subject psychology paper no and title paper no 12

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

PSYCHOLOGY Paper No 12. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

Module No 24. Basic Approaches to Leadership

Subject PSYCHOLOGY

Paper No and Title Paper No 12. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

Module No and Title Module No 24. Basic Approaches to Leadership

Module Tag PSY_P12_M24

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Learning Outcomes

2. Introduction

3. Trait Theories

4. Behavioral Theories

4.1 Ohio State Studies

4.2 University of Michigan Studies

4.3 Managerial Grid

4.4 Scandinavian Studies

4.5 Assessment of Behavioral Theories

5. Contingency Theories

5.1 Fiedler Model

5.2 Cognitive Resource Theory

5.3 Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Theory

5.4 Path Goal Theory

5.5 Assessment of Contingency Theories

6. Summary

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



1. Learning Outcomes

After studying this module, you shall be able to

Define The term Leadership

Describe the various approaches to leadership

Know the nature of leadership

Analyze the differences between various approaches

Identify the shortcomings of various approaches

2. INTRODUCTION

Leadership is one of the most important topic studied under the field of Organizational Behavior.

This is due to the fact that a leader is central to the growth and development of any organization.

Not only this, the leaders also play a crucial role in shaping the organization in a particular way

which draws upon their leadership style and qualities. The competencies and skills of a leader are

deeply studied and researched upon in literature. In order to allow us to understand the concept of

leadership, a number of theories have been proposed by various researchers. Theories are nothing

but conceptual frameworks propounded to delineate the various aspects of a concept. Leadership

too has been seen and studied from many different perspectives. These are the different

approaches to leadership which are discussed in this module.

Following are the most important approaches to leadership:

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Fig1: Basic Approaches to Leadership

3. TRAIT THEORIES

Trait theories basically focus upon the personal qualities and characteristics of individuals which

differentiate between leaders and non-leaders. Trait theories are called so because they are

primarily concerned with identifying those traits which have been historically seen in leaders. The

basic premise of these theories is that leaders are born and not made. This means effective leaders

can be ‘chosen’ from among available individuals to assume leadership responsibilities if their

traits are identified. They possess certain qualities which set them apart from followers as well as

ineffective leaders. The leaders have been described through terms such as ‘courageous’,

‘enthusiastic’, ‘charismatic’, etc.

However, the major shortcoming of these theories was that a set of traits universally applicable to

all leaders was not identified, although those traits were identified which were regularly

associated with successful and effective leaders. These included qualities like ambition and

energy, a desire to lead, honesty and integrity, self-confidence, intelligence, and job-relevant

knowledge. Another limitation of these theories was that they failed to identify those traits which

would predict leadership in all kinds of situations.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



4. BEHAVIORAL THEORIES

In contrast to the trait theories, the behavioral theories propose that specific behaviors

differentiate leaders from non-leaders. Whereas the trait theories propose that the leaders can be

‘selected’ based on their traits, the behavioral theories propose that the leaders have to be

‘trained’ in the behaviors which form effective leaders. In other words, the behavioral theories

contend that there are specific behaviors which help in identifying leaders. Some of the most

popular behavioral theories are discussed below:

4.1 Ohio State Studies

The behavioral theories research at Ohio State University was initiated in the late 1940s. The

researchers intended to identify different dimensions of leader behavior as described by

employees. They started with over 1000 dimensions but ultimately narrowed them down to two,

which were:

4.1.1 Initiating Structure

This dimension dealt with the leader’s behavior intended at structuring work as well as inter-

personal relationships at work. It describes the tendency of the leader to place higher importance

upon well-structured roles, work relationships and goals in comparison with personalized

interaction. Attainment of goals is deemed more important by the leader than inter-personal

relationships.

4.1.2 Consideration

This dimension characterizes the leader’s concern for mutual trust, respect and regard for

subordinates’ feelings. A leader high on consideration in comparison with initiating structure is

more likely to be friendly, more personal in his/her interactions with co-workers and subordinates

and to be more supportive in general.

Subsequent research on these lines has revealed that those leaders who score high on both

initiating structure as well as consideration dimensions (also called “high-high” leaders) were

more effective as compared to those who were rated low on either or both of these dimensions.

Thus, Ohio State Studies were the first to point out the importance of both task and human

dimensions in assessing leadership, although these studies failed to include situational factors as

important in the study of leadership.

4.2 University of Michigan Studies

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



At just about the same time as the Ohio State Studies, leadership studies were carried out at the

University of Michigan to identify leader behaviors which were seemingly related to performance

effectiveness. These studies were known as Michigan studies. Just like the Ohio State Studies, the

Michigan studies also came out with two dimensions of leader behavior. They were:

4.2.1 Employee-oriented

This dimension was associated with those leaders who were concerned with inter-personal

relations with the subordinates, their needs and well-being. They brought a component of

compassion in work.

4.2.2 Production-oriented

Another dimension identified was production-oriented. Production-oriented leaders, as the term

itself suggests, were those whose primary concern revolved around attainment of goals, and

getting the job done by the subordinates. They focused upon the work component rather than the

inter-personal component when it came to their approach towards co-workers and subordinates.

