project management, leadership and skills: planning and ... · project management, leadership and...

Project Management, leadership and Skills: planning and control- final assignment: 28 Aug 2016

1 | P a g e

Robert Kennedy College & Salford Business School

Student ID NO. @00439663

Module Name

Class#1713 –

UoS-PMLaSPaC - [UoS] Project Management, Leadership and Skills: Planning and Control

Assignment Title

PMLS Assignment 2 –Leadership and Teams

Assignment deadline: 28 Aug 2013

Effective word count: 3275 (deviation from 3000 = 9,6%)

This word count is done by excluding:

Module names

Titles

Indexes and front-page information

Bibliography

Appendix text

I confirm I have read the University regulations on plagiarism and that this assignment is my own

work.

Jaap

Rectangle

Jaap

Rectangle


2 | P a g e

Contents 1 Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. 3

2 Leadership ............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4

3 Leadership models ................................................................................................................................ 5

3.1 History........................................................................................................................................... 5

3.2 Models........................................................................................................................................... 5

3.3 Leadership styles ........................................................................................................................... 6

3.3.1 Situational, transactional and transformational ..................................................................... 6

3.3.2 Servant leadership ................................................................................................................. 7

3.4 Leadership within projects ............................................................................................................ 7

3.4.1 Management vs. Leadership ................................................................................................. 7

3.5 Project Frameworks ...................................................................................................................... 8

3.5.1 Waterfall vs Agile ................................................................................................................. 9

4 Motivation ........................................................................................................................................... 10

4.1.1 Leadership vs Management ................................................................................................ 10

4.1.2 Motivational levels and needs ............................................................................................. 11

5 Teams and Groups .............................................................................................................................. 12

5.1 Successful and unsuccessful teams ............................................................................................. 12

5.2 Teams development and cohesion .............................................................................................. 13

6 Conclusion and recommendations ...................................................................................................... 15

7 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................................... 16


3 | P a g e

1 Abstract

This research starts with a brief overview of the history of leadership. It gives an indication of the

first thoughts about leadership skills and traits and how the view on these matters changed over

time. Primarily the outcome of expected leadership seemed to be not in line with the expectations

related to the defined personal skills and traits of the leader. From there new models of leadership

arose to be better able to match the leadership style needed for projects and organizations.

With these models different kind of leadership styles were recognized to exist which could be used

based on the project and organization being led. In earlier days the autocratic, dictating hierarchical

styles were most popular. But as were leadership skills and traits ones over-rated, the same was

the true for the first models with a leadership style being very process and organization oriented.

In the dawn of further individualization of people, other leadership styles were needed and this

paper sheds a light on the process of transition from the autocratic hierarchical oriented models

and leadership styles towards the more people and team oriented models and styles.

There is a distinct difference between management and leadership and this study links these

differences to the leadership styles being used in certain situations. It brings the styles closer to the

situation being led and in doing so introduces the motivational needs of the stakeholders, teams

and people related to the project.

Projects are constructed out of parts which all play their specific role in the overall project life

cycle. The leadership theories being analyzed in this research are eventually related to the situation

and how this should be approach with the proper leadership style. It seems valid to assume that the

situational leadership style is probably the endpoint where all models and styles can and should

come together to effectively guide projects towards success.

The conclusions and recommendations at the end of this research are a short reflection of the

findings and how these findings can be used and interpreted.


4 | P a g e

2 Leadership

2.1 Introduction

Leadership is an important element for the success of an organization. There are many different

definitions of leadership. The right definition of leadership is probably dictated by the context

wherein it is being used. Several scholars defined leadership as the process where others are

influenced and guided in ways that make them do what needs to be done under certain

circumstances (Yukl, 2010; Bass, 1985).

What makes a good leader is still not very clear and different factors contribute to the execution

of good leadership. Leadership studies started with the analysis of certain traits that would

guarantee that someone could become a good leader. Especially in the first half of the twentieth

century many trait studies were conducted. The conclusion was that there is not a basic set of

characteristics that defines a good leader. An important element often not included were the

intervening variables interrupting the causal chain towards leadership outcomes (Yukl, 2010;

Mullins, 2005).

