Theory and Practice of Leadership

APPLICATION

1

Application Michelle King OGL 300: Theory and Practice of Leadership Dr. Klagge April 27, 2017

APPLICATION

2

Overview and Definition of Leadership The definition of leadership is subjective. After reviewing the twelve leadership theories presented in Leadership: Theory and Practice, there is no single definition that can be used to complete the sentence, “leadership is…”. “It is much like the words democracy, love, and peace.

Although each of us intuitively knows what we mean by such words, the words can have different meanings for different people” (Northouse. 2016). Over a century of research has been conducted on leadership in an effort to define and create a prescription for applying it, but the complexity of human beings and organizations has instead created a variety of theories which will be discussed within this paper.

There is consensus on the central components of leadership that help us to understand the commonalities in each leadership theory. This definition includes the following: “(a) leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c) leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals” (Northouse. 2016). In plain terms, “the essence of leadership is to get others to do something because they think you want it done and because they know it is worth while doing -- that is what we are talking about” (Eisenhower. 1965).

The impact of leadership is significant within an organization. Leaders who are skilled and have the competencies necessary to influence individuals toward a common goal can transform a company and achieve sustainable success. However, the effect of a leader who does not possess skills and competencies required can influence their followers conversely; essentially creating distress and confusion.

In this paper, I will be discussing the leadership theories we have covered during the term, including an overview of the twelve leadership theories, which theory fits my own leadership style, which five theories resonate with me and which do not. Furthermore, I will

APPLICATION

3

compare the five chosen theories and provide an example of one of the leadership theories as it applies to my personal experience.

Descriptions of Leadership Theories Trait Approach The trait approach is the earliest leadership theory centered around the concept that a person is a born leader (possessing innate qualities) and that only great people were destined to be leaders. This approach focuses on identify the traits of famous transformational leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Mohandas Gandhi, and Joan of Arc, with the intent of identifying the differences between leaders and nonleaders. Over the course of more than 100 years, researchers identified a wide variety of traits related to those who were leaders including “intelligence, selfconfidence, determination, integrity, and sociability”. (Northouse. 2016). Trait approach focuses exclusively on leaders and does not include situational effects or relationships with followers.

Strengths – The trait approach aligns with our belief that leaders are different than followers. This approach is “intuitively appealing” (Northouse. 2016) in its simplicity.

Additionally, there are over 100 years of research that supports the theory that leaders have different traits or characteristics than followers. Finally, this approach provides a guideline for what traits are expected of leaders and allows those who want to lead a prescriptive method for improving their leadership effectiveness.

Criticisms – The trait approach has a seemingly endless list of traits that are associated with leadership, which creates ambiguity. Further, there is no assessment of leadership in response to differing situations which effectively applies a “one size fits all” version of leadership. Lastly, the research on trait approach does not provide any relationship to leadership

APPLICATION

4

outcomes which provides no insight into which traits are necessary to achieve results in each situation or within a group.

Skills Approach Like the trait approach, the skills approach focuses on a “leader-centered perspective on leadership” (Northouse. 2016). Rather than personality characteristics, the skills approach is centered on the knowledge and abilities necessary to be an effective leader. Two models have emerged on the skills approach. The first is based on the research of Katz, which is a three-skill approach. Katz defined these skills as technical skills (knowledge and proficiency in a specific type of work), human skills (the ability to work with people), and conceptual skills (the ability to work with ideas and concepts). This is broken down into the ability to work with things (technical), people (human), and ideas (conceptual). The level of skills needed in each area differs depending on where the leader is positioned in the management structure.

The second model is based on the work of Mumford, which defined five components in the capability model: competencies, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences, and environmental influences. These five aspects are divided into a “three component model” (Northouse. 2016) of individual attributes (general cognitive ability, crystallized cognitive ability, motivation, and personality), competencies (problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge), and leadership outcomes (effective problem-solving and performance). Further, there is a correlation drawn between impacts of career experience (individual attributes and competencies) and environmental influences (individual attributes, competencies and leadership outcomes) on leadership skills.

APPLICATION

5

The skills approach is descriptive rather than a prescriptive approach to leadership theory.

