Topic : Leadership style in practice, do we have this quality as a leader?

By Prem Moktan

Bank of Bhutan

Year : 2012

There have been extensive psychology studies in relation to leadership behavior both in laboratory and in real life organizations.  This emphasis has been due to importance of effective leadership in achieving group and organizational goals through employees’ satisfactions.

The Ohio State University leadership behaviour studies and the University of Michigan leadership behaviour studies were the two major research programs carried out in-order to conduct in-depth studies on behaviour theories of leadership. These were the major studies conducted to articulate the leadership behaviour (Fleishman, Harris, and Burtt, 1955; Stogdill and Coons, 1957 cited in Weissenberg, Kavanagn, Micheal, 1972).

Ohio Studies identified more than thousand independent dimensions of leadership behaviour. They found from their research which was based on questionnaires to leaders and subordinates that initiating structure and consideration were two critical characteristics either of which could be high or low and independent of one another. These two dimensions were based on factor analysis of subordinates’ description of their supervisor’s behavior using the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) and Leadership Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ)  (Fleishman,1953a; Halpin and Winer, 1957).

 Initiating structure is degree to which a leader defines and structures his or her role and subordinates’ roles for achievement of group goal. (Rubbin, &Judge, 2011). Ohio leadership studies finding suggest that,  a high score on this dimension characterizes individuals who play a more active role in directing group activities through planning, communicating information, scheduling, trying out new ideas (Weissenberg, Kavanagn, Micheal, 1972).

Consideration is the degree to which a leader is supportive and acts friendly towards his or her subordinates. Leader emphasized on interpersonal relationships by taking personal interest in the needs of employees (Rubbin, &Judge,2011). Attention here is paid to the emotional well-being of subordinates. There is a general belief that if the people are happy then they will be optimally motivated to do the work they are given.

The role of the leader is thus seen more as being to motivate and support people. Motivation is based around Identity and social exchanges that create loyalty and other emotional ties. A high score is indicative of a climate of good rapport and two way communication. A low score indicates the supervisor is likely to be more impersonal in his relations with group members (Weissenberg, Kavanagn, Micheal, 1972).

The University of Michigan leadership studies were conducted around the same time as the Ohio State Leadership Studies and they had similar objectives. They found task oriented behaviour and people oriented bahaviour which were similar to initiating structure and consideration of Ohio state leadership behaviour studies.  The Michigan studies added 'Participative leadership' to the Ohio findings, moving the debate further into the question of leading teams rather than just individuals. Task oriented leaders do not do the same kind of works as their subordinates. They basically focused on planning, scheduling work and coordinating activities and providing necessary resources. They help setting goals for subordinates that were both challenging and achievable.

The Employee-oriented leader emphasized interpersonal relationships considering the needs of employees and helping them with their career and personal problems. Recognize subordinates effort with token of appreciation to their hard works. They set goals and provided guidelines, but then gave their subordinates plenty of leeway as to how the goals would be achieved.

The similarity of the Michigan and Ohio leadership studies were that both studies identified two critical characteristics focusing on task ('Initiating Structure') and people ('Consideration'). The Michigan studies added 'Participative leadership' to the Ohio findings, moving the debate further into the question of leading teams rather than just individuals. This two behavior dimension of leadership was used synonymously by most leadership researchers. Ohio studies Initiating structures focused on group performances like that of production- oriented or task oriented behavior of leaders in Michigan studies. And Ohio studies Consideration emphasized similar to employee-oriented leader’s characteristics in Michigan’s findings.

However, Ohio leadership behaviour thought to be distinct from the Michigan leadership behavior in terms of leadership dimensions orientation. Ohio studies concluded that a leader can be high in both task as well as consideration. However, conditions can arise in practical situations that impede the manager from maximizing his behavior at optimum points on the two leadership dimensions (Weissenberg, Kavanagn, Micheal, 1972).  But Michigan studies found that a leader can be either task oriented or the employee-oriented.  Both cannot be high at the same time. The generally agreed best position here is often seen as being a balance of both task and people focus. Whereas the Ohio studies found that high-high style resulted into high performance and more satisfaction.

There are various theories of leadership behaviour that influences the success of a leader. what personality, knowledge, values, ethics, and experiences does the leader has and what does he or she think will work?. No leadership style is best and leader must adjust their leadership style to the situation as well as people being led. There are many different aspects to be great leaders which require playing different leadership style in various situations under appropriate environment.

References:

Barney, J.B. (1985). Dimensions of Informal Social Network Structure: Toward a Contingency Theory of Informal Relations in Organizations, Social Networks, 7, 1-46

Edwin P. Hollandar, Lynn, R., Offermann, 1990, The power and leadership in Organisation. Personnel Psychology, Vol. 45, No. 2, 179-189.

Fiedler, F. E. A contingency model of leadership effectiveness.  In L. Bekowitz

(Ed.)  Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1964, pp. 150-190.

 Hughes, R., GInnett, R., and Curphy, G., 2006,  Leadership, 5^th Edition M Graw Hill Boston.

Ibarra, H. & Hunter, M. (2007). How Leaders Create and Use Networks. Harvard Business Review, 85, 1, pp. 40-47.

Matthew Franklin and Christian Kerr, Anna Bligh steps up and takes control, The Australian January 15, 2011.

 Politis, J.D. (2005). Dispersed leadership predictor of the work environment for creativity and productivity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8, 2, pp. 182-204. 

Robbins, S. & Judge, T. 2011. Organisational Behaviour, Chapter 5, 14^th Edition Upper saddle River, NY, Pearson Education.

Weissenberg, Peter; Kavanagh, Michael J. Personnel Psychology, Spring72, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p119-130, 12p.