2. Classical Leadership Theories and New Leadership School Flashcards
Leadership Theories - Timeline (General Overview)
Trait/Great Man Theories - Who is a leader and what are his traits?
Behavioural Theories - Which is the most effective leadership behaviour?
Situational Theories - Which leadership behaviour is successful in which situation?
New Leadership School - Transactional and Transformational Lship Styles
A. 1950s - Trait Theories
a. “Great Man” Theories (Stogdill) (back then)
b. Trait Theories Today
–> “Big Five Personality Traits” Model
c. Trait Theory Summary (Wrong, Right?)
a. Main Question: “Which personal leader attributes determine success?”
Attributes: personality traits, stability in diff. env. (abilities [intelligence, …], attainments [success in school, …], responsibility [reliability, …], participation [social activity, …], status [socioecon. popularity])
Emiprical findings:
- moderate correlation btw attributes and lship success
- partially contradictory findings reg. relevance of examined attributes
b. See photo
note: agreeableness may have neg. effect on result-orientedness, but no correlation with firm performance
c. Basic Assumption of Trait Theory proven wrong –> lship can be learnt
In the selection process of leaders, personality and intelligence tests still imp.
But: prognostic quality limited with complex tasks, such as a leadership role
A. 1950s - Trait Theories
d. Strengths and Weaknesses
S:
- Intuitively understandable
- Long research tradition
- Partially supported by empirical research (cf. “big five” theory)
W:
- Unidimensional explanation of leader behav. + success through personality traits + other attributes
- Prominent leaders exhibit different traits
- Disregard of situation, role and task
factors
- Development of lship competencies not considered
B. 1960s - Behavioural Theories
a. Continuum of Leadership Styles (Tannenbaum & Schmidt, 7 columns)
Continuum of Leadership Styles (Tannenbaum & Schmidt
B. 1960s - Behavioural Theories
b. Ohio State Studies (Fleishman, Hemphil)
1. Distinction (table with 5 aspects)
2. Matrix (Consideration vs. Initiating Structure)
3. Results
Ohio State Studies (Fleishman, Hemphil)
1. See photo, upper half
2. See photo, lower half
- Results:
- Both lship styles: moderately pos. relationships with team/organisational performance
- Relationship orientation on ø more strongly related w/ indicators of leadership success (e.g., employee motivation, satisfaction with leader, perceived leader effectiveness)
- Relationship orientation esp. more strongly related to employee job satisfaction
B. 1960s - Behavioural Theories
b. Ohio State Studies (Fleishman, Hemphil)
(to recall: Distinction and Matrix)
4. Strengths vs. Weaknesses
S:
- Distinction of two essential lship styles derived from organisational practice
- Empirical research proves effectiveness of both leadership styles regarding different success indicators
- Studies indicate that the combination of both leadership styles has a positive effect on leadership effectiveness
W:
- Rather weak implications of the model due to the conceptual breadth of the two categories
- Focus excl. on lship style, no consideration of situational or follower aspects
B. 1960s - Behavioural Theories
c. Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton)
1. Grid
2. Strengths & Weaknesses
Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton)
1. See Photo
9,9 most effective lship style
- S:
- Integration of both dimensions; consideration and initiating structure: Interplay between 2 dimensions considered
- Intuitively understandable
- Shared understanding and vocabulary in business world
W:
- Inconsistent research findings
- Match between leader behav +
situational characteristics not clear
- What skills do leaders need to balance task and relational leadership behavs over time?
B. 1960s - Behavioural Theories
d. Strengths & Weaknesses
S:
- Considers the behavs of leaders and what they do
- Leaders can assess their actions and determine how they want to develop alternative/additional leadership styles
- Implication for organisational practice: “Adequate” leadership behav learnable (–> leadership training)
W:
- Lship style as single determinant of leadership success may be oversimplification of the complexity of everyday leadership
- Neglects role of situation and organisational structure in measuring lship success
C. 1970s and 1980s - Situational Theories
a. Situational Leadership Model (Hersey & Blanchard)
1. Model
2. Suggestions for Leaders
Which leadership behaviour is successful in which situation?