It describes the skills and competencies necessary for effective leadership that can be acquired through experience and training.

Strengths – Rather than focusing on innate traits, this original research highlighted the “importance of skills and the value of skills across different management levels” while the later work “placed learned skills at the center of effective leadership performance at all management levels” (Northouse. 2016). Like the trait approach, the skills approach is “intuitively appealing” (Northouse. 2016) because it is accessible to everyone who is willing to develop their leadership competencies. Lastly, many organizations education programs focus on building competencies which provide a built-in structure for skill development.

Criticisms – Some of the skills defined in this approach do not seem to apply to the boundaries of leadership including “motivation, critical thinking, personality, and conflict resolution” (Northouse. 2016). There is also little explanation provided for how variations in the areas of skills related to problem-solving or social judgment relate to performance. While the skills approach claims to not be a trait approach, there are aspects that are specific to individual traits which make it appear more like trait theory, at least in part.

Behavioral Approach The behavioral approach focuses on the behavior of the leader in relationship toward followers in facilitating goal achievement. Researchers determined “that leadership is composed of two general kinds of behaviors: task behaviors and relationship behaviors” (Northouse. 2016).

Task behaviors are related to accomplishing objectives and relationship behaviors are related to the interaction between leaders and follower within a situation.

APPLICATION

6

The Ohio State University studies (1948) on behavioral leadership used a questionnaire called the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire as the basis for their research. The questionnaires, which were given to “hundreds of people in educational, military, and industrial settings, and the results showed that certain clusters of behaviors were typical of leaders” (Northouse. 2016). Their research found that two behaviors (initiating structure and consideration) were the core of the behavioral approach. Initiating structures are behaviors relating to tasks which would generally be thought of as managerial in nature: organizing work, establishing responsibilities, managing the schedule, etc. Consideration behaviors relate to relationships with followers and how the leader acts: building relationships through respect, trust, and cooperation.

The University of Michigan studies (1951) centered around the “impact of leaders’ behaviors on the performance of small groups” (Northouse. 2016). Their research also identified two distinct leadership behaviors: employee orientation and production orientation. The way that leaders approach followers, getting to know them personally and understanding their needs, is employee orientation. While production orientation focuses more specifically on the aspects of how a job is done and primarily how to utilize followers to accomplish tasks.

Both studies contributed to the most well-known model for behavioral approach, the Managerial Grid®, developed by Blake and Mouton (1964; revised 1978, 1985, 1991). Now renamed the Leadership Grid®, it was designed “to explain how leaders help organizations to reach their purposes through two factors: concern for production and concern for people” (Northouse. 2016). The Leadership Grid is divided into a grid separated by a horizontal axis, representing leaders concerns for results and a vertical axis representing leaders concern for people. The grid has a 9 point scale and each leadership style aligns to the grid based on the

APPLICATION

7

level of concern for production and people. The behavioral styles identified are authoritycompliance management, country-club management, impoverished management, middle-of-theroad management, and team management (Northouse. pg. 75-76).

Behavioral approach is not a prescriptive approach, it is instead a “framework for assessing leadership in a broad way, as behavior with a task and relationship dimension” (Northouse. 2016).

Strengths – This approach is supported through a wide variety of studies over a significant period. The behavioral theory focuses not just on what leaders do but how they lead through their behaviors related to tasks and relationships. Finally, the behavioral approach provides an opportunity for leaders to learn about themselves and their behaviors which allow for the opportunity to improve.

Criticisms – Research has not provided a direct correlation between behaviors and performance outcomes. There is also no clear link between behavioral approach and outcomes related to follower’s satisfaction. Lastly, the implication is that effective leadership falls into the team management category without considering the situation for leaders and follower.

Situational Approach The situational approach, developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1969), has been revised and improved over a 20-year period. The premise of this approach is that leadership should be adaptable and change per the demands of each situation. In this case, leadership “is composed of both a directive and supportive dimension, and that each has to be applied appropriately in a given situation” (Northouse. 2016). For a leader to employ situational approach they must be able to assess the commitment and competence of their followers in relation to the goal and then adjust their style accordingly.

