L&M leaders and followers Flashcards
(20 cards)
kouzes and posner’s leadership practices inventory
try get away from the idea that leadership is inherited
main research was middle and senior managers over 30 year spell
quali and quanti methods
LPI and 5 practices of exemplary leadership produced
the five practices
“when making extraordinary things happen in orgs, leaders engage in what they call the five practices of exemplary leadership” kouzes and posner 2017
1) model the way: inspire and motivate, set an example, be true to selves
2) inspire a shared vision: getting others to share the vision, lead in present but be forward looking
3) challenge the process: search for opportunities, take risks, experiment, challenge status quo
4) enable others to act: collaboration and strengthen team, empower workers to make decisions, create relationships of trust
5) encourage the heart: not j head but heart, recognise need deciaation and commitment inspire thru courage verbal praise and recognition make heroes and heroines use incentives and rewards
the leadership practice inventory (LPI)
measure 5 practices
psychometric measure
uses ques
formation started w case studies, interviews, self reports
2 parts to LPI
LPI self which completed by leader rates themselves on frequency they believe they engage
observer completed by 10 people, superiors and followers and they rate the same
both vers of ques are same, 30 qs
6 for each practice
forced choice
10 pt rating scale
1 - almost never
5 - occasionally
10 - almost always
respondents can see their responses and how they compare w avg rating of others
5p LPI strength reliable
self report on 10 pt scale
quantitative data
objective data
no experimenter bias
more reliable
5p LPI strength reliable and valid
later research studies
1993 study used 2876 managers and observers from a wide variety of orgs
results identical from obsever and self
no sig diff between genders
type of org didnt significantly affect scires
no gender bias
so signs of social desirability
LPI applicable across orgs
LPI cultural differences
weakness
researchers may not have taken into account cultural diff
5p based on western leadership ideals
LPI statements don’t take lang and culture into acc
study of LPI reliability and valdiity found sig diff in scores affected by cultural diff
weakness bc may only reflect cultural diff not which 5ps leader uses
lowers usefulness and ability to generalise to wider pop
LPI idiographic vs nomothetic
nomothetic make generalisations
like exps and ques
LPI is nomothetic
but used idiographic to formulate
LPI app to everyday life
could be used within orgs to identify the types of behaviours theirs leaders are using or not using
found that leader not practising then can be made aware from results and can improve own and followers performances
followership
became prominent w kelley’s 1988 theory
b4 that follower were passive
now leaders and followers shared process
ability to follow directives and support leader
willingness to cooperate in working towards goals and high degree of teamwork
willingness to follow leader but not passively
kelley’s 1988 two dimensions
workers who are enthusiastic, intelligent, self reliant make effective followers
all have diff motivations some wanna be follower some leader
some see it as a stepping stone to leadership
diff motivations have 2 underlying dimensions that explain diff
1) independent critical thinkers or dependent non critical thinkers
question, reason, analyse or j accept whatever they’re told
2) whether they are active or passive abt a situation
sit back and wait or do smth themselves
kelley’s five followership styles
1) passive/sheep
2) alienated
3) pragmatic survivors
4) conformist/yes people
5) exemplary
passive/sheep
passive
uncritical
lack initiative and sense of responsibility
perform tasks asked of them then stop
score low in independent thinking and passive w participation
alienated
critical and independent thinking
passive performing job
often an event within their role that turned them against the job
such as skipped for promotion or been there too long
cynical negative resentful
but dont go against their boss
happy to whisper on the sidelines
pragmatic survivors
better safe than sorry
shift followership based on whats needed
early warning system in an org
can see what is going bad before others
best type of follower to survive change
conformist/yes people
depend on leader for inspo
totally obedient
never question orders
bosses weak in self confidence form alliances w them
but they can cause org to loose enthusiasm and initiative
score high on active participation but low in independent critical thinking
exemplary
most effective
highest performance levels
high independent critical thinking
carry out work w enthusiam and assertiveness
risk takers and problem solvers
high approval ratings
dont see leaders as a hero but a person who manages change
strength reliability
exemplary followership leads to higher performance
research evidence
favara 2009
175 workers in one org
3 ques to measure followership style, job satisfaction, job performance
sig pos correlation between them all
findings show theory reliable
kelley application to everyday life
strength
beneficial
orgs can shift focus from j leaders to effective followers
increase morale and productivity
theory can be applied effectively to everyday life
cultural differences kelley
weakness
lacks generalisability
only western cultures
oyetunji 2013 studied lecturers in botswana unis who self reported follower style etc
found that opoisiute of exemplary followers shld be more effectuve
passive best performers
cultural diff bc some cultures dw workers challenging leaders
therefore limiting generalisability
kelley reductionism vs holism
weakness
breaks into specific identifiable componenets
not other factors like situational of task or org
reductionist theory
