orm6003 foundations of leadership week 3

Tuesday, April 11, 2023

1

ORM6003 Foundations of Leadership

Week 3


2

Compiled by:Ronald Keith Bolender, Ed.D. (2005)

Nova Southeastern University

www.bolender.com


3

Important Copyright NoteImportant Copyright Note

This set of PowerPoint slides may only be used in sections of ORM6003 Foundations of Leadership where

each student owns a copy of Leadership: Theory and Practice

(Northouse, 2004).


4

ReferencesFielder, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership

effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1991). The

transformation of professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing contributions: Toward a theory of leader-making. Journal of Management Systems, 3 (3), 33-48.

Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.


5

DevotionsDevotions


6

Chapter 6: Contingency Theory

ICA 3-1 Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Measure

In order to better understand the presentation of contingency theory, this exercise needs to be completed prior to the lecture.

Complete the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Measure assessment on pages 119-121 in the textbook (Northouse, 2004).


7


Contingency TheoryContingency theoryContingency theory is a leader-leader-

matchmatch theory, which means it tries to match leaders to appropriate situations.

It is called contingency contingency because it suggests that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context.


8


To understand the performance of leaders, it is essential to understand the situations in which they lead.

Effective leadership is contingentcontingent on matching a leader’s style to the right setting.


9


Fiedler (1967) developed contingency theory by studying the styles of many different leaders who worked in different contexts, primarily military organizations.

He assessed leaders’ styles, the situations in which they worked, and whether or not they were effective. After analyzing the styles of hundreds of leaders who were both good and bad, Fiedler and his colleagues were able to make empirically grounded generalizations about which styles of leadership were best and which styles were worst for a given organizational context.


10


Contingency theory is concerned with stylesstyles and situationssituations. It provides the framework for effectively matching the leader and the situation.


11


Within the framework of contingency theory, leadership styles are described as task-motivated or relationship-motivated.

Task-motivatedTask-motivated leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal, whereas relationship-motivatedrelationship-motivated leaders are concerned with developing class interpersonal relations.

To measure leader styles, Fielder developed the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale. Leaders who score high on this scale are described as relationship-motivated, and those who score low on the scale are identified as task-motivated.


12



13


This theory is supported by a great deal of empirical research. In an era in which popular newsstand accounts of “how to be a successful leader” abound, contingency theory offers an approach to leadership that has a long tradition. Many researchers have tested it and have found it to be a valid and reliable approach to explaining how effective leadership can be achieved.


14


The contingency theory is predictivepredictive and therefore provides useful information regarding the type of leadership that will most likely be effective in certain contexts.

From the data provided by the LPC scale and the descriptions of three aspects of a situation (i.e. leader-member relations, task structure and position power), it is possible to determine the probability of success for a given individual in a given situation.

This gives contingency theory predictive power This gives contingency theory predictive power that other leadership theories do not have. that other leadership theories do not have.


15


This theory is advantageous because it does not require that people be effective in all situations.

So often leaders in organizations feel the need to be all things to all people, which may be asking too much of leaders.

Contingency theory argues that leaders should not expect to be able to lead in every situation.

Companies should try to place leaders in optimal situations, in situations that are ideal for their leadership style.


16

Chapter 7: Path-Goal Theory

Path-Goal Theory Path-goal theoryPath-goal theory is about how leaders

motivate subordinates to accomplish designated goals.

It draws heavily from research on what motivates employees.

The stated goal of this leadership theory is to enhanceenhance employee performance and employee satisfaction by focusing on employee motivation.


17


In contrast to the situational approach, which suggests that a leader must adapt to the development level of subordinates, and unlike contingency theory, which emphasizes the match between the leader’s style and specific situational variables, path-goal theory emphasizes path-goal theory emphasizes the relationship between the leader’s the relationship between the leader’s style and the characteristics of the style and the characteristics of the subordinates and the work settingsubordinates and the work setting.