APPLICATION

8

The Situational Leadership® II model developed by Blanchard, et al., is classified by assessing the supportive behavior needed (low-high) and the directive behavior needed (lowhigh), with consideration of the development levels of the followers. The leader then determines whether they need to adapt their leadership style to delegate, support, coach, or direct follower to achieve the goal.

Strengths – The Situational Leadership® II model is well-known and is commonly used for training in many organizations. It is “easy to understand, intuitively sensible, and easily applied in a variety of settings” (Northouse. 2016). It is prescriptive rather than descriptive as it provides a guideline for what a leader should do based on the assessment of follower’s development level and the situation.

Criticisms – This approach assumes that leaders are easily able to objectively identify follower’s development levels, with little guidelines on how to fairly and accurately accomplish this. Studies have been conducted (Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997 and Vecchio et al., 2006), that “failed to find strong evidence to support the basic prescriptions suggested in the situational approach” (Northouse. 2016). There is also criticism related to the lack of research related to demographic characteristics such as “education, experience, age, and gender” (Northouse. 2016) and how those aspects influence leader’s perceptions of followers.

Path-Goal Theory Path-goal theory is another approach focused on leadership flexibility. In this theory, the focus is on motivating followers to overcome obstacles and achieve the goal. It is designed “to explain how leaders can help followers along the path to their goals by selecting specific behaviors that are best suited to followers’ needs and to the situation in which followers are working” (Northouse. 2016).

APPLICATION

9

Path-goal theory is a practical approach to leadership, prescribing that leaders select the behavior (directive, supportive, participative or achievement oriented), based on the follower characteristics (needs) and the task characteristics (clear/unclear, mundane/challenging, etc.). (pg. 121) Strengths – Path-goal theory provides “four conceptually distinct varieties of leadership, expanding the prior research, which dealt exclusively with the task- and relationship-oriented behaviors” (Jermier. 1996 cited by Northouse. 2016). This approach focuses on the impact of leadership behavior on followers related to the task they need to perform to accomplish the goal.

There is an aspect that takes into account the “motivation principles of expectancy theory of leadership” (Northouse. 2016), which is the only theory to specifically examine motivation. The model provided is practical and allows leaders to focus on how to help followers overcome obstacles.

Criticisms – As much as it is practical, it is also complex which can lead to confusion.

Despite the variety of research, there is not as much support for this theory as others like situational leadership. There is also the issue of the focus on leader directed behavior and how the leader influences the follower, rather than the relationship between the follower and leader. It is a one-way transaction.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory Leader-Member Exchange theory focuses on the “interactions between leaders and followers” (Northouse. 2016). This theory centers on dyadic relationships that are formed between leaders and followers that result in in-groups and out-groups. Unlike other theories, the follower’s actions and behavior, called exchanges, effect the relationship with the leader, where followers who are willing to interact more (negotiate) contribute to a higher quality relationship

APPLICATION

10

which results in more opportunities. In LMX theory, there are three phases in Leadership Making (Graen, Uhl-Bien, 1995 cited by Northouse. 2016). Phase 1 (stranger) is a one-way exchange with low-quality exchanges where the follower is most concerned with their own interests. This is more common with newer employees. Phase 2 (acquaintance) is a two-way exchange where the follower has been tested and has medium quality exchanges. These followers are concerned with self and others. Phase 3 (partnership) is a two-way exchange where the relationship is negotiated and reciprocal and the follower's concern is the group.

LMX is a descriptive model that consists of specialized relationships between leaders and followers that over time can evolve into high-quality exchanges that result in success in the organization.

Strengths – Rather than focus on the characteristics of leaders and followers, LMX theory centers on the dyadic relationship between leaders and followers which makes it unique within leadership theories. LMX theory also “validates our experience of how people within organizations related to each other and the leader” (Northouse. 2016). Another important strength is the focus on the importance of effective communication between leaders and followers.

