LEADERSHIP MODELS

Leadership Models Assignment Joan M. Black-Valentine University of Phoenix

LEADERSHIP MODELS

Many definitions of leadership exist, and some are more apropos than others are. Leadership is not just the "word of the day" taking the place of empowerment, paradigm, and management by objectives but is a key ingredient in a dynamic, changing culture (Louis, 1996). Cohen (2009) defines leadership as leaders asking questions to set direction, putting the right people in the right positions, seeking insight from all levels, and ensuring resources are allocated to the highest priority while acting ethically at all times and engaging people to stretch beyond what is comfortable to maximize results. Further writings (Navahandi, 2006) define leadership in context with leaders. First, leadership is a group phenomenon as there can be no leaders without followers. As such, leadership always involves interpersonal influence or persuasion. Second, goal directed leadership plays an active role in groups and organizations. Leaders use influence to guide others through a certain course of action or toward the achievement of certain goals. Third, the presence of leaders assumes some form of hierarchy within a group. In some cases, the hierarchy is formal and well defined with the leader at the top; in other cases, it is informal and flexible. When combined, the preceding three elements, define a leader as any person who influences individuals and groups within an organization, helps them in the establishment of goals and guides them toward achievement of those goals, thereby allowing them to be effective. There are numerous models or theories of leadership currently discussed. Some of these, more widely theorized and studied than others, results in the frequency of occurrence in journals, articles, and books. The four leadership models discussed are

LEADERSHIP MODELS Transformational leadership, Transactional leadership, Situational leadership, and Charismatic leadership Transformational Leadership Popper and Mayselles (Avolio & Yammarino, 2008) state that transformational leaders relationships with their followers focus on four factors: idealized influence,

inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. These facets, more geared to the individuals motivation and self-actualization with leaders setting examples for their followers, determining high standards, and showing determination, and confidence. A transformational leader makes his followers strive to emulate these traits. Idealized influence is behavior that arouses strong follower emotions and identification with the leader. Intellectual stimulation is behavior that increases follower awareness of problems and influences followers to view problems from a new perspective. Individualized consideration includes providing support, encouragement, and coaching to followers. A recent revision of the theory added another transformational behavior called inspirational motivation, which includes communicating an appealing vision, using symbols to focus subordinate effort, and modeling appropriate behaviors (Bass & Avolio, 1990). Transformational leadership involves internalization because inspirational motivation includes efforts to link the task to follower values and ideals with behavior such as articulating an inspirational vision. A leader can increase intrinsic motivation by increasing the perception of followers that task objectives are consistent with their authentic interests and values. Transformational leadership also involves personal

LEADERSHIP MODELS identification because idealized influence results in follower attributions of charisma to

the leader. Transformational behaviors such as inspirational motivation (e.g., optimistic visioning) and individualized consideration (e.g., coaching) may increase the selfefficacy of individual subordinates and the collective efficacy of teams. Intellectual stimulation may increase the creativity of individual followers and teams (Yukl, 2006). Transactional Leadership Another much discussed leadership theory is transactional leadership. One of the more commonly espoused leadership styles is the Transactional Leader. This model, characterized by the reward factor for carrying out a task can take two forms. One is the contingent reward, and the other is the management by exception form (Navahandi, 2006). According to Yukl (2006), contingent reward behavior includes clarification of the work required to obtain rewards and the use of incentives and contingent rewards to influence motivation. Passive management by exception includes use of contingent punishments and other corrective action in response to obvious deviations from acceptable performance standards. Newer versions of the theory also include laissezfaire leadership as a sub-category. This type of leader shows passive indifference about the task and subordinates (e.g., ignoring problems, ignoring subordinate needs) and is best described as the absence of effective leadership rather than as an example of transactional leadership (Yukl, 2006). Another transactional behavior called active management by exception, added in more recent versions of the theory (Bass & Avolio, 1990), relates to the practice of looking for mistakes and enforcing rules to avoid mistakes.

LEADERSHIP MODELS

According to Wren (1995), transactional leadership takes place when one person takes the initiative in making contact with others for the purpose of an exchange of valued things. Readers can deduce that the author means exchanging work for pay. Situational Leadership Although used in many management development programs, not many studies conducted evaluated the theory of Situational leadership. Conceptual weaknesses limit the utility of situational leadership theory and help to explain the lack of support for it in the research. Leadership behavior is not defined in a clear and consistent way, and sometimes task and relations behaviors defined in terms of decision styles such as autocratic telling, consulting, and delegating (Graeff, 1983).The model lacks a clear explanation of the process by which leader behavior influences subordinate performance (Barrow, 1977). The theory also fails to consider other situational variables important for determining the appropriate pattern of leadership behavior. Situational Leadership bases the theory on an interplay among (1) the amount of guidance and direction (task behavior) a leader gives, (2) the amount of socioemotional support (relationship behavior) a leader provides, and (3) the readiness level that followers exhibit in performing a specific task, function, or objective (Hersey & Blanchard, 1984) According to Hersey and Blanchard (1984) According to Situational Leadership, there is no one best way to influence people. Yukl (2006) espouses that the leadership style a person should use with individuals or groups depends on the readiness level of the people the leader is attempting to influence. When a subordinate is very immature in relation to the task, the leader should use substantial task-oriented behavior and be

