 Leadership is both a research area and a

practical skill encompassing the ability of an

individual or organization to "lead" or guide
other individuals, teams, or
entire organizations.

 We define leadership as the ability to

influence a group toward the achievement
of a vision or set of goals.

 Non-sanctioned leadership— the ability

to influence that arises outside the formal
structure of the organization—
 Trait leadership is defined as integrated patterns of
personal characteristics that reflect a range of
individual differences and foster consistent leader
effectiveness across a variety of group and
organizational situations.

The theory of trait leadership is developed from

early leadership research which focused primarily
on finding a group of heritable attributes that
differentiate leaders from non-leaders.

Leader effectiveness refers to the amount of

influence a leader has on individual or group
performance, followers’ satisfaction, and overall
effectiveness
Emergence: Development
Effectiveness: Productivity
  A comprehensive review of the leadership literature, when organized around
A review in the late 1960s of 20 the Big Five, has found extraversion to be the most important trait of
different studies identified nearly effective leaders, but it is more strongly related to the way leaders emerge than
80 leadership traits, but only 5 were to their effectiveness.
common to 4 or more of the
investigations. By the 1990s, after o Sociable and dominant people are more likely to assert themselves in
numerous studies and analyses, about group situations, but leaders need to make sure they’re not too assertive—
the best we could say was that most one study found leaders who scored very high on assertiveness were less
leaders “are not like other people,” but effective than those who were moderately high.
the particular traits that characterized
them varied a great deal from review  Conscientiousness and openness to experience also showed strong
to review. It was a pretty confusing relationships to leadership, though not quite as strong as extraversion. Overall,
state of affairs. the trait approach does have something to offer.

 Leaders who like being around people and are able to assert themselves
(extraverted), who are disciplined and able to keep commitments they make
(conscientious), and who are creative and flexible (open) do have an apparent
advantage when it comes to leadership, suggesting good leaders do have key
traits in common.
 Another trait that may indicate effective leadership is emotional intelligence (EI).
Why is EI so critical to effective leadership?

o A core component of EI is empathy. Empathetic leaders can sense others’ needs, listen to what followers
say (and don’t say), and read the reactions of others. A leader who effectively displays and manages
emotions will find it easier to influence the feelings of followers, by both expressing genuine sympathy
and enthusiasm for good performance and by using irritation for those who fail to perform

Conclusion:

Based on the latest findings, we offer two conclusions.

o First, contrary to what we believed 20 years ago and thanks to the Big Five, we can say that traits can
predict leadership.
o Second, traits do a better job predicting the emergence of leaders and the appearance of leadership than
actually distinguishing between effective and ineffective leaders.

The fact that an individual exhibits the traits and that others consider him or her a leader does not necessarily mean the
leader is successful at getting the group to achieve its goals.
 The most comprehensive theories resulted from the Ohio State
Studies in the late 1940s, which sought to identify independent
dimensions of leader behavior.

1) Initiating structure is the extent to which a leader is likely to

The failures of early trait studies led researchers in the late
define and structure his or her role and those of employees in the
1940s through the 1960s to wonder whether there was
search for goal attainment. It includes behavior that attempts to
something unique in the way effective leaders behave.
organize work, work relationships, and goals.
Trait research provides a basis for selecting the right people
o A leader high in initiating structure is someone who
for leadership. In contrast, behavioral theories of leadership
“assigns group members to particular tasks,” “expects
implied we could train people to be leaders.
workers to maintain definite standards of performance,”
and “emphasizes the meeting of deadlines.”

2) Consideration is the extent to which a person’s job

relationships are characterized by mutual trust, respect for
employees’ ideas, and regard for their feelings.
o A leader high in consideration helps employees with
personal problems, is friendly and approachable, treats
all employees as equals, and expresses appreciation and
support. In a recent survey, when asked to indicate what
most motivated them at work, 66 percent of employees
mentioned appreciation.
Leadership studies at the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center had similar objectives: to
locate behavioral characteristics of leaders that appeared related to performance effectiveness. The
Michigan group also came up with two behavioral dimensions:

1) Employee-oriented leader emphasized interpersonal relationships by taking a personal interest

in the needs of employees and accepting individual differences among them.
2) Production oriented leader emphasized the technical or task aspects of the job, focusing on
accomplishing the group’s tasks.

These dimensions are closely related to the Ohio State dimensions. Employee-oriented leadership is
similar to consideration, and production-oriented leadership is similar to initiating structure. In fact, most
leadership researchers use the terms synonymously.

• However, studies found the followers of leaders high in consideration

were more satisfied with their jobs, were more motivated, and had more
respect for their leader. Initiating structure was more strongly related to
higher levels of group and organization productivity and more positive
performance evaluations
Some research from the GLOBE study suggests there are international differences in preference for initiating
structure and consideration

• U.S. manager leading a team in Brazil would need to be team oriented, participative, and humane. Leaders high
in consideration would succeed best in this culture
• Chinese culture emphasizes being polite, considerate, and unselfish, but it also has a high performance
orientation. Thus, consideration and initiating structure may both be important.

Summary of Trait Theories and Behavioral Theories

• Leaders who have certain traits and who display consideration and structuring behaviors do appear to be more
effective. Perhaps you’re wondering whether conscientious leaders (trait) are more likely to be structuring (behavior)
and extraverted leaders (trait) to be considerate (behavior). Unfortunately, we can’t be sure there is a connection.
Future research is needed to integrate these approaches.