18


The underlying assumption of path-goal theory is derived from expectancy expectancy theorytheory, which suggests that subordinates will be motivated: If they think they are capable of performing

their work If they believe their efforts will result in certain

outcome If they believe that the payoff for doing their

work is worthwhile


19


For the leader, the challenge is to use a leadership style that best meets subordinates’ motivational needs.

This is done by choosing behaviors that complement or supplement what is missing in the work setting.

Leaders try to enhance subordinates’ goal attainment by providing information or rewards in the work environment; leaders provide subordinates with the elements they think subordinates need to reach their goals.

By choosing the appropriate style, leaders increase subordinates’ expectations for success and satisfaction.


20



21



22



23


ICA 3-2 Path-Goal Leadership Questionnaire

Complete the Path-Goal Leadership Questionnaire assessment on pages 142-143 in the textbook (Northouse, 2004).

Share with the class what style of leadership you use most often and which you use less frequently.


24


ICA 3-3 In-class Writing Assignment Over Case Study 7.3

Grade: This assignment is worth a maximum of 20 points.

Read Case Study 7.3 on pages 138-140 in Northouse (2004).

On paper, write out the questions and your answers to the questions listed at the end of this case study. PLEASE PRINTPLEASE PRINT

Break into groups of four to five and discuss this case study.


25

Chapter 8: Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX)

Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX)Up to this point, most of the theories

presented have emphasized leadership from the view of the leader (trait approach, skills approach and style approach) or the follower and the context (situational leadership, contingency theory and path-goal theory).


26


Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory takes still another approach and conceptualizes leadership as a process that is centered on the interactionsinteractions between leaders and followers. LMX theory makes the dyadic relationshipdyadic relationship between leaders and followers the focal point of the leadership process.


27



28


Prior to LMX theory, researchers treated leadership as something leaders did toward all of their followers.

This assumption implied that leaders treated followers in a collective way, as a group, using an average leadership style.

LMX theory challenged this assumption and directed researchers’ attention to the differences that might exist between the leader and each of her or his followers.


29


In-Group and Out-GroupThe LMX theory is based on the difference

between the leader/follower linkage known as an in-groupin-group versus the out-out-groupgroup leader/follower linkage.

In-group Those that are based on expanded and

negotiated role responsibilities (extra-roles).Out-group

Those that are based on the formal employment contract (defined roles).


30



31


LMX theory works in two ways: It describesdescribes leadership It prescribesprescribes leadership

In both instances, the central concept is the dyadic relationship that a leader forms with each of her or his subordinates.

Descriptively, LMX theory suggests it is important to recognize the existence of in-in-groupsgroups and out-groupsout-groups within a group or organization. IMPORTANT CONCEPT!IMPORTANT CONCEPT!


32


The difference in how goals are accomplished using in-groups as compared with out-groups is substantial.

Working with an in-group allows a leader to accomplish more work in a more effective manner than working without one.

In-group members are willing to do more than is required of their job description and look for innovative ways to advance the group’s goals.

In response to their extra effort and devotion, leaders give them more responsibilities and more opportunities.

Leaders also give in-group members more of their time and support.


33


Out-group members act quite differently from in-group members.

Rather than trying to do extra work, out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational roles. They do what is required of them, but nothing more.

Leaders treat out-group members fairly and according to the formal contract, but they do not give them special attention.

For their efforts, out-group members receive the standard benefits as described by the job description.


34


Prescriptively, LMX theory is best understood within the leadership-making model of Graen and Uhl-Bien (1991). The authors advocated that leaders should create a special relationship with all subordinates, similar to those relationships described as in-group relationships.

Rather than focusing on the differences between in-group and out-group members, the leadership-making model suggests that leaders should look for ways to build trust and respect with al of their subordinates, thus making the entire work unit an in-group.


35

ICA 3-4 Review of HWA 3-4 Interview Assignment

Break into groups of four or five.Share the HWA 3-4 interview

experience.Discuss how the information from the

interview will be incorporated into the HWA 5-2 Interview and Analysis of a Leader Project.


36

Review of the other homework assignments (HWAs) for Week Four.

orm6003 foundations of leadership week 3

Documents