Sri Venkateshwara College of Engineering

Department of MBA
Scheme I IA
Exam: MBA
Sem: 4TH SEM
Course Title: ORGANIZATION LEADERSHIP
Course Code: 20MBAHR401
Max. Marks: 50
Scheme & Solution for Internal Assessment

Q NO. MARKS

1.A What do you mean by traits in leadership? 3

Leadership traits refer to personal qualities that define effective

leaders. Leadership refers to the ability of an individual or an
organization to guide individuals, teams, or organizations toward
the fulfillment of goals and objectives.
1.B Explain on Trait Versus Process Leadership 7

We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader”

or “She is a natural leader.” These statements are commonly
expressed by people who take a trait perspective toward
leadership. The trait perspective suggests that certain individuals
have special innate or inborn characteristics or qualities that make
them leaders, and that it is these qualities that differentiate them
from non-leaders. Some of the personal qualities used to identify
leaders include unique physical factors (e.g., height), personality
features (e.g., extraversion), and other characteristics (e.g.,
intelligence and fluency; Bryman, 1992). In Chapter 2, we will
discuss a large body of research that has examined these personal
 qualities.

To describe leadership as a trait is quite different from describing

it as a process (Figure 1.1). The trait viewpoint conceptualizes
leadership as a property or set of properties possessed in varying
degrees by different people (Jago, 1982). This suggests that it
resides in select people and restricts leadership to those who are
believed to have special, usually inborn, talents

The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon

that resides in the context of the interactions between leaders and
followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a
process, leadership can be observed in leader behaviors (Jago,
1982), and can be learned.

1.C Discuss the evolution of leadership definitions. 10

The Evolution of Leadership Definitions

While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting

a definition to the term has proved to be a challenging endeavor
for scholars and practitioners alike. More than a century has
lapsed since leadership became a topic of academic introspection,
and definitions have evolved continuously during that period.
These definitions have been influenced by many factors from
world affairs and politics to the perspectives of the discipline in
which the topic is being studied. In a seminal work, Rost (1991)
analyzed materials written from 1900 to 1990, finding more than
200 different definitions for leadership. His analysis provides a
succinct history of how leadership has been defined through the
last century:

1900–1929 Definitions of leadership appearing in the first three

decades of the 20th century emphasized control and centralization
of power with a common theme of domination. For example, at a
conference on leadership in 1927, leadership was defined as “the
ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce
obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927, p.
124)

1930s Traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an

emerging view of leadership as influence rather than domination.
Leadership is also identified as the interaction of an individual’s
specific personality traits with those of a group, noting that while
the attitudes and activities of the many are changed by the one,
the many may also influence a leader.

1940s The group approach came into the forefront with leadership
being defined as the behavior of an individual while involved in
directing group activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same time,
leadership by persuasion is distinguished from “drivership” or
leadership by coercion (Copeland, 1942).

1950s Three themes dominated leadership definitions during this

decade:
• continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what
leaders do in groups;
• leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which
defined leadership based on behavior of the leader; and
• effectiveness, in which leadership is defined by the ability to
influence overall group effectiveness.

1960s
Although a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw
harmony amongst leadership scholars. The prevailing definition
of leadership as behavior that influences people toward shared
goals was underscored by Seeman (1960) who described
leadership as “acts by persons which influence other persons in a
shared direction” (p. 53).

1970s The group focus gave way to the organizational behavior

approach, where leadership became viewed as “initiating and
maintaining groups or organizations to accomplish group or
organizational goals” (Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns’s (1978)
definition, however, is the most important concept of leadership
to emerge: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing by
persons with certain motives and values, various economic,
political, and other resources, in a context of competition and
conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held
by both leaders and followers” (p. 425).
1980s This decade exploded with scholarly and popular works on
the nature of leadership, bringing the topic to the apex of the
academic and public consciousnesses. As a result, the number of
definitions for leadership became a prolific stew with several
persevering themes:
• Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still
predominantly deliver the message that leadership is getting
followers to do what the leader wants done.
• Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership
definitions of the 1980s, influence is examined from every angle.
In an effort to distinguish leadership from management, however,
scholars insist that leadership is noncoercive influence.
• Traits. Spurred by the national bestseller In Search of
Excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982), the leadership-as-
excellence movement brought leader traits back to the spotlight.
As a result, many people’s understanding of leadership is based
on a trait orientation.
• Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a
movement defining leadership as a transformational process,
 stating that leadership occurs “when one or more persons engage
with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one
another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p. 83).