- Situational Leadership Model (Hersey & Blanchard) - There four leadership styles which are most effective in the adequate situation: see photo
- Suggestions for Leaders (self-explaining from model)
- Use the whole spectrum of lship types
- Analyse your empls’ competencies and potentials precisely
- Differentiate lship behav: Leader req to practice all 4 lship styles in parallel and adapt to the resp. situation (i.e., depending on the maturity level of the followers)
- Analyse causes for the qualification and motivation levels of your employees
- Invest into your empls’ maturity in order to be better able to delegate
C. 1970s and 1980s - Situational Theories
a. Situational Leadership Model (Hersey & Blanchard)
3. Strengths & Weaknesses
S:
- Incorporation of situation (in which lship occurs)
- Frequently used in practice
W:
- High demands set on leaders: must be able to carry out 4 different styles simultaneously
- Leaders expected to have no preference for one lship style
- Classification of empls into 4 quadrants too rigid
- Empl. maturity only situational factor taken into account
D. New Leadership School
a. First Considerations
Classical research on leadership leads to dead end
- Limited predictive power of leadership success
- Primary focus on employees’ extrinsic motivation
- Neglect of change in employees’ work-related values, attitudes and expectations
- Marginalisation of leaders’ influence
–> Development of a new approach:
- Emphasis on leader‘s charisma
- Focus on emotions
- Goals: Stimulate intrinsic motivation + Personal growth of employees
- New terms:
Transformational / charismatic / visionary leadership
D. New Leadership School
b. Pyramid by Bass
D. New Leadership School
c. Transactional Leadership
1. Basic Assumptions
2. OKR
- Consists of “classical” goal- and task- oriented leadership (Management by Objectives):
- Define and agree upon clear goals
- Systematic performance appraisal + rewards
- Two main behav patterns:
—> “Contingent reward”: goal clarification coupled
with rewards for goal achievement
—> “Management by exception”: delegation – leader interventions only in exceptions
Exchange based on rational motivation; desired reward achieved when the task is completed acc. to the leader‘s expectations; exchange indep from the empls’ preferences
- OKR (Objective Key Result) - method to define, communicate and track objectives and their results in a VUCA-environment.
–> individual/team performance management process to…
- Motivate/ engage in mgmt process
- Align whole org with the strategy
- Focus on fast learning
- Dynamically adjust priorities + develop business model
D. New Leadership School
c. Transactional Leadership
3. Strengths & Weaknesses
S:
- Development of followers’ performance motivation, initiative taking, and readiness to take responsibility
- Est. transparent + comparable performance standards
- Individual analysis of critical points + possibilities for improvement
W/Limitations:
- Limited Qualification + motivations of followers
- Limitation of leadership to MbO
- Quantitative aspects of tasks over-valued cp. to qualitative aspects
- Individual goals + performance prioritised at the cost of teamwork
D. New Leadership School
d. Transformational Leadership
1. Def.
2. Basic Assumptions
- Dimension of Transformational Leadership
- Def: Transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend their own self-interests for the good of the
organization and are capable of having a profound and extraordinary effect on their followers. - Basic Assumptions:
- complements transactional leadership
- considers emotional aspects of leaders
- changes needs and preferences of subordinates –> lship through inspiration, vision, charisma - See photo
D. New Leadership School
d. Transformational Leadership
- Dimension of Transformational Leadership
–> examples of the dimensions
Idealised Influence:
- leader builds excitement, enthusiasm, respect, trust, identification through charisma, thus driving followers to perform beyond expectations (e.g. SBB, clock at HQ)
Inspirational motivation: <–> Vision!
- leader moves employees at emotional lvl by providing captivating vision, thereby stimulating their personal involvement and decreasing negative emotions (e.g. Elon Musk w/ Tesla and SpaceX or building St. Gallen monastery to build cathedral or to just make a living laying brick by brick [transf vs transac])
- Vision: picture of the future you seek to create; tangible + immediate quality –> gives shape and direction to the org’s future.
Intellectual Stimulation:
- leader brings in + stimulate new ideas which improve subordinates’ understanding, their perception of problems, and their ability to solve them (e.g. Axel Springer and their Silicon Valley visit)
Individualised Consideration:
- leader supports individual subordinates’ efforts and acts as coach + mentor, stimulating followers’ personal development (BVB coach as his team’s biggest fan)
E. Modern Theories
a. Leader-Member-Exchange (LMX, Graen)
1. In- vs Out-Group Followers
2. Development of Leader-Follower Relat
3. Suggestions
- In-group vs. out-group followers:
- In-Group:
high quality relats, e.g. strong support from leader, greater responsibilities
- Out-Group
low quality relats, e.g. in extreme cases, only monitoring of compliance with the work contract - Development of leader-follower relat
Role taking –> role building (in- or out-group) –> stabilisation (see photo) - Suggestions:
- est. pos. relat to each member of working group –> turn whole working group to in-group
- consider capabilities and needs of each empl
- treat each empl fairly –> respecting working climate
- Promote diversity by recog ind skills of empls
E. Modern Theories
b. Health-Oriented Leadership (HoL)
c. Servant Leadership
b. HoL
- Integrative approach for evaluating health-oriented leadership
- Consideration of leader and follower perspectives:
➢ Self-Care: Management of one‘s own health (leader and follower)
➢ Staff-Care: Management of follower health by leader
▪ Three dimensions: value, awareness, behavior
c. Servant Leadership
- Servant leader focuses on needs of his empls, aids them in becoming more
competent, free and independent.
➢ contradictory to other leadership approaches, placing leader and his needs in the center of attention
cf. photo (Spears)
