Leadership: perspective in theory and research

by

Author: Arthur G. Jago

Presented by

Syed Rashedul Hossen, ID: 6320131003

September 22, 2021

 Introduction
• In the last 75 years
– Leaders vs non-leaders
– Effective vs ineffective leaders
– Role of leader
• Objective of this survey:
– Discuss theories of leadership research
– Identify important similarities and differences
among these theories
– To outline major organizational implications
from each theoretical perspectives
 Concepts & Definition
• Leadership is both a process and property.

• The process of leadership is the use of noncoercive

influence to direct and coordinate the activities of the
members of an organized group toward the
accomplishment of group objectives.

• As a property, leadership is the set of qualities or

characteristics, attributed to those, who are perceived to
successfully employ such influence.
 Concepts & Definition
• Leadership is not only some quality or characteristic that one possesses or is
perceived to possess, it can be something that one does.
• It can describe an act as well as a person.
• Leadership does not involve the use of force, coercion or domination and is
not necessarily implied by the use of such titles as manager, supervisor, or
superior.
• It provides a conceptual distinction between leadership processes and
motivational processes.
• Leadership is therefore distinct from "supervision" or what might be termed
"headship
• It does not restrict the role of leader to one formally designated member of a
group or, for that matter, to any single group member.
• Leadership is an evolving, dynamic process. At times, leaders become
followers and followers become leaders.
 Universal vs contingent theories
•Successful or effective leadership does not depend on the characteristics of the
situation in which the leader operates.
• Leadership is proposed to be a general as opposed to specific phenomenon.
•what constitutes effective leadership for the corporation president is essentially
the same as that for the shopfloor foreman; clergyman.
• Leadership is invariant within, as well as between, roles.
•Different circumstances encountered by the leader are not necessarily seen as
requiring different forms of leadership.
•Different circumstances encountered by the leader are not necessarily seen as
requiring different forms of leadership because they propose that there exists a
"one -best-way" to lead, such perspectives attempt to offer universal
prescriptions for leadership.
•These theories provide contingent prescriptions for leadership; that is,
prescriptions contingent on certain situational factors.
 Traits vs behaviors
• Secondly, perspectives differ in the way the leadership construct is
conceptualized.
• It is possible to view leadership primarily in terms or relatively stable and
enduring characteristics or people.
• Leadership can be viewed as a trait (or set of traits) distributed in some way
among the population.
• leadership is viewed as a measurable and quantifiable property possessed in
different amounts by different people.
• Alternatively, it is possible to focus on observable leader behaviors rather than
on inherent traits.
• From such a perspective, leadership exists primarily in the actions of the
leader .
• Leadership is expressed in terms of overt behavior patterns rather than in
terms or some intrinsic property or characteristics.
A typology of leadership perspective

TABLE I
A T y p o lo g y o f le a d e r s h ip P e r s p e c tiv e s
T h e o re tic a l A p p ro a c h
U n iv e rs a l C o n lin g e n t
L eader Type Type
Focal T ra its I Ill
L e a d e rsh ip
C o n s tr u c t L eader Type Type
B e h a v io rs II IV
 Type 1 perspectives: The search for universal
leadership traits
• Upto 1940's leadership research was dominated by attempts to show that
leaders possessed some intrinsic quality or characteristic that differentiated
them from followers.
• The search was directed toward identifying that property possessed by the
likes of Napoleon, Hitler, Lincoln, Gandhi. Kennedy (and their lesser known
counterparts in educational, military and industrial settings) that would
ultimately prove to be the essence or successful and effective leadership.
• The research mainly focused on 2 key issues:
• (1) The measurements and qualifications of leadership traits;
• (2) The relation between those traits and standards of leader effectiveness.
• The research gives out many traits for effective leadership, which provides a
quantitative estimate of potential leaders and a basis for choosing the best
individual.
 Type 1 perspectives: The search for universal
leadership traits( Cont’d)
• However, several features can be barriers that prevent the development of such a
test for measuring some traits supposed for leadership with 2 main pretexts: (1)
the relationship amongst those features are not typically sustainable and essential;
• (2) the direction and the relationship amongst those are dependent on certain
situational contingencies.
• the relative significance of those traits would be influenced by some factors like
the group’s settings, historical precedent, group’s goals, the traits or
characteristics of subordinates.
• Finally, there are 2 main potentials issues with testing the existence of a
leadership trait:
• (1) As there would be measurable distinction between leaders and followers, the
inappropriate selection process employed to find out manager, could be debated,
more than the nature of leadership;
• (2) It may not be implied, that the leadership trait preceded selection to the
leadership role, with a simple comparison of leaders and followers.
 Type 2 perspectives: Leadership styles
• For this perspective, effective leaders were presumably distinguished from
ineffective leaders, not by how they behaved on an intelligence or personality
test but rather, by how they behaved when interacting with followers or
potential followers.
• Type II research concentrated on two related issues.
– The first issue concerned the dimensionality of leader behavior. What meaningful categories
or factors can be used to describe differences in leader behavior? What summary dimensions
can be used to identify patterns-or "styles"-or leader behavior?
– The second issue concerned on the relative effectiveness or different leader behaviors. What
categories or factors, seem to distinguish effective from ineffective leaders? What is the
optimal leadership style?
• The research concentrated on 2 main issues:
• (1) the dimensionality of leader behaviors;
• (2) the relative effectiveness of different leader actions. Consideration and
Initiating Structure
Type 2 perspectives: Leadership styles( cont’d)
• To address the dimensionality issue, there are 2 distinct factors emerged:

• (1) Consideration is involved in a series of aspects related to both

communication and consultation, mutual trust, respect that a leader
interacts with subordinates;
• (2) Initiating structure is involved in some ways, including organizing
relations among members, establishing favorable channels of
interactions as well as suggesting methods to achieve the group’s
missions.
• However, there are some studies, which indicate that under certain
circumstances a behavior pattern emphasizing both consideration and
initiating structure may not be ideal because the leadership effectiveness
may depend on 8 key factors and one’s standard selection.
Type 2 perspectives: Leadership styles( cont’d)

• Autocracy-democracy :There is a comparison between autocracy and

democracy. While autocratic leadership is characterized by highly centralized
decision-making and completely concentrated power, democratic leadership is
characterized by highly participative decision-making and power equalization.
• Researches by Morse and Reimer suggest that democratic leadership provides
opportunities for subordinates to express and achieve individual requirements
for accomplishing the goals and enhance the effectiveness of making any
decision.
• Leader behavior: Cause or Effect? :The assumption in Leader Style’s research
is that leadership behavior determines organizational consequences as well as
members’ satisfaction and performance in the group.
• Farris and Lim report that leaders who believed in their subordinate behaviors
with high performers, displayed greater supportiveness and better goal
emphasis, than those who believed that their subordinates were low performers.
 Type 3 perspectives: Fiedler's Contingency
Model
•The research provides theoretical and empirical elaboration through offering
more complicated models, which may come closer to show the complexities of
leadership effectiveness.
•Specifically, it is concerned with clarifying the conditions that certain leader
traits come into effect. Task versus relationship motivation is measured by the scale.
•Relationship-oriented and task-oriented leadership is distinctly similar to the
research of consideration and initiating structure leader behavior. In fact, the
researcher used the terms high and low least preferred co-worker to replace
consideration and initiating structure.
•The research also proposed situation favorableness with three critical
dimensions in the apparent order of importance, including Leader-member relations,
Task structure, and Position power respectively.
• The most favorable of these combinations is the situation characterized by 3
main factors, namely good leader-member relations, a structured task, and strong
position power.
 Type 4 perspectives: Behavioral Contingencies

• This type reaches the assumption that effective leadership depends on the situation,
which is defined in terms of behaviors rather than traits.
• The research attempts to resolve similar inconsistencies and contradictions that
stem from Type II research. In fact, two-third of the research are attempted to prove
the situational contingencies contributing to resolving issues that could be found out
through consideration and initiating structure and the auto democratic literature.
• Path-goal Theory: In this aspect, leadership is considered in terms of both the
motivating impact and the need satisfaction impact, that the leader can have on
followers.
• Effective leadership is supposed to involve behaviors that increase follower
performance through giving out psychological states that result in enhancing
motivation or the requirement of satisfaction.
• In addition, the research advocates that leader’s mission is to assist his followers in
attaining their goals and objectives.
• Moreover, the leader has to provide his subordinates the favorable conditions to
guarantee such goals to be compatible with the organizational accomplishments.
 Type 4 perspectives: Behavioral Contingencies
• The contingency theory of behavioral leadership supposes the fact that the BC propositions
imply the effectiveness of various leadership behaviors depends on 2 main realms, such as
characteristics of subordinates and the environment within which they function.
The empirical research concentrated on 2 main specific hypotheses:
• (1) leader initiating structure will contribute to the satisfaction and dissatisfaction of
followers who engaged in ambiguous missions;
• (2) leader consideration will have positive effects on the satisfaction of followers engaged
in clear tasks.
So, the research reveals 2 main cases:
• (1) if task demands are unclear, structuring behaviors through providing the compulsory
guidance and instruction, are likely to clarify expectations to objectives accomplishment of
members in the organization.
• (2) if task demands are self-evident, followers may resent a leader, with an attempt to
initiating further structures.
• Effective leadership in an organized situation, engages in personally supportive behavior,
which provides a source of rewards for followers.
 Type 4 perspectives: Behavioral Contingencies
• Leadership is seen in terms of the process by which a leader motivates and shapes the
followers’ behaviors by controlling consequences associated with various behaviors.
• It clearly suggests that making positive rewards, contingent on performance, will motivate
followers and provide their need satisfaction.
• Vroom and Yetton propose that the effectiveness of a decision, is a function of 3 main
classes in regard to outcomes. each or which may be expected to be affected by the decision
process used. These are:
• I. The quality or rationality of the decision.
• 2. The acceptance or commitment on the part of subordinates to execute the decision
correctively.
• 3. The amount or time required to make the decision.
• In BC perspectives researches found:
• (1) leaders take greater participation on some issues that they lack relevant information or
expertise or those problems which require subordinate acceptances and commitments;
• (2) leaders are more active in joining when subordinates confide in organizational
achievements rather than when they do not or the potential conflict amongst followers in
the group.
 Conclusion
• The four-fold typology employed in this review is designed to provide a useful
vehicle for organizing the dominant trends in prior leadership research.
• the typology has been used to identify historical trends in leadership research
and to indicate how certain perspectives represent outgrowths of others.
• No leadership theory can rightfully claim comprehensive treatment of the
entire domain of leadership phenom­ena. Because at least some empirical
support is available for each perspective.
• Leadership appears to be a far more complex set of cause-and-effect
relationships than suggested by any one of the comparatively simple
theoretical models offered to date.
• Much future research will undoubtedly be directed toward testing and refining
existing leadership approaches as well as bringing new perspectives also.
• It is clear that new methods and measures are required if leadership is to
develop and mature as a subdiscipline within behavioral science.
 Discussion
• 1. “some critics of leadership research view that research
in the leadership area so far produced a fragmented
literature which are lacking consistency and a
programmatic thrust”- Do you agree?
• 2. Now it is said that global leadership is incompetent
compare to previous generations, what is your views?