Into the 21st Century After decades of dissonance, leadership

scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a common
definition for leadership. Debate continues as to whether
leadership and management are separate processes, while others
emphasize the trait, skill, or relational aspects of leadership.
Because of such factors as growing global influences and
generational differences, leadership will continue to have
different meanings for different people. The bottom line is that
leadership is a complex concept for which a determined definition
may long be in flux.

2A What do you mean by interpersonal skills? 3

Interpersonal skills involve the ability to understand,

communicate and work well with individuals and groups through
developing effective relationships. Interpersonal skills are also
called human, people and soft skills.

2B Explain on Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership. 7

Neuroticism The tendency to be depressed, anxious,
insecure, vulnerable, and hostile
Extraversion The tendency to be sociable and
assertive and to have positive energy
Openness The tendency to be informed, creative,
insightful, and curious
Agreeableness The tendency to be accepting,
conforming, trusting, and nurturing
Conscientiousness The tendency to be thorough,
organized, controlled, dependable, and
decisive

Over the past 25 years, a consensus has emerged among

researchers regarding the basic factors that make up what we call
personality (Goldberg, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1987). These
factors, commonly called the Big Five, are neuroticism,
extraversion (surgency), openness (intellect), agreeableness, and
conscientiousness.
To assess the links between the Big Five and leadership, Judge,
Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002) conducted a major meta-analysis
of 78 leadership and personality studies published between 1967
and 1998. In general, Judge et al. found a strong relationship
between the Big Five traits and leadership. It appears that having
 certain personality traits is associated with being an effective
leader.

Specifically, in their study, extraversion was the factor most

strongly associated with leadership. It is the most important trait
of effective leaders. Extraversion was followed, in order, by
conscientiousness, openness, and low neuroticism. The last factor,
agreeableness, was found to be only weakly associated with
leadership.

2C Explain the studies conducted by Ohio and Michigan on concept 10

of Leadership.
The Ohio State Studies

A group of researchers at Ohio State believed that the

results of studying leadership as a personality trait seemed
fruitless and decided to analyze how individuals acted
when they were leading a group or an organization. This
analysis was conducted by having followers complete
questionnaires about their leaders. On the questionnaires,
followers had to identify the number of times their
leaders engaged in certain types of behaviors.

The original questionnaire used in these studies was

constructed from a list of more than 1,800 items
describing different aspects of leader behavior. From this
long list of items, a questionnaire composed of 150
questions was formulated; it was called the Leader
Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ ; Hemphill &
Coons, 1957). The LBDQ was given to hundreds of
people in educational, military, and industrial settings, and
the results showed that certain clusters of behaviors were
typical of leaders. Six years later, Stogdill (1963)
published a shortened version of the LBDQ . The new
form, which was called the LBDQ-XII, became the most
widely used instrument in leadership research. A
questionnaire similar to the LBDQ , which you can use to
assess your own leadership behavior, appears later in this
chapter.
Researchers found that followers’ responses on the
questionnaire clustered around two general types of leader
behaviors: initiating structure and consideration (Stogdill,
1974). Initiating structure behaviors are essentially task
behaviors, including such acts as organizing work, giving
structure to the work context, defining role
responsibilities, and scheduling work activities.
Consideration behaviors are essentially relationship
behaviors and include building camaraderie, respect, trust,
 and liking between leaders and followers.
The two types of behaviors identified by the LBDQ-XII
represent the core of the behavioral approach and are
central to what leaders do: Leaders provide structure for
followers, and they nurture them. The Ohio State studies
viewed these two behaviors as distinct and independent.
They were thought of not as two points along a single
continuum, but as two different continua. For example, a
leader can be high in initiating structure and high or low in
task behavior. Similarly, a leader can be low in setting
structure and low or high in consideration behavior. The
degree to which a leader exhibits one behavior is not
related to the degree to which she or he exhibits the other
behavior.