Criticisms – One of the criticisms of LMX theory relates to the idea of in-groups and outgroups as being inherently unfair. Although we know that these relationships exist, purposely perpetuating that idea seems discriminatory. There is also no developed concept around how high-quality relationships are created or what factors are important in the differing quality of the leader-follower relationship. Finally, there appears to be no concrete methodology for measuring the exchanges within the dyadic relationship

APPLICATION

11

Transformational Leadership Transformational leadership is a newer leadership theory. This theory focuses on “the charismatic and effective elements of leadership” (Northouse. 2016). As the name implies, transformational leadership is centered on the process of changing and transforming followers through a relationship built on engagement and connection. Transformational leadership is not transactional but rather promotes building relationships that “help followers reach their fullest potential” by understanding their “needs and motivations” (Northouse.2016).

Within transformation leadership, there is also pseudo-transformational leadership, where leaders transform followers through selfish and exploitive means to gain power.

Transformational leadership examines the personality characteristics of leaders, their actions and the effect on their followers. There are four factors in transformational leadership: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration, which lead to exceptional performance outcomes.

Strengths – This theory has been researched broadly in many qualitative studies with well-known CEO’s in large corporations (pg. 175). Transformational leadership is appealing to the ideas it portrays of a visionary leader. Additionally, this theory centers on the needs and the growth of followers in relation to goal achievement.

Criticisms – Transformational leadership lacks clarity due to the complexity and variations in the activities “including creating a vision, motivating, being a change agent, building trust, giving nurturance, and acting as a social architect” (Northouse. 2016). It also ascribes the traits of leaders as being more innate than learned, which means that it is not

APPLICATION

12

available to everyone. There is evidence that positive effects result from transformational leadership but there is no evidence of actual transformation of followers or organizations.

Authentic Leadership Authentic leadership focuses on whether the leader is “genuine and real” (Northouse.

2016). The speed at which changes are occurring through technology and globalization has created uncertainty and distrust in leadership. Recent scandals involving companies like Enron and the banks involved in the housing crisis have made people feel as though they do not know who to trust. Authentic leadership seeks to create transparent and honest relationships with followers.

This leadership theory has multiple approaches including: “(1) the practical approach, which evolved from real-life examples and training and development literature; and (2) the theoretical approach, which is based on findings from social science research” (Northouse.

2016). Authentic leadership centers on three concepts: intrapersonal (focus on leader – their skills and knowledge), developmental (related to experience), and interpersonal (collective process with leaders and followers) (pg. 220).

Strengths – Meets the needs of followers for trustworthy leadership. Provides a guideline for those who want to become authentic leaders through “practical and theoretical approaches” (Northouse. 2016). It is open to all because anyone can become more authentic and develop higher levels of transparency with followers.

Criticisms – This theory is still new in its development and ideas. Although there is a moral component of authentic leadership, it is not clear how those values are developed or applied. Authentic leadership is appealing, as forming relationships built on trust provides

APPLICATION

13

security for followers, but there is not enough evidence that it results in positive performance outcomes.

Servant Leadership As Northouse describes in Leadership: Theory and Practice, “servant leaders place the good of followers over their own self-interests and emphasize follower development” (Hale & Fields, 2007). The term servant leadership was invented by Robert K. Greenleaf who was against coercive leadership and in favor of leadership focused on communication leading to building group consensus. Greenleaf emphasizes that servant leadership has a “social responsibility to be concerned about the “have-nots” and those with less privilege” (Northouse.

2016). Many researchers and leadership writers have embraced servant leadership and there are differing definitions that identify characteristics associated with being a servant leader per studies conducted over the past 20 years. The textbook provides a specific model of servant leadership developed on the research of Liden, Wayne, Zhao and Henderson (2008) and Liden, Panaccio, Hu and Meuser (2014). This model has “three main components: antecedent conditions, servant leader behaviors, and leadership outcomes” (Northouse. 2016). The benefit of servant leadership is that is can be applied throughout the organization at every level of management. By applying a philosophy of prescriptive behaviors that can be learned and developed, with interested organizations who want to foster long-term relationships with followers, servant leadership is accessible to anyone who wants to apply the behaviors outlined in the model.

Strengths – There is an ethical dimension to servant leadership that is not defined in other theories. Servant leadership is centered around caring for others by “putting followers first” as a

APPLICATION

14

means of influencing them. Recently there has been comprehensive research that validates the servant leadership theory as unique among the many leadership theories.

