Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

LEADERSHIP

Is a process of influence between leader and followers, which is to achieve the goals of
a group, organization or society.
Four major aspects:
a. That leadership is not a static trait or characteristic that lies in the leader it is a process
that takes place over time in being involved in an interactive relation leader, followers
and situation.
b. Leadership involves influence
c. Leadership is a group phenomenon.
d. That the influence is directed at obtaining a common goal.

Stages in the study of leadership, four phases:


1. Focus trait: 30/40 years: the leadership is an innate ability that some people have.
2. Focus on leadership styles: 40/60 years: is interested in determining the behaviour
of leaders and their relation to the performance or satisfaction of subordinates.
3. Contingency Model: 70/mediados end of the 80s: the effectiveness of leadership is
determined by situational aspects: type of task, power of the leader....
4. Approximation of the new leadership from the mid-80 emphasizes the motivational
capacity of the leader through the vision and charisma to try to explain the effects that
some leaders are able to bring their followers.

A) APPROACHES CENTRED ON THE LEADERSHIP.

1) The Trait Approach


From this perspective holds that leaders have a number of traits that
differentiate them from their followers. While this concept fell into disuse after
the 50's, has resurfaced again in a less radical version.
House and Aditya hue three important aspects:
1. It seems that there are a number of features that consistently distinguish the
leaders from those who are not: physical energy, greater than the average
intelligence of his followers, self-confidence and achievement motivation and
power.
2. The effects of traits on behaviour increase the effectiveness of the leader
when these traits are relevant to the situation where the leader develops.
3. Traits have more influence on behaviour of the leaders when the
characteristics of the situation allowing the expression of individual provisions.
When there are strong rules, rewards or punishment associated with certain
behaviours, the situation, rather than traits, determines the behaviour of the
leader.
2) The focus of leadership styles
It focuses on establishing a typology of leadership behaviors. Interested in
determining what the leaders are and what consequences those behaviors on
group members. The origin of this approach can be found in Lewin's
experiments on the effects of autocratic and democratic leadership in groups of
children.
Adult Leader: to secure a democratic or autocratic atmosphere in groups
composed of children of 10/11 years.
Democratic leader: activities were subject to the approval of the group.
Members were free to work with colleagues they wanted. Were allowed to
organize the division of tasks. The leader tried to be a member in the group.
Autocratic leader: the leader determined the activities saying how and with
whom. Avoided involvement in group activities.
Results: The autocratic group had less cooperative, more hostility among
members and greater subservience to the leader.
Subsequently, three lines of research analyze the behaviour of leaders, with
very similar results:
Ohio's approach, the focus of Michigan and the leadership grid. In all there are
two major dimensions of leader behaviour: task orientation and relationships
orientation. Ohio´s investigation showed two dimensions: Initation to the
structure and Consideration.
Initation to the structure : the leader behaviours are related to work planning,
definition of responsibilities, all the leader guide, structure, and is active in
carrying out the task.
Consideration: leader behaviours concern for the welfare of subordinates and
maintain a good atmosphere within the team.
The authors consider that these two dimensions were independent.
is expected that the initiation of structure is related positively with group
performance and the consideration to employee satisfaction.
However, variability and inconsistency of the results was to give increasing
importance to the situational aspects of leadership.

B) INTERACTION BETWEEN THE LEADERSHIP AND THE SITUATION


VARIABLES: MODELS FOR CONTINGENCY

was based on the premise that the performance of a group or organization depends not
only on the characteristics of the leader but also various situational variables.
The contingency model of leadership effectiveness: Fiedler
The effectiveness of leadership depends on a combination of situational factors with
certain personal characteristics of the leader.
Among the situational factors are taken into account:

The relationship, good or bad, with the leader of the group: group atmosphere.

The degree to which work and power of the leader.

The leader's personal characteristics:



If he is orientated to the task: if his main purpose is to complete the work.

If he is orientated to the relationship: when it gives priority to get along with
subordinates.

Combination of situational factors with the personal guidance of the leader is


predicted:

• The task-oriented leaders get better results in extreme situations.