Many studies have been done to determine which

leadership behavior is most effective in a particular
situation. In some contexts, high consideration has been
found to be most effective, but in other situations, high
initiating structure is most effective. Some research has
shown that being high in both behaviors is the best form
of leadership. Determining how a leader optimally mixes
task and relationship behaviors has been the central task for
researchers from the behavioral approach. The path–goal
approach, which is discussed in Chapter 6, exemplifies a
leadership theory that attempts to explain how leaders
should integrate consideration and structure into their
behaviors.

The University of Michigan Studies

Whereas researchers at Ohio State were developing the

LBDQ , researchers at the University of Michigan were
also exploring leadership behavior, giving special attention to
the impact of leaders’ behaviors on the performance of small
groups (Cartwright & Zander, 1960; Katz & Kahn, 1951;
Likert, 1961, 1967).

The program of research at Michigan identified two types

of leadership behaviors: employee orientation and
production orientation. Employee orientation is the
behavior of leaders who approach subordinates with a
strong human relations emphasis. They take an interest in
workers as human beings, value their individuality, and
give special attention to their personal needs (Bowers &
Seashore, 1966). Employee orientation is very similar to
the cluster of behaviors identified as consideration in the
Ohio State studies.
 Production orientation consists of leadership behaviors
that stress the technical and production aspects of a job.
From this orientation, workers are viewed as a means for
getting work accomplished (Bowers & Seashore, 1966).
Production orientation parallels the initiating structure
cluster found in the Ohio State studies.

Unlike the Ohio State researchers, the Michigan

researchers, in their initial studies, conceptualized
employee and production orientations as opposite ends of
a single continuum. This suggested that leaders who were
oriented toward production were less oriented toward
employees, and those who were employee oriented were
less production oriented. As more studies were
completed, however, the researchers re-conceptualized the
two constructs, as in the Ohio State studies, as two
independent leadership orientations (Kahn, 1956). When
the two behaviors are treated as independent orientations,
leaders are seen as being able to be oriented toward both
production and employees at the same time.

In the 1950s and 1960s, a multitude of studies were

conducted by researchers from both Ohio State and the
University of Michigan to determine how leaders could
best combine their task and relationship behaviors to
maximize the impact of these behaviors on the
satisfaction and performance of followers. In essence, the
researchers were looking for a universal theory of leadership
that would explain leadership effectiveness in every
situation. The results that emerged from this large body of
literature were contradictory and unclear (Yukl, 1994).
Although some of the findings pointed to the value of a
leader being both highly task oriented and highly
relationship oriented in all situations (Misumi, 1985), the
preponderance of research in this area was inconclusive.

3A What do you mean by Referrent power? 3

Referent power is a form of reverence gained by a leader who has

strong interpersonal relationship skills. Referent power, as an
aspect of personal power, becomes particularly important as
organizational leadership becomes increasingly about
collaboration and influence and less about command and control.
3B Briefly explain the Three-Skill Approach in Leadership. 7
Based on field research in administration and his own first hand
observations of executives in the workplace, Katz (1955, p. 34)
suggested that effective administration (i.e., leadership) depends
on three basic personal skills: technical, human, and conceptual.
Katz argued that these skills are quite different from traits or
qualities of leaders. Skills are what leaders can accomplish,
whereas traits are who leaders are (i.e., their innate
characteristics). Leadership skills are defined in this chapter as
the ability to use one’s knowledge and competencies to
accomplish a set of goals or objectives. This chapter shows that
these leadership skills can be acquired and leaders can be trained
to develop them.

Technical Skill

Technical skill is knowledge about and proficiency in a specific

type of work or activity. It includes competencies in a specialized
area, analytical ability, and the ability to use appropriate tools and
techniques (Katz, 1955). For example, in a computer software
company, technical skill might include knowing software
language and programming, the company’s software products,
and how to make these products function for clients. Similarly, in
an accounting firm, technical skill might include understanding
and having the ability to apply generally accepted accounting
principles to a client’s audit. In both these examples, technical
skills involve a hands-on activity with a basic product or process
within an organization. Technical skills play an essential role in
producing the actual products a company is designed to produce.
As illustrated in Figure 3.1, technical skill is most important at
lower and middle levels of management and less important in
upper management. For leaders at the highest level, such as chief
executive officers (CEOs), presidents, and senior officers,
technical competencies are not as essential. Individuals at the top
level depend on skilled subordinates to handle technical issues of
the physical operation.