Criticisms – The title of “servant” alludes to a theological approach to leadership that can be off-putting to some followers. Being a servant has the implication of being a follower which contradicts the idea of leading. There is an aspect of this altruistic approach which seems fanciful or idealistic and could potentially be perceived as a threat to individual autonomy.

Adaptive Leadership As Northouse describes in Leadership: Theory and Practice, “adaptive leadership focuses on the adaptations required of people in response to changing environments.” Adaptive leadership focuses on the “activities of the leader in relation to the work of the follower in the contexts in which they find themselves” (Northouse. 2016). This leadership theory is newer and is still developing but the current model is divided into three areas “situational challenges, leader behaviors and adaptive work” (Northouse. 2016). Situational challenges focus on defining whether a challenge is technical (can be managed through the existing process), technical and adaptive (the problem is clearly defined but the solution is complex or unclear) and adaptive (the problem is unclear and the solution is therefore also unclear). The leadership behaviors of an adaptive leader include: observing what is happening to assess the truth of the situation, identifying what the challenges are, regulating personal and follower distress, creating a safe space in which followers can work through the issues, helping followers stay focused on the work, empowering followers by allowing them to work through problems without leadership interference, and being open to listening to everyone, especially individuals or groups who are on the fringe.

APPLICATION

15

Strengths – Rather than just descriptive or prescriptive, adaptive leadership is process focused on interactional events between followers and leaders (pg. 275). Unlike most other theories, adaptive leadership is follower-centric centered on follower growth and change. This approach is practical providing a prescriptive approach to helping followers through adapting to changes in the organization.

Criticisms – This theory is based on “ideas and assumptions, but not on established research” (Northouse. 2016). Some of the concepts in adaptive leadership are too broad and up to interpretation. The lack of specificity related to leader behaviors makes it difficult for leaders to understand how to objectively analyze followers.

Psychodynamic Approach The psychodynamic approach centers on the psychology of the experiences and patterns that subconsciously govern human behavior. “It acknowledges that people are complex, unique and paradoxical beings with rich and myriad motivational drivers and decision-making and interaction patterns” (Northouse. 2016). The key concepts related to leadership with this approach are: focus on inner theater (influence of life experience), leader-follower relationships (dependency, fight-flight, and pairing) and focus on the shadow side of leadership (narcissism) (pg. 302-305).

This approach focuses on the idea “that psychological, social and emotional processes between leaders and followers have a great influence and need to be taken into consideration” (Northouse. 2016). Without considering the psychological factors that influence how people behave and why leaders are not as effective in motivation and influencing followers.

Strengths – This theory looks at what lies below the surface of groups of individuals and how this affects organizational life in ways that other theories do not. It provides mechanisms

APPLICATION

16

like coaching and 360 feedback as useful tools in understanding personal behavior. It also applies this concept to leaders as well as followers, putting leaders on the same level as followers in analyzing the impact of their behaviors.

Criticisms – The earliest work in this area was based on observations of patients with mental health issues which looks at dysfunction rather than functional systems. It is a theory that would be difficult to implement from a training perspective as it relates to leadership.

Additionally, there is no aspect of this theory that relates to team dynamics as the focus is primarily on individuals.

My Leadership Style It was difficult for me to choose one theory that fits my leadership philosophy. I can reasonably see myself utilizing many theories depending on the situation, the goal, the followers, the culture of the corporation and the obstacles that are present. If I must choose one, it would be authentic leadership. Leadership is built on relationships and the basis of any good relationship is trust and respect. “They have a clear idea of who they are, where they are going, and what the right thing is to do” (Northouse. 2016). Authentic leadership incorporates the honesty and transparency I believe is essential to the approach of building relationships through the connection.

Five Leadership Models The three leadership theories that resonate in a positive manner with me are authentic leadership, servant leadership, and adaptive leadership.

Authentic leadership resonates with me because it focuses on relationship, connection, honesty, and transparency. Authentic leaders have a sense of purpose, are compassionate,

APPLICATION

17

understand their values and do not compromise them, and are self-disciplined. I believe that leaders have an obligation to their followers to walk the walk by being an example.