Leadership can be related to projects because projects are managed and management can be done

through some type of leadership style. Different studies show that the leadership style chosen has

some influence on the success of the project (Bonnici, 2011; Jiang, 2014). It seems reasonable to

assume that every project need its own leadership style and that every situation should be

approached accordingly (Turner & Muller, 2006).

Emotional intelligence is important to be able to grasp and understand what projects and teams

need under certain circumstances. Empathy with stakeholders, teams and people related to the

project is essential to choose the proper leadership style at the right moment, the right time and for

a specific project (Goleman, 2000). Emotional intelligence can be the glue that brings leadership

and projects together on the road to success (Clarke & Howell, 2009).


5 | P a g e

3 Leadership models

3.1 History

The study of management and leadership today has a long history. In earlier days the line between

the manager and leader was very thin if not absent at all. You had leaders who managed

subordinates which carried out the tasks given. These leaders had certain characteristics that made

them a leader and the ones being led lacked these skills and hence the difference between natural

leaders and natural followers was born (Bikinshaw & Crainer, 2004; Bernard, 1948; Higgs, 2003).

It was when the leadership characteristics did not meet the expected leadership outcomes when the

traits and skills approach of leadership studies began to change towards other dimensions. From

the moment this shift occurred, scholars began to agree with each other that there was not one best

leadership style that fit the gap of every organizational problem (Pardey, 2007; Yukl, 2010;

Wadell, 1994). The same can be said for projects, which in nature are different from each other

and therefor need their own specific leadership style (Turner & Muller, 2006)

3.2 Models

After the agreement that leadership traits and characteristics did not fit the bill of leadership

expectations, scholars began to search for different styles and models of leadership. After being

able to agree on some models and styles, people started using it varied in different situations. It

seemed that different organizations, market areas, people and situations often needed a different

leadership model or style to be efficient (Rafferty & Griffin, 2004; Stone & Russel, 2004; Bernard,

1948).

Some well analyzed basic models are described by different scholars. From out the Management

grid of Blake & Mouton (1964) can be explained the differentiation between the tasks oriented

transactional style and the people oriented transformational style; which formed the two resulting

key factors of their research.


6 | P a g e

Related to people but more on the group and team level are the group development elements of

Tuckman (1965) where the four different areas of his model can be linked to the Continuum model

of Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958).

Based on the previous models more were developed in the years after. But the main differentiation

was already set in those earlier years. You had basically two main orientations: task focused and

people focused. The variants formulated in other theories all are in some ways extractions and

complementary to these two main areas of leadership.

3.3 Leadership styles

While at first the study about leadership styles all seem to predict that there existed one best style

for all situations, progressing research showed that this was not the case. Simple because of the

many leadership and project failures based on this theory.

Later models were based on the assumption that the effective leadership style depended more on

the type of organization, project or situation. Several different leadership styles arose from this

assumption (Adeniyi Adewale, 2007). This acknowledgement of effective leadership style based

on specific needs is very useful for project managers, because every project has its own

characteristics and demands.

3.3.1 Situational, transactional and transformational

A personal leadership style based on the situation is called situational leadership. Successful

leaders are often able to adapt to the situation at hand and change their leadership style accordingly

(Yukl, 2010; Bertocci, 2009). For a project manager this is a must have characteristic combined

with emotional intelligence (Golemand, 200) for flexibility in communication with stakeholders

and team members.

Bonnici (2011) described some ways how to create the right leadership style based on different

characteristics and demands from the environment, situation and the person doing the leading. He


7 | P a g e

emphasized breaking free from old autocratic models and create a personal style fitting the context

being led. This is comparable to the situational leadership style mentioned by Blanchard (2007),

where the style is adjusted to the situation.