Human Skill

Human skill is knowledge about and ability to work with people.

It is quite different from technical skill, which has to do with
working with things (Katz, 1955). Human skills are “people
skills.” They are the abilities that help a leader to work effectively
with subordinates, peers, and superiors to accomplish the
organization’s goals. Human skills allow a leader to assist group
members in working cooperatively as a group to achieve common
goals. For Katz, it means being aware of one’s own perspective
on issues and, at the same time, being aware of the perspective of
others. Leaders with human skills adapt their own ideas to those
of others. Furthermore, they create an atmosphere of trust where
employees can feel comfortable and secure and where they can
feel encouraged to become involved in the planning of things that
will affect them. Being a leader with human skills means being
sensitive to the needs and motivations of others and taking into
account others’ needs in one’s decision making. In short, human
 skill is the capacity to get along with others as you go about your
work.
Human skills are important in all three levels of management.
Although managers at lower greater number of employees, human
skills are equally important at middle and upper levels.

Conceptual Skill

Broadly speaking, conceptual skills are the ability to work with

ideas and concepts. Whereas technical skills deal with things and
human skills deal with people, conceptual skills involve the
ability to work with ideas. A leader with conceptual skills is
comfortable talking about the ideas that shape an organization and
the intricacies involved. He or she is good at putting the
company’s goals into words and can understand and express the
economic principles that affect the company. A leader with
conceptual skills works easily with abstractions and hypothetical
notions.

Conceptual skills are central to creating a vision and strategic

plan for an organization. For example, it would take conceptual
skills for a CEO in a struggling manufacturing company to
articulate a vision for a line of new products that would steer the
company into profitability. Similarly, it would take conceptual
skill for the director of a non-profit health organization to create a
strategic plan that could compete successfully with forprofit
health organizations in a market with scarce resources. The point
of these examples is that conceptual skill has to do with the
mental work of shaping the meaning of organizational or policy
issues—understanding what a company stands for and where it is
or should be going. In Figure 3.1, conceptual skill is most
important at the top management levels. In fact, when upper-level
managers do not have strong conceptual skills, they can
jeopardize the whole organization. Conceptual skills are also
important in middle management; as we move down to lower
management levels, conceptual skills become less important

3C Explain on Situational Leadership. 10

This theory says that the same leadership style cannot be
practiced in all situations, depending upon the circumstance and
environmental context the leadership style also changes. The
pioneers of this theory were Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey.

The model encourages the leaders to analyze a particular situation

in depth and then lead in the most appropriate manner, suitable
for that situation. The three aspects that need could be considered
in a situation are:
  Employees’ competences
 Maturity of the employees
 Complexity of the task
 Leadership style

In the Situational Leadership model, the leadership style has been

divided into 4 types:

 S1: Telling - Telling style is associated with leaders who

minutely supervise their followers, constantly instructing
them about why, how and when of the tasks that need to
be performed.
 S2: Selling - Selling style is when a leader provide
controlled direction and is a little more open and allows
two way communication between him/herself and the
followers thus ensuring that the followers buy in the
process and work towards the desired goals.
 S3: Participating - This style is characterized when the
leaders seeks opinion and participation of the followers to
establish how a task should be performed. The leader in
this case tries creating relationship with the followers.
 S4: Delegating - In this case, the leader plays a role in
decisions that are taken but passes on or delegates the
responsibilities of carrying out tasks to his followers. The
leader however monitors and reviews the process.

The developmental level of follower is an important indication for

a leader to decide the most appropriate leadership style for them:

 D4 - High Competence, High Commitment - The

followers who are identified in this category are the ones
who have high competence and high commitment towards
tasks to be performed. It might happen so that they turn
out better than their leaders in performing these tasks. (For
e.g. cricketing legend Sachin Tendulkar playing in the
Indian cricket team under the captainship of Mahendra
Singh Dhoni)
 D3 - High Competence, Variable Commitment - This
category consists of followers who have the competence
to do the job but their commitment level is inconsistent.
They also tend to lack the confidence to go out and
perform task alone. (E.g. President Barack Obama)
 D2 - Some Competence, Low Commitment - In this case,
the followers have a certain level of competence which
might be sufficient to do the job but they are low on
commitment towards the tasks. Despite of having relevant
skills to perform the task they seek external help when
 faced with new situations. (A team member made the
trainer for new joiners)
 D1 - Low Competence, High Commitment - This category
of followers may not have the specific skill required but
they display a high level of commitment towards the task
they have to perform, with confidence and motivation,
they figure out ways to complete the tasks. (E.g.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, a lawyer by profession
who spearheaded the Indian Freedom Struggle)