The researchers at Michigan found that the employee-oriented leaders were more successful in

achieving higher group productivity and job satisfaction as compared with the production-

oriented leaders.

4.3 Managerial Grid

Managerial Grid was proposed by R. R. Blake and J. S. Mouton in 1964 as a two-dimensional

nine-by-nine matrix of leadership style. It has also been referred to as the ‘Leadership Grid’.

Blake and Mouton represented leader behavior along the two dimensions of “Concern for

people” on the x-axis and “Concern for production” on y-axis. Scores on each axis range from 1

(Low) to 9 (High). Since it is a nine-by-nine matrix, it created 81 different cells, each

representing a different leadership style.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Fig2: Managerial Grid

It results in following leadership styles:

Impoverished Style: It is represented by (1, 1) cell. These types of leaders have low concern for

both people and production.

Country Club Style: It is represented by (1, 9) cell. Here, the concern for people is the highest but

the concern for production is very low.

Produce or perish Style: It is represented by (9, 1) cell. It is also called dictatorial style. With a

high concern for production, this type of leaders have a very low concern for people and hence,

end up being too rigid for achieving targets.

Middle-of-the-road-Style: It is represented by (5, 5) cell. Leaders with this style have a balance

approach towards both concern for people and concern for production.

Team Style: It is represented by (9, 9) cell. Here, concern for people and concern for production

are both high.

4.4 Scandinavian Studies

The above mentioned studies were carried out between late 1940s and early 1960s. These studies,

initiated by researchers in Finland and Sweden, have been trying to re-interpret the dimensions

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



delineated by the Ohio and Michigan studies in the context of

present organizational scenario. These studies have reassessed

whether there are only two dimensions which capture leader behavior. Alternatively, they have

proposed a new dimension which focused on development-oriented behavior of the leaders

relevant in today’s world. These leaders have an innovative approach and strive to generate new

and creative ideas. They value experimentation and initiate change when required. The

Scandinavian studies propose that in today’s dynamic world, the leaders have to be development-

oriented in order to be effective.

There has been much support for the development-oriented leader behavior as a separate

dimension.

4.5 Assessment of Behavioral Theories

Behavioral studies were a different class of studies which studied leadership for more than just

traits. These studies included a crucial aspect to the leadership study, i.e. behavioral component.

This was a new development but still these studies were not completely free from limitations and

shortcomings.

The major reason for this has been the fact that the behavioral studies have not found strong and

consistent relationship between leader behavior and the performance of the group. A serious flaw

of the trait theories, i.e. the absence of consideration of situational factors, has been repeated in

these studies.

5. CONTINGENCY THEORIES

Both the trait and behavioral studies failed to capture the influence of situational factors on

leadership effectiveness. This shortcoming was addressed by the contingency theories which

recognized for the first time that assessing leadership effectiveness required more than identifying

leader traits or behaviors. These theories focused upon the situational factors and their influence.

In other words, these theories suggested that the leader’s effectiveness was dependent on how

he/she responds and acts in different kinds of situations. Some leaders are more effective in high-

pressure situations while others are made for more relaxed and stress-free situations. Some of the

leaders are capable of modifying their leadership style according to the changing demands of

situations. Thus, these theories also addressed the leaders’ quality of being flexible.

Five of the most successful and well-accepted contingency theories have been discussed below:

5.1 Fiedler Model

This contingency model for leadership was developed by Fred Fiedler in 1967. The Fiedler

Contingency Model addressed the need to match leader’s style of interaction to the degree of

control and influence given to the leader by the situation. According to Fiedler, the leadership

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



style of an individual is fixed and he developed the Least

Preferred Coworker (LPC) Questionnaire to identify whether a

leader is task-oriented or relationship-oriented.

Fiedler stated that it is required to identify the leadership style of the leader as well as to assess

the situation to understand whether or not it suits that style. If a situation demands a task-oriented

leader, then in order to carry out leader functions effectively, either a task-oriented leader has to

be selected or the situation has to be modified to suit the style of a relationship-oriented leader.

Fiedler presented three contingency dimensions in order to assess how much control a leader has

in a situation. These are:

i. Leader-member relations: These can be either good or bad.

ii. Task Structure: The task structure can be either high or low.

iii. Position Power: It can be either strong or weak.

A leader has maximum control in a situation when the leader-member relations are good, task

structure is high and the position power is strong. These dimensions define a situation, which is

then matched with the leadership style to assess leadership effectiveness.

Fiedler concluded that when the situations are either too favorable (high control situation) or too

unfavorable (low control situation), task-oriented leaders generally performed better. On the

contrary, the relationship-oriented leaders performed well in moderately favorable situations,

which offer moderate control to the leader.

Fig3: Fiedler’s Contingency Model

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Despite being a powerful model, Fiedler’s Contingency Model

was criticized on the grounds that the LPC scores were

unstable and the three contingency dimensions were difficult to assess.

