nature of the leadership position, the types of challenges facing the leader, and the criteria used to assess effectiveness.

Most trait studies on the relationship of traits and skills to effective leadership only test for simple, linear relationships. However, the relationship is often curvilinear, and a moderate amount of the trait is usually optimal rather than the maximum amount (e.g., Le et al., 2010). Examples of traits for which either a very low or very high level is undesirable are shown in Table 6-4 . When the relationship is curvilinear, a study that only tests for a linear relationship will yield incorrect results, and the practical implications for leaders may be incorrect.

Most trait studies examined how single traits or skills are related to leadership effectiveness or advancement. This approach fails to consider how the traits are interrelated and how they interact to influence leader behavior and effectiveness. A more holistic approach is needed to examine patterns of leader traits and skills in relation to leader effectiveness (Kaplan & Kaiser, 2006; McCall, Lombardo, & Morrison, 1988; Quinn, 1988). Sometimes the optimal pattern involves a balance among related traits. For example, effective leaders balance a high need for power with the emotional maturity required to ensure that subordinates are empowered rather than dominated.

The concept of balance has been described for individuals, but it applies to shared leadership as well. For example, balance may involve several different leaders in a management team who have

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

complementary attributes that compensate for each other’s weaknesses and enhance each other’s strengths (Bradford & Cohen, 1984). A better understanding of leadership in an organization may be gained by examining the pattern of traits for the executive team rather than focusing on the traits of a single leader such as the chief executive officer (see Chapter 11 ).

Table 6-4 Negative Aspects of Very Low or Very High Trait Scores Self-confidence

• too little: indecisive, avoids risks, and does not seek to influence others • too much: arrogant, acts too quickly, and takes too many risks

Need for Esteem

• too little: does not seek recognition or build a reputation for high expertise and reliability • too much: preoccupied with reputation and status, exaggerates achievements, covers up • mistakes and failures or blames others

Need for Affiliation

• too little: does not try to form strong relationships or build a social support network • too much: overly concerned about being liked and accepted by others, over-uses ingratiation, and will not

risk popularity by asking for sacrifices or insisting on better performance

Need for Independence

• too little: dependent on others for direction, rule oriented, avoids taking initiative • too much: resents authority, too quick to ignore rules and standard procedures

Altruism (value)

• too little: selfish, indifferent about the needs of others, may exploit them for personal gain • too much: overly generous and forgiving, unable to ask for sacrifices or maintain discipline

Performance Orientation (value)

• too little: the person accepts weak performance and does not push for improvement • too much: the person is a perfectionist and is overly demanding and never satisfied

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Guidelines for Managers The finding that particular skills and traits are positively related to managerial effectiveness and advancement has some practical implications for people in planning their own managerial careers. The following guidelines (summarized in Table 6-5 are based on research, theory, and practitioner findings about traits and skills.

• Learn about your strengths and weaknesses. It is essential for leaders to understand what is required for success in their current position and how well their traits and skills will enable them to do what is required. Understanding of strengths makes it easier to build on them and become more effective. Understanding of weaknesses makes it easier to correct them or compensate for them. Take advantage of opportunities to gain systematic feedback about strengths and weaknesses from multisource feedback programs and assessment centers (see Chapter 15 ).

• Maintain a high level of self-awareness. Self-awareness includes a good understanding of one’s own needs, emotions, abilities, and behavior. Awareness of your emotional reactions to events facilitates information processing and decision making in stressful situations, and it helps you maintain optimism and enthusiasm Table 6-5 Guidelines for Understanding and Improving Relevant Competencies ◾ Learn about your strengths and weaknesses ◾ Maintain self-awareness ◾ Identify and develop skills relevant for a future leadership position ◾ Remember that a strength can become a weakness ◾ Compensate for weaknesses.

about a project or mission in the face of obstacles and setbacks. Awareness of your behavior and its influence on others makes it easier to learn from experience and to assess your strengths and weaknesses. Insights can be gained by monitoring your own behavior and its consequences. It is also important to be receptive to feedback from others about positive and negative aspects of behavior as they perceive it.