3.3.2 Servant leadership

Servant leadership is strongly related to transformational leadership where it tries to connect with

the higher emotional and motivational levels of subordinates and members of teams. As the name

implies it tries to serve the people being led (Yukl, 2010; Bass, 2006). It is less compatible with

the old style of project management like waterfall where more often the management style is

dictating and transactional (Turner, 2009; Kessler & Schweitzer, 2007). It is a natural fit for the

more modern agile approach like Scrum for example, where the role of Scrum Master is defined

as being a servant leader and coach of the team (Miller, 2013).

3.4 Leadership within projects

3.4.1 Management vs. Leadership

Management and leadership are two different things while many people think they are the same.

Recognizing this distinction is important to construct the right perception around the project

manager. There are similarities between the manager and leader but both roles require a different

set of competencies. It is not common that these sets of requirements are found in one person

(Aswathappa, 2010).

Both roles however are involved in deciding what needs to be done by guiding people to reach the

goals and vision. The way they do this is often very different. Managers cope with complexity on

an operational level by planning and setting directions for the short terms. Leaders operate on a

more strategic level and manage change through setting directions and developing a vision for the

long term. They formulate the strategies needed to achieve that vision (Bennis & Nanus, 1997;

Adair, 2007).


8 | P a g e

An interesting view on these sets of traits come from John Kotter (1990) who proposed that indeed

leadership and management are different but both depend on each other. Added to this he describes

that when an organization is able to create a synergy between these roles and knows how to manage

their differences, it can operate within complex and changing business environments (Kotter,

1990).

This relationship between leadership, management and project management leadership is studied

by Turner & Muller (2006) where they link the leadership style with the project type. Some

projects need a more direct and transactional style of leadership and others a more people focus

transformational style of leadership. In fact, many projects demand a situational style of leadership

because of the changing environment and requirements (Turner & Muller, 2006).

Related to the research of Turner & Muller (2006) is the conclusion in a study about the

relationship between leadership style and project success from Jiang (2014). Jiang states that

leadership is critical to project success and “influences the performance through various patterns

like the collaboration of teamwork, management of source and communication with both followers

and clients.” Choosing the right leadership or project management style for a specific project seems

to be an important aspect of project performance and project success.

3.5 Project Frameworks

There are different project frameworks with their own specific characteristics. In that sense they

are comparable with the differences of teams, organizations and projects which all have their own

characteristics and need a management and leadership style that fits with the specific needs of the

moment.

Different styles are needed based on the formality and flexibility of the project (Walker, 2015).

The research of Turner & Muller (2006) fit well with the study of Walker (2015) and they

complement each other in this respect. Indeed it seems that different leadership and management

styles are needed based on the type of project and that its success is dependent on the choices

made.


9 | P a g e

3.5.1 Waterfall vs Agile

There are to main types among the many different project frameworks in the field. They are

opposite of each other in their approach to the project management and leadership styles used to

guide the projects. Also are they different in the way how teams are formed and managed. In that

sense these framework form valuable examples for this research. They are called Waterfall and

Agile.

Waterfall is static in its project approach with not much freedom in differentiating from the norm.

It consists out of steps and from start to finish they are done sequentially without the flexibility to

return to previous stages (Turner, 2009; Maylor, 2010). It has a formal and rational approach to

the project itself, but also towards the teams executing the tasks. The teams are more adjusted to

the stages of the project instead of putting the members and their interaction at the center of

attention (Kessler & Sweitzer, 2007).

This is very different in agile projects, where the team is the center of the universe. Contrarily to

waterfall inside Agile often the more transformational and servant leadership style is chosen. That

is a direct result of the role definition of the members within an agile team, where the project

manager is more a coach who serves.

Often automatically the direct transactional leadership style is chosen in waterfall projects which

increases its formality even more (Zastrov, 2016). But when an emotional intelligent leader or

project manager is able to sense the needs of the team and fits that into the context of the stage

(Goleman, 2000), then perhaps many of the pitfalls of waterfall projects could be avoided?

