Introduction

The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions:

• Concern for People - This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs
of team members, their interests, and areas of personal development when
deciding how best to accomplish a task

• Concern for Production - This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes

concrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when
deciding how best to accomplish a task.

The Managerial Grid model by is a behavioral leadership model. On the grid, concern
for production is represented on a one to nine scale on the horizontal axis (x-axis).
Concern for people is represented on a one to nine scale on the vertical axis (y-axis).

According to Blake and Mouton there is also a third axis: Motivation, measured from
negative (driven by fear) to positive (driven by desire).

The concept distinguishes 5 different leadership styles, based on the concern for
people and the concern for production. Using the axis to plot leadership 'concerns for
production' versus 'concerns for people', the following five leadership styles are
defined:
LEADERSHIP STYLES

1. Country Club Leadership Style- High People/Low Production

Description: One-sided, thoughtful attention to the needs of employees.

Characteristics: The relationship-oriented manager has a high concern for people, but
a low concern for production. He pays much attention to the security and comfort of
the employees. He hopes that this will increase performance. He is almost incapable
of employing the more punitive, coercive and legitimate powers. This inability results
from fear that using such powers could jeopardize relationships with the other team
members.

Results in: A usually friendly atmosphere, but not necessarily very productive.

This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of
his/her team. These people operate under the assumption that as long as team
members are happy and secure then they will work hard. What tends to result is a
work environment that is very relaxed and fun but where production suffers due to
lack of direction and control.

2. Produce or Perish Leadership Style- High Production/Low People

Also known as Authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, people in this category believe

that employees are simply a means to an end. Employee needs are always secondary
to the need for efficient and productive workplaces. This type of leader is very
autocratic, has strict work rules, policies, and procedures, and views punishment as
the most effective means to motivate employees.

Description: Authoritarian or compliance leader.

Characteristics: The task-oriented manager is autocratic, has a high concern for

production, and a low concern for people. He finds employee needs unimportant and
simply a means to an end. He provides his employees with money and expects
performance back. There is little or no allowance for cooperation or collaboration. He
pressures his employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals.
Heavily task-oriented people are very strong on schedules. They are intolerant of
what they see as dissent (it may just be someone's creativity). This hard style is based
on Theory X of Douglas McGregor. It is often applied by companies on the edge of real
or perceived failure, such as in Crisis Management.

Results in: Whilst high output is achievable in the short term, much will be lost
through an inevitable high labor turnover.

3. Impoverished Leadership Style- Low Production/ Low People

Description: A delegate-and-disappear management style. A basically lazy approach.

Characteristics: The manager shows a low concern for both people and production. He
(or she) avoids to get into trouble. His main concern is not to be held responsible for
any mistakes.

Results in: Disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony due to lack of effective

leadership.

This leader is mostly ineffective. He/she has neither a high regard for creating
systems for getting the job done, nor for creating a work environment that is
satisfying and motivating. The result is a place of disorganization, dissatisfaction and
disharmony.

4. Middle-of-the-Road Leadership Style- Medium Production/Medium People

Description: The manager tries to balance between the competing goals of the
company and the needs of the workers.

Characteristics: The manager gives some concern to both people and production,
hoping to achieve acceptable performance. He believes this is the most anyone can
do.

Results in: Compromises in which neither the production nor the people needs are
fully met.

This style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns. It may at first
appear to be an ideal compromise. Therein lies the problem, though: When you
compromise, you necessarily give away a bit of each concern so that neither
production nor people needs are fully met. Leaders who use this style settle for
average performance and often believe that this is the most anyone can expect.

5. Team Leadership Style - High Production/High

People

Description: The ultimate. The manager pays high concern to both people and
production. Motivation is high.

Characteristics: This soft style is based on the propositions of Theory Y of Douglas

McGregor. The manager encourages teamwork and commitment among employees.
This style emphasizes making employees feel part of the company-family, and
involving them in understanding organizational purpose and determining production
needs.
Results in: Team environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high
satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production. This is also called the
Leadership Grid.

According to the Blake Mouton model, this is the pinnacle of managerial style. These
leaders stress production needs and the needs of the people equally highly. The
premise here is that employees are involved in understanding organizational purpose
and determining production needs. When employees are committed to, and have a
stake in the organization's success, their needs and production needs coincide. This
creates a team environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high
satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production.

Usage of the Managerial Grid.

Managerial grid is used in analyzing or coaching a manager, in particular regarding

relationships skills such as: dealing with critique, initiative, decision-making, conflict
resolution, advocacy (expressing opinions, ideas), inquiry (information seeking) and
resilience (reacting to problems or failures).

Strengths of the Managerial Grid.

Using the Grid model makes the various leadership styles measurable to a certain
extent and allows more than two competing options (X versus Y). Accurate
measurement is important, because of the tendency by managers for self-deception
and exaggeration.

Using a model makes it easier to openly discuss behavior and improvement actions.

Disadvantages of the Managerial Grid.

There are more dimensions of leadership that can be relevant.

The model basically neglects the significance of the internal and external constraints,
context, circumstances and situation.
REFERENCES

Blake, R. & Mouton, J. (1964) The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence.
Houston: Gulf Publishing Co.

Gareth R. Jones and Jennifer M. George (2009) Contemporary Management (Sixth Edition) Mc
Graw-Hill International Edition.

Bass, Bernard (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the
vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, (3), Winter, 1990, 19-31.

Blake, Robert R. and Mouton, Janse S. (1985). The Managerial Grid III: The Key to Leadership
Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co.

Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (1991). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ivancevich, J., Konopaske, R., Matteson, M. (2007). Organizational Behavior and Management.
New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3),
315-336.

Kouzes, James M. & Posner, Barry Z. (1987). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Lamb, L. F., McKee, K. B. (2004). Applied Public Relations: Cases in Stakeholder Management.
Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Routledge.

Mischel, W. 1968. Personality and Assessment . New York: Wiley.

Newstrom, J. & Davis, K. (1993). Organization Behavior: Human Behavior at Work. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Northouse, G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice. (3rd ed.) Thousand Oak, London, New
Delhe, Sage Publications, Inc.