LEADERSHIP THEORIES

NDEJJE UNIVERSITY

Mr. Musa Manga Nsubuga

PhD (Cand.) UK; MSc Eng. Envir. (1.1 Dist) Leeds, UK; BSc.
Const.(1.1 Hons) MAK; Dip. Arch

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND SPORTS SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
Leadership
The ability to influence
a group toward the
achievement of goals.

Management
Use of authority inherent
in designated formal
rank to obtain
compliance from
organizational members.
 Trait Theory  Contingency Theories
 Ghiselli  Fiedler
 Bases Of Influence  House &
(Power) Mitchell
 French & Raven  Vroom & Yetton
 Behavioral Theories  Role Theories
 Ohio State  Mintzberg
University
 Blake & Mouton
 Theories that consider personality, social, physical, or
intellectual traits to differentiate leaders from non-
leaders.

LEADERS ARE
“BORN,” NOT MADE
 Physical Characteristics
 Appearance, Height, Age
 Personality

 Extroversion, Persistence, Self-assurance,

Decisiveness
 Intelligence
 Knowledge, Ability, Judgment
 Social Characteristics

 Tact, Diplomacy, Sociability, Fluency

 The Big Five Personality Traits
*** Extroversion (Ambition, Energy)
** Conscientiousness
** Openness To Experience
* Emotional Stability/Intelligence (Self-confidence)

Agreeableness
 Limitations:
 No universal traits found that predict leadership in all
situations.
 Unclear evidence of the cause and effect of
relationship of leadership and traits.
 Better predictor of the appearance of leadership than
distinguishing effective and ineffective leaders.
 Vision & Articulation
 Proposes A Better Future – An Optimistic Goal
 Delivered Clearly In A Convincing Fashion
 Personal Risk
 Willing To Take Risks & Incur Costs To Achieve The
Vision
 Self-sacrifice Will Be Necessary
 Environmental Sensitivity
 Knows Whether The Environment Will Be Supportive
 Knows What Resources Are Needed To Bring About
Change
 Sensitivity To Followers
 Perceptive Of Others’ Abilities, Needs & Feelings
 Taps Into Follower Emotions
 Unconventional Behavior
 May Do Things That Are Novel, Or Contrary To The
Norms

IS THE VISION VALUE-BASED? WILL THE

FOLLOWERS BECOME ENTHUSIASTIC? DO
THE PEOPLE BELIEVE THE VISION IS
ATTAINABLE? ARE CHARISMATIC LEADERS
“BORN” OR CAN THEY BE TAUGHT?
 Correlated With High Satisfaction Among Followers

 Effective When There Is An Ideological Part To The

Task, Or Facing Stress & Uncertainty

 Charismatic Leaders – Don’t Tolerate Criticism,

Surround Themselves With “Yes” People

 29 Firms Study --- Found An Absence Of Ego-driven

Charismatic Leaders
 Inspirational, Idea-oriented, Visionary
 Dramatic, Arouses Intense Feelings
 Communicates High Expectations & A Need For
Change
 Unpredictable
 Relies On Referent Or Charismatic Power
 Raises Level Of Awareness And Commitment
 Gets Followers To Transcend Their Self-interests
 Requires Trust And Belief In The Vision Presented
 Exchanges Rewards For Services
 MANAGEMENT BY EXCEPTION (Watches For
Deviations)
 Keeps The System Operating Smoothly
 Uses Reward And Coercive Power Bases
 Recognizes What Workers Want & Tries To Deliver It
 Rewards According To Worker Effort
 Responsive To Worker Self-interests

Is Transformational Leadership Built “On Top Of”

Transactional Leadership, Or Is It Just A Special
Case Of Charismatic Leadership?
 Assumption
 Leaders Are Born, Not Made!
 Implication
 We Must Be Very Careful In How We Select Our Leaders
 Limitations
 It Overlooks The Needs Of Followers
 It Ignores Situational Factors
 Cause And Effect Are Not Clearly Defined
Do Self-confident Leaders Cause Firms To Be Successful,
Or Does A Successful Firm Allow A Leader To Feel
Self-confident?
 Legitimate Power
 Authority To Command, Based On The Position
 Reward Power

 Able To Award Positive, Desired Outcomes

 Coercive Power

 Able To Threaten, Punish Or Harm

 Expert Power

 Influence Based On Knowledge And Information

 Referent Power

 Influence Based On Charisma, Identification And

Trust
 Resistance
 Coercive
 Compliance

 Legitimate
 Reward
 Commitment

 Expert
 Referent
 Expert Power
 Act Confident And Decisive
 Keep Informed
 Don’t Threaten Subordinates’ Self-esteem – Be
Approachable
 Willing To Share Your Knowledge With Others
 Referent Power
 Treat Subordinates Fairly
 Defend Subordinates’ Interests
 Be Sensitive To Subordinates’ Needs & Feelings
 Legitimate Power
 Be Cordial, Polite, And Confident
 Make Appropriate Requests
 Follow Proper Channels
 Exercise Power Regularly And Enforce Compliance
 Reward Power
 Verify Compliance And Accomplishments
 Offer Rewards For Desired Actions And Behaviors
 Offer Credible Rewards That Are Desired By
Subordinates
 Coercive Power
 Inform Subordinates Of Rules And Penalties
 Understand The Situation Before Acting & Warn
Before Punishing
 Administer Punishment Consistently & Punish In
Private
 Ohio State Studies/U. of Michigan
 Initiating Structure/Production Orientation
 Consideration/Employee Orientation
 Assumption: Leaders can be trained
 Goal: Develop leaders
 Problem: Effective behaviors do not generalize across
situations
Initiating Structure
The extent to which a leader is likely to define
and structure his or her role and those of sub-
ordinates in the search for goal attainment.

Consideration
The extent to which a leader is likely to have job
relationships characterized by mutual trust,
respect for subordinate’s ideas, and regard for
their feelings.
Employee-Oriented Leader
Emphasizing interpersonal relations; taking a
personal interest in the needs of employees and
accepting individual differences among members.

Production-Oriented Leader
One who emphasizes technical or task
aspects of the job.
 Assumption
Leaders Are Effective Because Of The Actions They
Take
 Implication
We Can Learn To Become Leaders By Studying What
Effective Leaders Do
 Limitations
Situational Factors That Influence Success Or Failure
Are Ignored
Leaders Need To Be Flexible…you Can’t Lead The
Same Way All The Time
 All Consider the Situation
 Fiedler’s Contingency Model
 Cognitive Resource Theory
 Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model
 Path Goal Theory

 Assumptions underlying the different models:

Fiedler: Leader’s style is fixed
Other’s: Leader’s style can and should be changed
 Considers Leader Behaviors (Task & Relationship)
 Assumes Leaders CAN change their behaviors
 Considers Followers as the Situation

 Follower Task maturity (ability & experience)

 Follower Psychological maturity (willingness to take
responsibility)
 Assumptions

 Leaders can and should change their style to fit their

followers’ degree of readiness (willingness and ability)
 Therefore, it is possible to TRAIN leaders to better fit their
style to their followers
Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)
A contingency theory that focuses on followers’ readiness;
the more “ready” the followers (the more willing and able)
the less the need for leader support and supervision.

LOW Amount of Follower Readiness HIGH

Amount of Leader Support &

Supervision Required
LOW
HIGH
Follower Readiness
Unwilling Willing

Supportive Monitoring
Able Participative
Leadership
Styles
Unable High Task
and
Directive
Relationship
Orientations