The leaders focused on the relationship perform better in situations where the
level of control is medium.

Fiedler and Garcia, the theory of leadership resources


An extension of the Contingency Model.
Variables: experience and intelligence of the leader and the stress they are subject and
subordinate leaders. Thus, in conditions:
Under Stress: intelligence correlates positively with performance but experience do it
in a negative way.
High stress : occurs on the contrary, intelligence correlates negatively with the
performance and experience positively.

D) THE INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP AS A PROCESS: THE THEORY OF


CREDIT IDIOSINCRATYC.

We must know the idiosyncratic theory of appropriation by Hollander to explain why,


on occasion, the leader is allowed to deviate from the norm group. This theory takes
into account a past often overlooked in other theories: that leadership is built over time.
It is also contemplated that the method of election of the leader (appointed or elected) is
important in perceiving and prosecute their work.
The theory of idiosyncratic credit
This theory tries to explain how the influence of leaders varies over time and under
what circumstances the group tolerates the leader deviates from the norm group.
General rule: when the leader arrive to the group finds it difficult to influenciate on it,
but as evidence of its effectiveness and acceptance of the rules of the group is gaining
credit in the eyes of his followers.
These credits give to the leader more status, increase their ability to influence and give
it some independence of the standards group.
The origin of the authority of the leader is the factor that determines the degree of
influence and acceptance of the leader.
Several Hollander experiments show that:
The elected leaders are perceived as more responsive to the needs of followers, more
interested in the work group and more competent leaders designated by an external
authority. The support group members to the elected leader depends on your skill and
success of their business.
In the case of the designated leader, support depends on only one of these factors:
competition or success.

E) THE LEADERSHIP IN THE CONTEXT OF THE RELATIONS


INTERGROUP.

These theories in the study of leadership considered that this phenomenon is influenced
by the relationships that the group's leader has with other groups. From this perspective,
the leader is the prototypical member of the group (the one that best embodies their
values) and to the extent that members will act in this group prototypical leader. It is
important to realize that: a) the prototypical leader is not static and can vary depending
on the objectives that the group pursued and that b) the leader can also help to define
what is prototypical of the group according to their interests. Theories discussed have
ignored one important fact: the phenomenon is a leadership group and the groups are
not isolated but never having relations with other groups in their environment.
B) THE CROSS-CULTURAL LEADERSHIP

values, beliefs, norms and ideals inherent in a particular culture affect the behavior of
the leader and his goals and also affects the perception that followers have about their
leaders.
Hofstede found four dimensions used to characterize different cultures and for making
comparisons among them:
1. Power distance: the degree to which members of an organization or society expect
and accept unequal distribution of power.
a. Society with low power distance and authoritarian leader: rejection of their
subordinates.
b. Society with high power distance of a little lead managers: perceived as weak and
ineffectual.
2. Individualism / collectivism:
a. Individualism is characteristic of societies in which relations between individuals are
weak. A leader will have trouble focusing on the relationship.
b. Collectivism is characteristic of societies in which individuals are integrated into
strong, cohesive groups that protect them, asking to change an unquestionable loyalty.
Hopefully within a collectivist culture that a leader focused on the task is difficult.
3. Masculinity / femininity:
a. In masculine societies: the sexual roles are clearly defined. Men are expected to be
assertive, strong and focused on material success. Women are expected to be modest,
tender and interested in the quality of life. The leader must be assertive, determined,
aggressive and makes decisions by himself, without consulting the group.
b. In feminine societies, both roles overlap extensively. The ideal leader is more
intuitive, and look for consensus.
4. Uncertainty avoidance: the degree to which members of a culture feel threatened by
uncertainty or fear of unknown situations.
a. In countries with high uncertainty avoidance is emotional need laws governing the
action every time.
It would require a leader manager. In such a culture would be expected to tell the leader
in each moment what to do because, otherwise, it would create great anxiety.
b. In countries with low avoidance is largely rejecting the formal rules. A leadership
management arouse too strong resistance because people are expected to participate in
decisions and is willing to take responsibility.