Some leaders may have the right traits or display the right behaviors and still fail. As important as traits and behaviors
are in identifying effective or ineffective leaders, they do not guarantee success. The context matters, too
Contingent: Depend
Fiedler's Contingency Theory of Leadership states
that your effectiveness as a leader is determined by
how well your leadership style matches the
situation. The theory is based on the premise that
each of us has one and only one leadership style
which can be scored on the Least Preferred Co-
worker (LPC) scale.
1) Identifying Leadership Style

Fiedler believes a key factor in leadership success is the individual’s basic leadership style. He created the least preferred
co-worker (LPC) questionnaire to identify that style by measuring whether a person is task or relationship oriented.
The LPC questionnaire asks respondents to think of all the co-workers they have ever had and describe the one they least
enjoyed working with by rating that person on a scale of 1 to 8 for each of 16 sets of contrasting adjectives (such as
pleasant–unpleasant, efficient–inefficient, open–guarded, supportive–hostile).

• If you describe the person you are least able to work with in favorable terms (a high LPC score), Fiedler
would label you relationship oriented.
• If you see your least-preferred co-worker in unfavorable terms (a low LPC score), you are primarily interested
in productivity and are task oriented. About 16 percent of respondents score in the middle range and thus fall
outside the theory’s predictions.

Fiedler assumes an individual’s leadership style is fixed. This means if a situation requires a task-oriented leader and the
person in the leadership position is relationship oriented, either the situation has to be modified or the leader has to be
replaced to achieve optimal effectiveness.

2) Defining the Situation

After assessing an individual’s basic leadership style through the LPC questionnaire, we match the leader with the
situation. Fiedler has identified three contingency or situational dimensions:
1. Leader–member relations is the degree of confidence, trust, and respect members have in their leader.
 2. Task structure is the degree to which the job assignments are procedurized (that is, structured or unstructured).
3. Position power is the degree of influence a leader has over power variables such as hiring, firing, discipline,
promotions, and salary increases.

The next step is to evaluate the situation in terms of these three variables.
o Fiedler states that the better the leader–member relations, the more highly structured the job, and the stronger the
position power, the more control the leader has.

• A very favorable situation (in which the leader has a great deal of control) might include a payroll manager who is well
respected and whose employees have confidence in her (good leader–member relations); activities that are clear and
specific—such as wage computation, check writing, and report filing (high task structure); and provision of considerable
freedom to reward and punish employees (strong position power).
• An unfavorable situation might be that of the disliked chairperson of a volunteer United Way fundraising team. In this job,
the leader has very little control.

3) Matching Leaders and Situations

The Fiedler model proposes matching an individual’s LPC score and these eight situations to achieve maximum leadership
effectiveness.
o Fiedler concluded that task-oriented leaders perform better in situations very favorable to them and very unfavorable.
So, when faced with a category I, II, III, VII, or VIII situation, task-oriented leaders perform better.
o Relationship oriented leaders, however, perform better in moderately favorable situations— categories IV, V, and VI.

In recent years, Fiedler has condensed these eight situations down to three. He now says task-oriented leaders perform best in
situations of high and low control, while relationship-oriented leaders perform best in moderate control situations.
How would you apply Fiedler’s findings?
You would match leaders—in terms of their LPC scores—with the type of situation—
in terms of leader– member relationships, task structure, and position power—for
which they were best suited. But remember that Fiedler views an individual’s
leadership style as fixed. Therefore, there are only two ways to improve leader
effectiveness.

o First, you can change the leader to fit the situation—as a baseball manager
puts a right- or left-handed pitcher into the game depending on the hitter. If a
group situation rates highly unfavorable but is currently led by a relationship-
oriented manager, the group’s performance could be improved under a
manager who is task-oriented.
o The second alternative is to change the situation to fit the leader by
restructuring tasks or increasing or decreasing the leader’s power to control
factors such as salary increases, promotions, and disciplinary actions.

4) Evaluation
Studies testing the overall validity of the Fiedler model find considerable evidence to
support substantial parts of it. If we use only three categories rather than the original
eight, ample evidence supports Fiedler’s conclusions. But the logic underlying the
LPC questionnaire is not well understood, and respondents’ scores are not stable. The
contingency variables are also complex and difficult for practitioners to assess.
1) The situational leadership theory refers to those leaders
who adopt different leadership styles according to
the situation and the development level of their team
members. It is an effective way of leadership because it
adapts to the team's needs and sets a beneficial balance for
the whole organization.
 According to path–goal theory, whether a leader should be
directive or supportive or should demonstrate some other
behavior depends on complex analysis of the situation. It
predicts the following:

● Directive leadership yields greater satisfaction when

tasks are ambiguous or stressful than when they are
highly structured and well laid out.

● Supportive leadership results in high performance

and satisfaction when employees are performing
structured tasks.
o The Path-Goal model is a theory based on specifying a
leader's style or behavior that best fits the employee and ● Directive leadership is likely to be perceived as
work environment in order to achieve a goal. redundant among employees with high ability or
considerable experience.
o Path–goal theory assumes that leaders are flexible and that
they can change their style, as situations require.
The theory proposes two contingency variables, such as
environment and follower characteristics, that moderate the
leader behavior-outcome relationship.
 The model is normative—it provides a decision tree of seven contingencies and five leadership
styles for determining the form and amount of participation in decision making.

 Research testing both the original and revised leader-participation models has not been encouraging,
although the revised model rates higher in effectiveness. Criticism focuses on the model’s
complexity and the variables it omits.

 The theories we’ve covered to this point assume leaders use a fairly homogeneous style with
everyone in their work unit.