Introduction to leadership Flashcards
(33 cards)
What are the three perspectives on leadership in this course?
- Functionalist
- Interpretative
- Critical (radical-humanist)
What are on the axes in the plot of the different perspectives?
Horizontal: Relativism vs Objectivism
Vertical: Sociology of regulation (harmony) vs Sociology of radical change (conflict)
What is objectivism?
Reality is external to us as individuals, exists independent on our interpretations of it. The aim of objectivist science is explanation, prediction and control.
What is relativism?
Assumes social reality is socially constructed and does not exist independent of our interpretations of it. How we define a situation and how we name/frame it will have implications on how we and others act. The aim is to understand how people create meaning.
What are some questions that objectivists try to answer about leadership?
- Does a leadership style X enhance performance of teams in a certain context?
- What variables help explain follower satisfaction under given circumstances?
- Do culturally diverse teams produce more creative outputs than non-diverse teams?
What are some questions that relativists try to answer about leadership?
- How do people interpret and define leadership in a certain situation and with what implications?
- Who is defined as leader and follower, and why?
- Do people act differently if they see themselves, or someone else, as a leader or follower?
What is sociology of regulation?
Harmony and consensus is the natural state. Focus in research is on explaining and understanding stability, integration, coordination and consensus. Effective leaders create common goals, consensus, and stability, and pave the way for collective and coordinated actions.
What is sociology of radical change?
Radical change and conflict are assumed the normal state of society. The aim is to understand and explain change, conflicts of interests, power dynamics, coercion, and systems of domination.
What questions can we ask when a situation seems to be based on agreement and consensus (based on radical change perspective)?
- Whose interests are being served by this consensus?
- Are there underlying, suppressed, or hidden conflicts?
- Are there any underlying patterns or weak signals that indicate that large-scale change is in the making?
Is the history of leadership neutral carriers of factual information?
No, since what we know is dependent on the existence of written texts, which are often written by “winners” (men)
What did the earliest prescriptive texts focus on?
- Strategies to use in war, with focus on avoiding unnecessary conflict (Sun Tzu)
- The conduct of politics. Aristotle exposed the “tricks of public speaking” used to persuade
What started the rise of the modern era of leadership?
The rise of industrial societies
What are different views on the development of leadership since the 1900s?
- Increasingly rational leadership over time. Despite setbacks along the way, the future is preferable to the past.
- Binary model with shifts between centralisation and decentralisation.
- Binary model with shifts between objectivism and subjectivism (science vs culture)
- Political zeitgeist. Changes and what appears normal is framed by the political ideologies of the day
What are the different views people tend to have on leaders vs managers?
- Leader: vision, charisma, inspiration, courage, seizing opportunities, making things happen, promoting creativity and innovation (assumed to be good). Dynamic people who create change.
- Manager: compliance, giving orders, process, formal authority, reluctant to take risks, bothered by uncertainty, wait for things to happen. Cannot or will not change.
Why are chapters in leadership books typically focusing on theory that leaders are born with a set of traits?
They are “great man” biographies, men wrote about men. Focused on someone widely regarded as a leader, analysed their history and behaviour, and then attributed their success to particular personality characteristics
Why is the trait approach originally appealing to organizations?
They can identify people who possess “good” traits, place them in leadership roles, and be confident they will succeed
What are drawbacks of trait theory that history has shown?
- No focus on followers
- No focus on situation, some may only have been successful in particular situation
- People with “good” leader traits can use it as a force of evil (Hitler)
Why was development towards “leaders are made” started?
People started to question whether it was good to have charismatic visionaries in positions of power (Hitler)
What did the behavioural studies undertaken at university of Iowa in the 1930’s focus on?
Assessed three leadership styles to see which one was most effective:
- Democratic. Involving employees in decision-making.
- Autocratic. Do not involve employees in decision-making.
- Laissez-faire. Giving employees complete freedom.
Result was that effectiveness depends on the situation –> development of contingency theories
Why did the transformational leadership theory rise in more recent years?
It was a perfect fit for those who believed the behavioural approach had run its course, and it attracted scholars from leading business schools. It offers an appealing win-win situation.
Why are authentic leaders able to energise followers?
By being self-aware and acting with integrity, they are positive role models (common in politics).
What are difficulties in the studies of authentic leadership?
- Lack of agreement about what it means to be authentic. If authenticity is “being ourselves” a person with low moral standards can be authentic if they act accordingly.
- The notion that it’s possible to just be ourselves is based on an assumption that we are unique individuals, rather than seeing the self as socially constructed through our relationships with others.
- How should authenticity be measured? There is no other measure than people telling that they are being authentic.
Why should leaders not be authentic according to Pfeffer?
Rather than being true to themselves, leaders should be true to what followers need from them
What are the forces in Lewin’s force-field study and what should leaders do according to the theory?
- Driving forces: external or internal
- Restraining forces: people who resist change.
To create change, leaders should increase driving forces and/or decrease restraining forces