Chapter Three

Early Theories: The Foundations of Modern

Leadership

Three Eras of Modern Leadership Research

The trait Era – 1800s to mid 1940s

The behavior era – mid 1940s to 1970s

The contingency era – early 1960s to present

The Trait Era

Leaders are born; they have special characteristics and traits

Some traits are related to leadership

No one trait defines leaders or effective leaders

Although traits play a role, they are not the dominant factor in leadership

The Behavior Era Behaviors can be learned

Two key categories of behavior: Task and Relationship Orientations

Behaviors alone do not determine effective leadership

Not clear which behaviors are most effective

Examples of Major Leadership BehaviorsStructuring/Task

Set goals

Clarify expectations

Set schedules

Assign tasks

Relationship/Consideration

Show empathy and understanding

Be friendly and approachable

Allow participation

Nurture followers

Contingency Era

No one best way to lead

Simple traits or behaviors alone do not fully explain leadership success

Understanding both leader traits/behaviors and the situation is critical

Personal and situational factors affect leadership effectiveness

Elements of Fiedler’s Contingency Model The leader’s style:

• Task or relationship motivation measured by the LPC scale

Situational control:• Leader-member relations• Task structure• Position power

Task-Motivated (Low-LPC) Draws self-esteem from

task completion Focuses on task first Can be harsh with

failing followers Considers competence

to be key employee trait

Enjoys details

Relationship-Motivated (High-LPC)

Draws self-esteem from interpersonal relationships

Focuses on people first

Likes to please others

Considers loyalty to be key employee trait

Gets bored with details

Task- and Relationship-Motivated Leaders

Fiedler’s Contingency ModelGROUP

PERFORMANCE

High

Low

SITUATIONAL CONTROL

Leader-Member Relations

Task Structure

Position PowerMODERATE LOW

GOOD

BAD

HIGH LOW

HIGH

LOW

HIGH

LOWLOWLOW

HIGH HIGH HIGH

LOW

Low-LPC

High-LPC

HIGH

Implications of Fiedler’s Contingency Model Leaders must understand their own

style (Task vs. Relationship) and their leadership situation (Sit Con)

Leaders should focus on changing the situation to match their style

Leaders can’t change their leadership style

Leaders can seek training to compensate for task ambiguity

Elements of the Normative Decision Model

The leader’s decision-making style:• Autocratic• Consultative• Group• Delegation

Contingency factors

Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model Quality requirement (QR)

How important is the quality of the decision?

Commitment requirement (CR)

How important is employee commitment to the decision?

Leader information (LI)

Does leader have enough information to make a decision?

Structure of the problem (ST)

Is the problem clear?

Commitment probability (CP)

How likely is employee commitment if leader makes the decision alone?

Goal congruence (GC)

Do employees agree with organizational goals?

Employee conflict (CO)

Is there conflict among employees over the solution?

Subordinate information (SI)

Do employees have enough information to make a high-quality decision?

Contingency Factors in the Normative Decision Model

Implications of the Normative Decision ModelLeaders must understand the

situation and how to use different decision styles

Leaders can change leadership styles

Participation can waste time and is not always desirable

Leaders must pay attention to their followers’ needs and reactions when making decisions

Path-Goal Theory

Effectiveness: Employee

satisfaction and motivation

Leader’s Actions: Focus on obstacle

removal Employ task and

consideration behaviorsUnderstand followers’

needs

Leaderstructuring andconsideration

Situationalcontingencies:

Task structure Employee need

for autonomy

Implications of Path-Goal Theory

Leaders must understand their followers’

perception of the task Leaders must take their followers’ need

for challenge and autonomy into account When followers need challenge or the

task is challenging, leaders must avoid being directive When the task is routine, boring, or

stressful, leaders must be supportive to motivate

their followers

Attributional Models

The consequences of their actions are severe

When they have a mediocre track record in other similar situations

When other employees are successful in similar situations

The employee is defensive

The manager’s success depends on the employee’s good performance

Employees Are More Likely To Be Held Responsible When:

Implications of Attributional Models

Leaders must be aware of their biases

Collecting objective data from multiple sources helps in evaluating subordinates

Considering both situational and personal causes of employee actions is essential

Leadership Substitutes: Follower Characteristics

Experience and training substitute for

leader structuring Professionalism substitutes for

leader consideration and structuring

Lack of agreement with leader’s goals neutralizes leader consideration and structuring

Leadership Substitutes: Task Characteristics

Unambiguous tasks substitute for

leader structuring Direct feedback from the task

substitutes for leader consideration and

structuring Challenging task substitutes for

leader consideration

Leadership Substitutes: Organizational Characteristics A cohesive team substitutes for leader

consideration and structuring Leader’s lack of power neutralizes

leader consideration and structuring Standardization and formalization

substitute for leader structuring Organizational rigidity neutralizes

leader structuring Physical distance neutralizes leader consideration and structuring

Implications of Leadership Substitutes

Leaders can use various substitutes to free up their time for other activities or develop and empower followers

Technology can support the development of substitutes

Teams and autonomous work groups can use substitutes positively

Leader-Member Exchange LMX

F Follower

In-Group

FFF

F

F

Out-group

F

F

F

F

F

F

F Leader

Stages of LMX

Development of Trust

Creation of Emotional Bond

Testing and Assessment

Implications of LMX

In order to use in-groups effectively, leaders should:

Base in-group membership on current performance and/or future potential

Review criteria for in-group membership

Set clear performance-related guidelines for in-group membership

Keep membership fluid and dynamic Maintain different in-groups for

different activities