• Identify and develop skills relevant for a future leadership position.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Effective managers are more oriented toward continuous learning and self- development. Learn what traits and skills are useful for the type of leadership role or position you want to have in the future. Determine which skills need to be strengthened and seek opportunities to develop them. Some training may be obtained in specialized management development workshops run by one’s employer or by consulting companies. Other approaches for developing new skills include challenging assignments, personal coaching, and self-development activities (see Chapter 15 ).

• Remember that a strength can become a weakness. A trait or skill that is a strength in one situation can later become a weakness when the situation changes. People tend to emphasize a skill that brings repeated success early in their careers, and later when it is no longer as relevant, the strength becomes a weakness. For example, a study conducted by CCL researchers found that staff managers who performed brilliant analytical work could not develop the action orientation necessary to implement ideas when they moved into a line position. Successful line managers had the opposite problem; they seemed incapable of the reflective analysis and cooperative teamwork that was necessary in a staff position. Any trait taken to an extreme can also become a weakness, even when the situation has not changed. Confidence can become arrogance, innovation can become recklessness, decisiveness can become rashness, integrity can become fanaticism, and global vision can become lack of focus.

• Compensate for weaknesses. One way to compensate for weaknesses is to select subordinates who have complementary strengths and allow them to assume responsibility for aspects of the work they are more qualified to perform. Sometimes it is appropriate to delegate responsibilities to qualified individuals, and other times it is better to have a management team (in which you are a member) share the responsibility for a particular problem or challenge.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Summary The early trait studies attempted to identify physical characteristics, personality traits, and abilities of people who were believed to be “natural leaders.” Hundreds of trait studies were conducted, but individual traits failed to correlate in a strong and consistent manner with leadership effectiveness. More progress was made after researchers included additional traits and skills and used better measures of traits and outcomes. Nevertheless, much of the trait research continues to have weaknesses such as lack of adequate attention to situational variables, mediating processes, curvilinear relationships, and trait interactions. As in the case of leadership behavior, some scholars have emphasized broadly defined categories of traits and skills that can make it more difficult to identify and understand important relationships.

Some personality traits found to be relevant for leadership advancement or effectiveness include energy level and stress tolerance, self-confidence, internal control orientation, emotional stability, extroversion, conscientiousness, and integrity. The motive pattern characteristic of many effective managers includes a socialized power orientation and a moderately strong need for achievement with an emphasis on collective performance rather than individual performance.

To be successful, a leader also needs interpersonal, cognitive, and technical skills. The relative priority of the three types of skills and the optimal mix of specific skills probably depends on the type of organization, the level of management, and the nature of the challenges confronting a leader. Some skills such as persuasiveness, analytical ability, speaking ability, and memory for details will help a leader be successful in any situation, whereas some other skills are not easily transferred to a different type of position. Competencies involve a combination of traits and skills, and some competencies examined in recent leadership research include emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and the ability to learn and adapt to change. The uniqueness and relevance of these competencies continues to be a controversial subject in the leadership literature.

The trait approach has important implications for improving managerial effectiveness. Information about traits and skills relevant for different types of managerial positions is useful for people who are planning a managerial career. The information is also useful for selecting people to fill managerial positions, for identifying training needs in the current job, and for planning management development activities to

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

prepare the person for promotion to higher-level jobs. Leadership development is discussed in Chapter 15 .

Review and Discussion Questions 1. What traits are the best predictors of managerial performance and advancement? 2. Is it possible to have too much of a good thing with some traits? 3. Why is it important to consider the joint effects of different traits and skills? 4. What are the major reasons for managers to derail in their careers? 5. How are technical, conceptual, and interpersonal skills related to managerial effectiveness? 6. To what extent are the effects of traits and skills dependent on the situation? 7. Which skills are most important at lower, middle, and higher levels of management? 8. What are emotional and social intelligence, and how are they relevant for leadership?