This conclusion is supported by a study of Yang et al. (2009) who compared the leadership style

being used in traditional and agile projects. His research seems to indicate that leaders of agile

teams used the transformational leadership style more often to successfully finish the project

compared to managers in waterfall projects. This means that another study is in line with the

research of Turner & Muller (2006), Walker (2015) and they all support the conclusion of Jiang

(2014) that the leadership style chosen is critical for the success of projects and depend on its

context.


10 | P a g e

4 Motivation

Just choosing the right leadership style for the project or organization is not enough. People on

projects need also be motivated and often the different motivational needs are as diverse as there

are stakeholders on the project. There are many theories around motivation but a single one that

fits all situations does not exist. This is in line with not having one leadership style or set of traits

that is a success for all situations (Yukl, 2010; Bertocci, 2009). Perhaps there is also something

like situational motivation?

4.1.1 Leadership vs Management

Management and leadership both have a different role in creating and maintaining the motivation

of teams. Leadership is more inspirational in nature. It acts on the higher emotional levels of

subordinates and tries to motivate people to do that extra step; going the eight miles. (Carnall,

2007; Hayes, 2010). The leadership approach to reach goals can be very different, from autocratic

through consultative towards group and people oriented (Isakesen & Tidd, 2006). The different

leadership styles can be used accordingly.

Often management is in the range of autocratic and transactional. Tasks need to be done and the

management style to reach goals is therefor in many cases operational and task oriented. The

relationship with the higher emotional and motivational levels of subordinates is with management

less important. Lately however literature is making a shift towards management with a human

oriented flavor creeping towards a more transformational and servant leadership model (Wellin,

2016).


11 | P a g e

4.1.2 Motivational levels and needs

The search for the all fit motivational theory led to the definition of different levels of motivation

which could be useful for managers and leaders. It is useful to mention the steps of Maslow (1954),

because he defined different dimensions of motivation upon which others could be laid. These

dimension are also called the hierarchy of needs. There are five basic layers.

Figure 4.1 – The hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1943)

Alongside these layers are three others recognized by scholars and related to the hierarchy of

Maslow (1943). These three levels of motivation are; -the individual level, related to biological

aspects and the lower levels of the hierarchy of needs, -the group and communication level about

belonging, being accepted and commitment and therefor related to the middle layers of the

hierarchy of needs and finally –the organizational or workspace level, also related to the middle

layers of the hierarchy of needs (Herzberg, 1966; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Maslow, 1954).


12 | P a g e

5 Teams and Groups

Teams and groups are very important within project management. They are the followers of the

leader and manager and without them there is nothing to be led. Reaching deadlines and applying

requirements is impossible without the people executing the work. This makes the part of

leadership and management concerned with groups and teams an important element.

People working together to achieve a common goal and having shared tasks can be called a team.

Often the members have a different skillset and work on different tasks. (Senior, 2006; Lawler).

The working environment of projects is intrinsic complex because of its uniqueness and the

conditions for team-forming are often difficult and out of the ordinary (Smith, 2001).

Functional teams are important within project management. They are focused on specific

functional tasks of project areas. There is a shift towards multi-functional teams with a closer

connection between project teams. The increasing complexity of projects forces the teams to be

more global and divers. Therefor parts of the teams are often formed out of sub-groups from

different organizations (Maylor, 2010).

5.1 Successful and unsuccessful teams

A successful team partly depends on the type of leadership and management. The practical

approach of situational leadership can be very useful. The manager or leader must be able to build

on the ‘readiness’ of the team members and choose the right leadership style based on its outcomes.

As a result of this relationship with task behavior it can be determined what the best fit is for the

specific team (Carnall, 2007).

The stability of a successful team is constant over time and the members know what needs to be

done and find the work satisfactory. The norms of the team are shared and there is a positive

balance between the definition of tasks and personal needs led by an emotional intelligent leader

(Goleman, 200). This is where the balance between transactional and transformational leadership

is most useful. Situational leadership is the tool that fits these leadership styles to the team, project

and situation being led (Belbin, 2012, Kouze & Posner, 2007).