LEADERSHIP MODELS

directive in defining roles, clarifying standards and procedures, and monitoring progress on attainment of objectives. As the subordinates maturity increases up to a moderate level, the leader can decrease the amount of task-oriented behavior and provide more relations-oriented behavior. The leader should act supportive, consult with the subordinate, and provide praise and attention. When the subordinate is very mature, the leader should use a low-level of task-oriented and relations-oriented behaviors. A mature subordinate can do the work without much direction or monitoring by the leader, and the confidence to work without supportive behavior by the leader. Under this model, Hersey and Blanchard (1984) stated that the definition of task behavior is the extent to which the leader engages in spelling out the duties and responsibilities of an individual or group. These behaviors include telling people what to do, how to do it, where to do it, and who is to do it. One-way communication from the leader to the follower characterizes task behavior. They further wrote that the definition of relationship behavior is the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multiway communication. The behaviors include listening, facilitating, and supportive behaviors. Charismatic Leadership According to Navahandi (2006) the word charisma means an inspired and divine gift. Charismatic Leaders, who have the gift, divinely endowed with grace and talent, capture the imagination and inspire their followers devotion and allegiance. Whereas this may seem to be of religious or political icons, it also applies to leaders in business organizations. Charismatic leaders are leaders who have a profound emotional effect on their

LEADERSHIP MODELS followers. Followers see them not merely as bosses but as role models and heroes. Charismatic leaders share several common personality and behavioral characteristics and traits. Although many of the traits-such as self-confidence, energy, and the ability to

communicate well - relate to all types of leadership, their combination is what sets apart the charismatic leaders. One characteristic that defines charismatic leaders is their selfconfidence in their own abilities and in the correctness and the moral righteousness of their beliefs and actions. The self-confidence of charismatic leaders, accompanied by an apparent lack of internal conflict is a key concept of charismatic leaders. Whereas non-charismatic leaders doubt themselves in the face of failure and criticism, charismatic leaders seem to know they are right and project that confidence (Navahandi, 2006). Differences in Leadership Models While many Leadership models share many of the same traits, they are inherently different. Two of the closest models would be the transformational and charismatic models Differences Transformational and Charismatic Models Bass (1985) saw charismatic leadership as the ability to inspire superficial identification only. Charisma is an ingredient of transformational leadership, but transformational leadership encloses it and goes beyond it. Transformational leadership arouses stronger emotions and appeals to values. Charismatic leaders often try to keep followers dependent and weak, while transformational leaders offer empowerment. Charismatic leaders are rare. Transformational leaders reside at any

LEADERSHIP MODELS level of an organization. Charismatic leaders inspire extreme love and extreme hate, while transformational leaders inspire a less polarized response. Differences Transformational and Transactional Transforming leadership must be distinguished from transactional leadership.(Bass, 1985). Both appeal to values, but the latter only to values related to exchange (fairness, reciprocity). Some of the transactional behaviors include the contingent reward or the use of incentives and rewards to induce task performance; passive management by exception, which is the use of punishments and other measures to correct deviations from expected performance. Other behaviors include active management by exception, which is monitoring subordinates to ensure that deviations from expected performance do not occur; Laissez-faire leadership, which is not managing much at all and ignoring problems. Transformational Behaviors include idealized influence, or charisma; individualized consideration or support, guidance, and encouragement. Other behaviors include intellectual stimulation, which increases follower awareness and understanding of problems; inspirational motivation, which conveying a compelling vision; using symbols and slogans to unite followers and intensify their efforts. References Barrow, J. C. (1977).The variables of leadership: A review and conceptual framework, In Yukl, G. (2006) Leadership in Organizations, (6th ed., pp. 224 - 225) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press

LEADERSHIP MODELS Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond, In Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed., p. 263). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Graeff, C. L. (1983).The situational leadership theory: A critical review, In Yukl, G.

(2006) Leadership in Organizations, (6th Ed., pp. 223 - 225) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1984). Situational Leadership, In The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership. (2000). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Louis, J. B. (1996). The changing definition of leadership. LIMRA's Vision, 1(3), 12. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Navahandi, A. (2006). The art and science of leadership (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Popper, M. and Mayseless, O., Internal World of Transformational Leaders, In Avolio, B. J. and Yammarino, F. J., (Ed.), Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead (pp. 203 229). Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. Wren, J. T. (1995). The leader's companion: Insights on leadership through the ages. New York: The Free Press. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.