Servant leadership is akin to authentic leadership in the sense that the focus is on the importance of the leader’s relationship with the followers. I believe that leaders should be altruistic and even though servant leadership is idealistic, we should be reaching a higher level of connection and cooperation if we hope to achieve great things. There is also the correlation between the ethical or moral aspects of servant leadership and authentic leadership. The servant leadership model is aspirational and that appeals to my sense of leadership as a calling rather than just a set of skills that can be applied like LMX or Skill theory.

Adaptive leadership is appealing to me because I work in an environment, and have spent a great deal of my life, where needing to be adaptable was paramount. All leaders should be flexible in their approach to leadership. There are too many continually changing aspects of our lives that necessitate adaptation to be resistant to new paradigms. Adaptive leadership requires an evaluation of situations to assess the best approach. As an analytical idealist, being able to have a prescriptive approach to leadership is important for my success.

The two theories which did not resonate with me are psychodynamic approach and leader-member exchange theory.

Although I agree that understanding the psychology of individuals is important in assessing and evaluating behavior, this approach could result in discrimination based on a lack of understanding of the complexities of the human psyche. In a corporate environment, I do not believe the application of this approach would be effective over the long-term. There are aspects of this approach that could be applicable within the context of a mentor or coaching relationship but as a leadership methodology, I feel it is not an effective theory. Servant, authentic and

APPLICATION

18

adaptive leadership theories have more realistic applications of psychological dynamics of followers and how leaders should respond.

Leader-member exchange theory has characteristics that I find appealing. I have witnessed ad-hoc versions of this approach in various organizations and for the in-group, this theory can be effective but there are too many opportunities to actively discriminate against outgroup members which I cannot abide. “Although LMX theory was not designed to do so, it supports the development of privileged groups in the workplace” (Northouse. 2016). Behaving ethically toward colleagues and followers is not an optional for me so I would not be able to effectively apply this theory.

Analysis: Leadership Application Currently, I work in a situation where one of the leaders in my management chain isolates himself from the whole group in favor of a smaller group that do not challenge him in any way.

His closest confidant is someone he has known since kindergarten and he has promoted and advocating for him, ignoring others who are as qualified. His leadership style seems closely aligned to LMX theory as he obviously has in-group and out-group members. This has produced a negative effect on many of the more senior staff who are high achieving because the leader is allowing himself to be influenced by the relationship he has with one of two people who hold a specific self-interest. The result has been that the other staff members have grown distant and distrusting of the leader which has created a separate in-group as those who are in the out-group bond together.

There are characteristics of the leader’s behavior that align with the behavioral approach as well. He falls into the paternalism/maternalism aspect of this approach where he uses authority-compliance and team management but does not integrate the two.

APPLICATION

19

Paternalistic/maternalistic leaders “make the most of the key decisions, and reward loyalty and obedience while punishing noncompliance” (Northouse. 2016). Combining this approach with the LMX approach has resulted in an ineffective leadership style which appears to discriminate against some members of the group while promoting others who are undeserving.

Given the structure of our organization and the pressures to achieve related to unrealistic goals, the better approach would be for the leader to employ situational approach. “The situational approach stresses that leadership is composed of both a directive and supportive dimension, and that each has to be applied appropriately in a given situation” (Northouse. 2016).

Our current situation as it relates to a growing problem that we are peripherally responsible for should be approached from a flexible position related to the situation. If the leader could apply the Situational Leadership® II model, he could transform the situation and inspire his followers.

With the proper direction and support, the team could have made significant strides in proactively preventing a reoccurrence of the current project.

Conclusion Leadership theory is as diverse as the people who lead. There is no one “right way” for everyone but rather a set of theories that should be studied and tested to find the approach that will help a leader be successful. Though most training efforts are focused on leadership development, follower development in relation to leaders is also important as described in several of the theories that are more follower-centric (adaptive, authentic, servant, situational, path-goal). Most critical to nearly every leadership theory is the importance of flexibility and the willingness to receive feedback to improve skills and competencies. Without the desire to continually learn and grow, no leader can hope to be effective for the long-term.

APPLICATION

20 References

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2017, from https://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/all_about_ike/quotes.html