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Key Terms big five personality traits cognitive skills competencies conceptual skills derailed careers emotional intelligence emotional maturity emotional stability interpersonal skills locus of control orientation need for achievement need for affiliation need for power personalized power orientation self-awareness self-confidence social intelligence socialized power orientation technical skills

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Case National Products Susan Thomas is the vice president for human resources at National Products, a manufacturing company with 500 employees. The company has an opening for a general manager in one of its product divisions, and the president asked Susan to review the backgrounds of three department managers who are interested in being promoted to this position. She is expected either to recommend one of the three internal candidates or to begin recruitment of external candidates. The internal candidates are Charley Adams, Bill Stuart, and Ray Johnson. The following information about each candidate was obtained from performance records, interviews with the candidates, and discussions with the boss of each candidate.

Charley Adams Charley Adams has been a production manager for the past eight years. He is an easy-going person who loves to swap jokes and tell stories. Charley stresses the importance of cooperation and teamwork. He is uncomfortable with conflict, and he tries to smooth it over quickly or find an acceptable compromise.

Before becoming a manager, Charley was always willing to take on extra assignments for his boss and to provide helpful advice to less experienced coworkers in his department. Charley is proud of his reputation as a “good team player” and a loyal “company man.” It is important to Charley to be liked and appreciated by people in the organization.

Charley comes from a cultural background emphasizing the importance of close family ties. He holds frequent Sunday dinners at which the entire Adams clan gathers for an afternoon of swimming, baseball, eating, and singing. On Saturdays, Charley likes to play golf with friends, including some of the other managers in the company.

Charley wants his department to have a good performance record, but he is reluctant to jeopardize relations with subordinates by pushing them to improve their performance beyond current levels, which he believes are adequate. When Charley gives out performance bonuses to subordinates, he usually tries to give something to everyone.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Bill Stuart Bill Stuart has been the manager of an engineering department for three years. He was promoted to that position because he was the best design engineer in the company and was ambitious to further his career by going into management. At the time, Bill had little understanding of what the job would be like, but he saw it as both an opportunity and a challenge.

Bill grew up as somewhat of a loner. He still feels awkward around people he doesn’t know well, and he dislikes social functions such as cocktail parties and company picnics. As a design engineer, Bill preferred assignments where he could work alone rather than team projects. He is impatient with bureaucratic authority figures and he is critical of corporate policies that he regards as too restrictive. Bill gets along well with his present boss, because he is left alone to run his engineering group in his own way.

Bill likes challenging assignments, and he tries to save the most difficult and interesting design projects for himself. Although Bill usually performs these tasks effectively, his preoccupation with them sometimes takes time away from some of his managerial responsibilities, such as developing and mentoring subordinates.

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...

Ray Johnson Ray Johnson has been a corporate marketing manager for five years. He grew up in a poor ethnic neighborhood where he learned to be tough in order to survive. He has worked hard to get where he is, but for Ray, good performance has been a way to get ahead rather than something he enjoys for its own sake.

Ray lives in a large house with a big swimming pool in the best part of town, and he likes to throw big parties at his home. He wears expensive clothes, drives a luxury car, and he belongs to the best country club. Ray is married, but fancies himself as quite a playboy and has had many affairs, including some with female employees.

Ray views the organization as a political jungle, and he is quick to defend himself against any threats to his reputation, authority, or position. He tries to undermine or discredit anybody who criticizes or opposes him. He keeps a tight control over the operations of his department, and he insists that subordinates check with him before taking any action that is not routine.

Questions 1. What are the dominate motives for each candidate? 2. What are the implications of these traits for the success of each candidate if selected for the

general manager position? 3. Should Susan recommend one of these candidates for the position, or look for external

candidates?

3/16/2016http://e.pub/opuflea6lshqlyjnqb61.vbk/OPS/xhtml/fileP7000478565000000000000000001...