13 | P a g e

This is an indication that the right mixture of transformational and transactional leadership should

be chosen to make a team successful. The situational type of leadership as described by Blanchard

(2007) and Bonnici (2010) could be the glue to attach these different styles of leadership to the

context of the organization, project and team. With the emotional intelligence of Goleman (2000)

the project manager or leader should be able to determine which motivational needs are useful for

the situation at hand. This approach brings the different theories together and makes them more

useful than used on their own.

Another important element that makes a team successful is how the team members feel and its

translation into the energy of the team. The positive energy of the team will also increase the

motivation of the team on all levels of the hierarchy of needs from Maslow (1943).

If the energy is somehow disturbed the first motivational stage, the biological one, will not be

satisfied and the team-members get stuck in wasting precious energy on primary needs like safety,

belonging and area defense (Mullinsm, 2005; Sherwin, 2012). When members on the other hand

are committed to each other and the team as a whole, then this will increase the chance to become

a successful team (Straub, 1998).

5.2 Teams development and cohesion

It is important for the manager or leader to increase the commitment of the members of a team

towards the shared goals, tasks and vision. Followers should have the feeling that the team also

belongs to them; that they feel individually connected. Teams themselves go through certain stages

of development and growth. Common stages are forming, storming, norming and performing

(Turner, 2009; Mullins, 2005; Pardey, 2007).

These stages can short be describes as; -the team-members come together and form a team, -the

members are searching for the roles they should perform (storming), -the roles and tasks are more

clear and divided among the team-members (norming) and –from-out this settled situation the team

can really perform and the team-members are fitting into the team-structure.


14 | P a g e

It depends on the type of project how these stages will develop because in waterfall hierarchical

projects the roles are more dictated upon the team where in Agile projects the teams are often self-

managed with more personal freedom and responsibilities. Many people still feel comfortable by

the more linear approach of waterfall because of the fact that they do not have to go through the

storming phase to ‘earn’ their place in the team (Bowes, 2014).


15 | P a g e

6 Conclusion and recommendations

What this research made clear is that there seems to be a tight relationship between the leadership

style chosen and the success of a project. The reason for this is partly that every project is unique

in its setting, its content, its stakeholders and team members. Because of this vast array of possible

project constellations, there cannot be just one leadership style that is compatible with them all.

Furthermore this study clarified in some ways that teams on their own are entities in need of a

specific approach. Because most projects consist out of teams, it is safe to assume and conclude

that this is yet another element that emphasizes the need for a flexible leadership style based on

the situation at hand.

Projects are as diverse as there are teams and both need their own motivational inspiration. This

research shed some light on the matter of team and stakeholder motivation to increase the positive

energy of the whole and in doing so make project success a more feasible goal. All these elements

play an important role for the project manager, who should analyze every new project with an

emotional intelligent empathic state of mind.

It is recommended that above all the situation and context of the project should lead the choice of

which leadership style is the best fit to be used. Although many projects still use the directive and

transactional style of leadership; also within these settings the people focused transformational,

situational and servant leadership approach could be beneficial and increase the overall quality and

chance of project success.


16 | P a g e

7 List of references

Adair, J., 2007. Leadership for Innovation: how to organize team creativity and harvest ideas. 2 ed.

London: Kogan Age.

Adeniyi Adewale, M., 2007. Effective Leadership Management. 1 ed. Bloomington: Author House.

Aswathappa, K., 2010. Management: Concepts, Practice & Cases. 1 ed. Columbus: McGraw Hill

Education.

Bass, B., 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. 1 ed. New York: Free Press.

Bass, M. & Riggio, R., 2006. Transformational Leadership. 1 ed. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Belbin, 2012. Belbin Team Roles. [Online]

Available at: http://www.belbin.com

[Accessed 8 7 2016].

Bennis, W. & Nanus, B., 1997. Leaders, Strategies for taking charge. 1 ed. New York: Harper Business.

