Leadership Theories and Analysis

What is leadership?

Leadership is "the behaviour of an individual when he is directing the activities of a group towards a shared goal". (Hemphill and Coons, 1957, p.7)

A leader is interpreted as someone who sets direction in an effort and influences people to follow that direction. How they set that direction and influence people depends on a variety of factors. To really comprehend the "territory" of leadership, one should briefly scan some of the major theories, notice various styles of leadership and review some of the suggested traits and characteristics that leaders should have.

There are many leadership theories. Arthur G. Jago (1982) proposed a framework that organizes leadership theories based on each theory's focus and approach.

"Focus" refers to whether leadership is viewed as a set of traits or as a set of actions.

Focus on Traits: Theories with such a focus see leaders as having certain innate or inherent personality traits that distinguish them from non-leaders. These personality traits are supposed to be relatively stable and enduring.

Focus on Behaviour: Theories with this type of focus see leadership as observable actions of the leader instead of personality traits.

"Approach" is concerned with whether a particular theory or model of leadership takes a universal or a contingent perspective.

Universal Approach: This approach believes that there is a universal formula of traits or behaviour for an effective leader. In other words, the universal approach assumes that there is "one best way" to lead in all situations.

Contingent Approach: Contrary to the universal approach, the contingent approach does not believe the "one best way" formula. It believes that effective leadership depends on the specific situation.

I am going to analyse two theories in detail, which according to me appear contradictory are Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid Theory (1978) under the head behaviour theories and Fiedler's Contingency theories under the head contingencies theory.

Behavioural Theories

For over 20 years, a major thrust in leadership research has focused on the various behavioural patterns or styles used by different leaders and the functions fulfilled by these individuals. This research examined the impact that leadership behaviour had on the performance and satisfaction of followers. From these studies, two dimensions of leadership behaviour emerged.

Consideration: Consideration, also known as employee-centred behaviour, refers to leadership behaviour that is aimed at meeting the social and emotional needs of individuals and group members.

Initiating structure: Initiating structure, also known as job-oriented behaviour, refers to leadership behaviour that is aimed at careful supervision of employee work methods and performance levels.

Some research indicates that those leaders that were high in consideration would be more effective than those who were high in initiating structure, particularly in regard to maintaining employee satisfaction and performance and reducing turnover and absenteeism. Subsequent research argued that being high in both dimensions was necessary for effective leadership.

As the early researchers ran out of steam in their search for traits, they turned to what leaders did - how they behaved (especially towards followers). They moved from leaders to leadership - and this became the dominant way of approaching leadership within organizations in the 1950s and early 1960s. Different patterns of behaviour were grouped together and labelled as styles. This became a very popular activity within management training - perhaps the best known being Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid (1964; 1978). Various schemes appeared, designed to diagnose and develop people's style of working. Despite different names, the basic ideas were very similar. The four main styles that appear are:

Concern for task / production. Here leaders emphasize the achievement of concrete objectives. They look for high levels of productivity, and ways to organize people and activities in order to meet those objectives.

Concern for people. In this style, leaders look upon their followers as people - their needs, interests, problems, development and so on. They are not simply units of production or means to an end.

Directive leadership. This style is characterized by leaders taking decisions for others and expecting followers or subordinates to follow instructions.

Participative leadership. Here leaders try to share decision-making with others.

(Wright 1996: 36-7)

Contingencies theory.

The central idea of this approach was that effective leadership was dependent on a mix of factors. Fred E. Fiedler argued that effectiveness depends on two interacting factors: leadership style and the degree to which the situation gives the leader control and influence.

Devices Fiedler used to determine leader personality and the situation was Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Scale. The LPC is used to measure a leader's motivation: "Task motivation" vs. "relationship motivation" (these are the trait versions of the "concern of production" vs. "concern of people" categories in the Managerial Grid).

Fiedler assumes that everybody's least preferred co-worker in fact is on average about equally unpleasant. But people who are relationship motivated tend to describe their least preferred co-workers in a more positive manner, e.g., more pleasant and more efficient. Therefore, they receive higher LPC scores. People who are task motivated, on the other hand, tend to rate their least preferred co-workers in a more negative manner. Therefore, they receive lower LPC scores. So, the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale is actually not about the least preferred worker. Instead, it is about the person who takes the test; it is about that person's motivation type.

Three things are important here:

Leader-member relations refer to