5.2 Cognitive Resource Theory

The Contingency model proposed by Fiedler was further extended by him along with Joe Garcia

in 1987. This was called the Cognitive Resource Theory. This theory focused on the role of stress

in situational unfavorableness, as well as addressed the influence of leader’s intelligence and

experience on his/her reaction to stress on job. It is difficult for the leaders to think rationally

when under stress. Fiedler and Garcia found that a leader’s intellectual abilities correlate

positively with performance under low stress but negatively under high stress. On the other hand,

the experience of a leader showed negative correlation with performance under low stress but a

positive correlation under high stress. In other words, the cognitive resource theory suggested that

intelligent leaders were found to be more effective in low stress situations while highly

experienced leaders were found to be more effective in high stress situations.

Cognitive Resource Theory has received strong research support in its favor.

5.3 Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)

This theory was developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard (1969). Keeping in line with the

very basic fact of leadership that it is the followers who accept or reject a leader, Situational

Leadership Theory has focused upon the role of followers in leadership effectiveness.

Hersey and Blanchard have argued that the right leadership style is contingent or dependent on

the level of followers’ readiness. They argue that the leader should match his/her style with the

ability and willingness of the subordinates. This theory is also called as the life cycle theory of

leadership because the needs of maturity of subordinates move in stages in the form of a cycle.

Willingness refers to the psychological maturity of the subordinates which can vary from person

to person.

Based on this premise, four situations may arise and SLT has identified four different leader-

behaviors for each of them:

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Fig4: Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory

Telling Style

It focuses on directive leadership style. This is appropriate for the situations where subordinates

have low maturity level, i.e. they neither willing nor able to perform.

Selling Style

Here, the leader behavior is both supportive and directive. It is appropriate for the subordinates

who are willing to perform but are unable to do so.

Participating Style

In this leadership style, the leader is more supportive than directive. It is suitable when the

subordinates are able but unwilling to perform.

Delegating Style

This style is low on both supportive and directive behavior. When subordinates are both willing

and able to perform, they hardly require any leadership support.

5.4 Path-Goal Theory

This theory was proposed by Robert House (1971). According to this theory, the leader should

assume the responsibility to guide his/her subordinates on the path to their goals. In other words,

the leader should provide the subordinates with all the necessary information, support, and other

resources which are required by the followers to achieve their goals. Therefore, the two major

roles of the leader are to create a goal orientation and to improve the path towards the goal so as

to facilitate attainment of goals.

The path-goal theory outlines two types of situational or contingency variables:

Environmental Contingency factors: These are those factors which are associated with the

characteristics of work environment and are beyond the control of employees. These primarily

include task structure, formal authority system, and work group.

Personal Characteristics of Employees: These factors are associated with the employees

themselves and partially determine how they respond to leader’s behavior. These include locus of

control, experience, and perceived ability.

This theory identifies four leadership behaviors in order to highlight which leadership behaviors

should be assumed by the leaders in response to changing situations so as to maximize

effectiveness. They are as follows:

Directive: This leadership behavior is aimed at giving specific guidance and clarifying

performance expectations. It is more successful in situations where tasks are ambiguous or

stressful.

Supportive: Supportive leaders are friendly, show concern for subordinates as people and for the

needs of followers. This leadership style produces effective results when the tasks are well-

structured.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Participative: Participative leader behavior includes

consultation with followers and uses their suggestions for

making decisions. This style is more successful when the followers have an internal locus of

control.

Achievement-oriented: This kind of leader behavior emphasizes excellence in subordinates.

These leaders set challenging goals.

This theory suggests that leaders are flexible and that the same leaders can display any or all of

these leadership styles.

[Source: P. Robbins, S; Judge, T.A. and Sanghi, S. (2010) Essentials of Organizational

Behaviour. 10th Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall]

Fig5: Path-Goal Theory

5.5 Assessment of Contingency Theories

The contingency theories addressed a major lacuna which was left behind by trait and behavioral

theories, that of the influence of situational factors on leadership effectiveness. But these theories

too have certain shortcomings which should be taken care of. For e.g. contingency theories over-

emphasize the importance of situational factors without giving due consideration to the followers.

Also, these theories have not addressed the issue of differential treatment meted out to different

followers by the same leader. In other words, it is assumed that the leaders treat all their followers

equally, which is not always true in practical situations.

6. Summary

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Different theories have been propounded by different

researchers in order to understand the concept of

leadership. They can primarily be classified as Trait theories, Behavioral theories, and

Contingency theories.

Trait theories focus upon the personal traits and qualities of individuals which deem them

fit or unfit to be leaders.

Behavioral theories identified types of leader behaviors in order to assess leadership

effectiveness. Major behavioral theories are Ohio State Studies, Michigan Studies,

Managerial Grid and Scandinavian Studies.

Contingency theories focused upon the influence of situational factors on leadership

effectiveness. Major contingency theories are Fiedler Contingency Model, Cognitive

Resource Theory, Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT), and

House’s Path-Goal Theory.

subject psychology paper no and title paper no 12

Documents