Bernard, C., 1948. Organization and Management. 1 ed. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Bertocci, D., 2009. Leadership in Organizations. 1 ed. Plymouth: University Press of America.

Birkinshaw, J. & Crainer, S., 2004. Leadership the Sven-Goran Eriksson way: How to turn your team into

winners. 1 ed. London: Wiley.

Blake, R. & Mouton, J., 1964. The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence.. 1 ed. Houston:

Gulf Publishing Co..

Bonnici, C. A., 2011. Creating a Successful Leadership style. 1 ed. New York: Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers.

Bowes, J., 2014. Agile vs Waterfall: Comparing project management methods. [Online]

Available at: https://manifesto.co.uk/agile-vs-waterfall-comparing-project-management-

methodologies/

[Accessed 18 8 2016].

Carnall, C., 2007. Managing Change in organizations. 5 ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Clarke, N. & Howell, R., 2009. Emotional Intelligence and Projects. 1 ed. Pensylvania: Project

Management Institute.

D, G., 2000. Working with emotional intelligence. 1 ed. New York: Bantam Books.

Heil, G., Bennis, W. & Stephens, D., 2000. Douglas McGregor, Revisited: Managing the Human Side of

the Enterprise. 1 ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.


17 | P a g e

Herzberg, F., 1966. Work and The Nature of Man. 1 ed. New York: Staples Press.

Holbeche, L., 2006. Understanding Change. 1 ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Juanjuan, J., 2014. The Study of the Relationship between Leadership style and Project Success.

American Journal of Trade and Plicy, 1(1), pp. 51-55.

Kessler, C. & Sweitzer, J., 2007. Outside-in software development. 1 ed. New York: IBM Press.

Kotter, J., 1990. A Force for Change: How Ledareship Differs from Management. 1 ed. New York: Free

Press.

Kouze, M. & Posner, B., 2007. The Leadership Challange. 4 ed. San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Maslow, A., 1943. A Theory of human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), pp. 370-96.

Maslow, A., 1954. Motivation and Personality. 1 ed. New York: Harper.

Maylor, H., 2010. Project Management. 4 ed. Essex: Pearson.

Miller, G., 2013. Agile Problems, Challanges & Failures. New Orleans, PMI.

Mullins, L., 2005. Management and organizational behavior. 7 ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Pardey, D., 2007. Introducing Leadership. 1 ed. Burlington: Butterwortyh-Heinemann.

Rafferty, A. & Griffin, M., 2004. Dimensions of transformational Leadership: Conceptual and Emperical

Extensions. Leadership Quarterly, Issue 15, pp. 329-354.

Senior, B. & Fleming, J., 2006. Organizational Change. 3 ed. New York: Prentice Hall.

Smith, G. R., 2001. Making the Team. IEE Review, 47(5), pp. 33-36.

Stone, G. & Russel, B., 2004. Transformational vs Servant Leadership: a difference in leader focus. The

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 4(25), pp. 349-361.

Tannenbaum, R. & Schmidt, W., 1973. How to Choose a Leadership Pattern. Harvard Business Review,

36(2), pp. 95-101.

Tuckman, B., 1965. Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), pp. 384-99.

Turner, R. J. & Muller, R., 2006. Matching the Project Manager’s Leadership Style with the Project Type.

International Hournal of Project Management, Volume 25, pp. 21-32.

Wadell, D., 1994. A Situational Ledareship Model for Military Leaders. Airpower Journal, 8(3), p. 29.

Walker, A., 2015. Project Management in Construction. 6 ed. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.

Wellin, M., 2016. Managing the Psychological Contract. 2 ed. New York: Routledge.


18 | P a g e

Yukl, G., 2010. Leadership in Organizations. 7 ed. New York: Pearson.

Zastrov, R., 2016. Dive into Agile Software Development. 1 ed. Munich: BookRix GmbH & Co. KG.

project management, leadership and skills: planning and ... · project management, leadership and...

Documents