4 CASE STUDY
Laura is the Associate Director of a non-profit agency that
10
provides assistance to children and families. She is the head of a
department that focuses on evaluating the skill-building programs
the agency provides to families. She reports directly to the agency
leadership. As a whole, the agency has been cautious in hiring
this year because of increased competition for federal grant
funding. However, they have also suffered high staff turnover.
Two directors have left as well as three key research staff and one
staff person from the finance department. Laura has a demanding
schedule that requires frequent travel; however, she supervises
two managers who in turn are responsible for five staff members
each. Both managers have been appointed within the last six
months. Manager 1: Kelly has a specific background in research.
She manages staff who provide research support to another
department that delivers behavioral health services to youth.
Kelly supports her staff and is very organized; however, she often
takes a very black and white view of issues. Upper level
leadership values Kelly’s latest research on the therapeutic
division’s services. Kelly is very motivated and driven and
expects the same from her staff. Manager 2: Linda has a strong
background in social science research and evaluation. She
manages staff that work on different projects within the agency.
She is known as a problem solver and is extremely supportive of
her staff. She is very organized and has a wealth of experience in
evaluation of family services. Linda is very capable and can
sometimes take on too much.
The managers are sensing that staff are becoming over worked as
everyone takes on increased responsibilities due to high staff
turnover. Staff have also mentioned that Laura’s “glass half-
empty” conversation style leaves them feeling dejected. In
addition, Laura has not shared budgets with her managers, so they
are having difficulty appropriately allocating work to staff. Laura
said she has not received sufficient information from the finance
department to complete the budgets. The finance department said
they have sent her all the information they have available. As
staff become distressed, the managers are becoming frustrated.
They feel like they are unable to advocate for their staff or
problem solve without key information like the departmental
budget.
QUESTIONS:

1. How can Laura most effectively use both management and

leadership skills in her role as associate director? What
combination of the two do you think would work best in this
setting?

2. What steps could be taken to build staff confidence?

1. How can Laura most effectively use both

management and leadership skills in her role as
associate director? What combination of the two
do you think would work best in this setting?
Ans. A director could be both a leader and manager. However,
given that the two mangers are very capable and directly manage
all the department staff, Laura should focus on being a leader. She
should delegate managerial responsibilities to the two managers.
This strategy will build the managers’ confidence, allowing them
to problem-solve for their staff. It will also free Laura to focus on
building a greater sense of staff commitment to mission and
vision
1. What steps could be taken to build staff confidence?
Ans. Staff seems uncertain about the future due to high
turnover and Laura’s negative conversation style. Building
staff confidence could involve:  Giving managers more
autonomy and the needed information to manage their
staff  Communicating regularly with staff about changes
 Encouraging staff to pursue professional development
and learning opportunities and providing time for them to
do so  Engaging in team building exercises and
interactions  Incentivizing excellent performance 
Addressing Laura’s conversation style directly, explaining
to her how it impacts staff perceptions  Involving staff in
the hiring process where possible as team vacancies are
filled  Talking to staff directly and without retribution
about the issues they think contribute to high-turnover
2. What advice would you give Laura on improving her
leadership skills and to the managers on improving their
management skills?
Ans. It might help for both Laura and the managers to take a
personality or leadership/management assessment. This way the
mangers can ascertain their individual skills, learn how they can
best support employees, and figure out how they can work
together to use each other's strengths to run the department. Using
a Style approach, Manager 1 appears to utilize a task oriented
approach and Manager 2 demonstrates a relationship oriented
style. These two orientations could be structured to support one
another. Laura can focus on building leadership skills by building
on her current strengths. In addition, Laura may want to revisit
the roles and responsibilities of each position and how her
division's work aligns with the overall organizational mission.
Aligning with the overall mission and communicating it to staff
may help improve