Leading should not be considered the same as managing. Business leaders who do
not understand the difference between the functions/roles of leading and
managing are quite likely to misinterpret how they should carry out their
duties to meet organizational goals. While some managers are high-quality
leaders, others only manage resources and don't lead their subordinates.
Leadership is one of the four primary activities that are used to influence
others. As such, it is a subcategory of the management concept that focuses
mainly on behavioral issues and opportunities. Managing is more comprehensive
than leading. It involves dealing with resource issues as well as behavioral
factors. Generally speaking, not all managers are necessarily leaders, yet the
most effective managers, over the long term, are leaders.
Leadership is the process of guiding the behavior of others toward an
organization's goals. Guiding, in this context, means causing individuals to
behave in a particular manner or to follow a specific set of instructions.
Ideally, the behavior exhibited is perfectly aligned with such factors as
organizational goals, culture, policies, procedures, and job specifications.
The main goal of leadership is to get things done through other people, making
it one of the main activities that can enhance the management system. It is
accomplished to a great degree through the use of effective communication.
Because leadership is a prerequisite for business success, to be a successful
business manager one must have a solid understanding of what leadership
includes. Indeed, such issues as the increased capabilities afforded by
enhanced communication technology and the rise of international business have
made leadership even more important in today's business environment. The
following sections describe the major theories underlying the most commonly
accepted management/leadership practices and the concepts they are based on.
In today's business environment, possessing management skills is no longer
sufficient to be successful. Contemporary business practices require that
managers have knowledge and experience regarding the differences between
management and leading and how both activities must be integrated for business
success. Commonly, businesspeople believe that a manager makes sure tasks and
duties are completed, while a leader is sensitive to the needs of people and
what they need to be exceptional employees. Integrating these concepts allows
business managers to apply logic and analytical skills to business activities
and tactics while being sensitive to and working with workers as individuals
with needs and desires related to their work and careers.
LEADERSHIP BASED ON TRAITS
The trait theory of leadership is based on research which implies that the
abilities and dispositions necessary to make a good leader are inborn, not
capable of being developed over time. The central thrust of this research is to
describe leadership as accurately and analytically as possible. The reasoning
is that a description of the full spectrum of managerial leadership traits
would make it possible to easily identify individuals who possess them. An
organization could then hire only those individuals who possess these traits
and thus be assured of always having high-quality leaders.
Current management thoughts, however, suggests that leadership ability cannot
be explained by an individual's inherited characteristics. To the contrary,
business analysts believe that individuals can learn to be good or even
exceptional leaders. Thousands of employees each year complete training to
improve their leadership skills. Corporations and not-for-profit organizations
continue to do this as an investment, which pays dividends.
IDENTIFYING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS
Since trait theory proved not to be aligned with leadership skill, researchers
have analyzed other angles to explain leadership success or failure. Rather
than looking at the traits successful leaders supposedly should possess,
researchers began to investigate what good leaders really do. This behavioral
approach was concerned with analyzing how a manager completed a task and
whether the manager focused on such interpersonal skills as providing moral
support and recognizing employees for their successes. Based on these research
efforts, leaders can be accurately described by either their job-centered
behavior or their employee-centered behavior, since this research indicated two
primary dimensions of leader behavior: a work dimension (structure behavior/
job-centered behavior) and a people dimension (consideration behavior/
employee-centered behavior).
WHICH LEADERSHIP STYLES ARE MOST EFFECTIVE?
Caution should be exercised when considering what style of leadership is best.
Research suggests that no single leadership style can be generalized as being
most effective. Organizational situations are so complex that one particular
leadership style may be successful in one situation but totally ineffective in
another.
CONTINGENCY THEORY
Contingency theory, as applied to management/leadership, focuses on what
managers do in practice. Because this theory suggests that how a manager
operates and makes decisions depends upon, or is contingent upon, a set of
circumstances, it is centered on situational analysis. Using contingency
theory, managers read situations with an "if-then" mentality: If this
situational attribute is present, then there is an appropriate response that a
manager should make. This theory takes into consideration human resources and
their interaction with business operations. Managers may take different courses
of action to get the same result based on differences in situational
characteristics. In general, contingency theory suggests that a business leader
needs to outline the conditions or situations in which various management
methods have the best chance of success. This theory thus runs directly counter
to trait theory, discussed earlier. Some of the challenges to successfully
using contingency theory are the need to accurately analyze an actual
situation, then to choose the appropriate strategies and tactics, and finally
to implement these strategies and tactics.
Managers encounter a variety of leadership situations during the course of
their daily activities, each of which may require them to use leadership styles
that vary considerably, depending on the situation. In using the contingency
model, factors of major concern are leader-member relations, task structure,
and the position power of the leader. The leader has to analyze these factors
to determine the most appropriate style of response for meeting overall
work-unit and organizational goals. Leader-member relations refer to the
ongoing degree to which subordinates accept an individual leader or group of
leaders. Task structure refers to the degree to which tasks are clearly or
poorly defined. Position power is the extent to which a leader or group of
leaders has control over the work process, rewards, and punishment. Taking
these factors into consideration, leaders can adjust their style to best match
the context of their decision making and leadership. For those leaders who have
a breadth of leadership styles, knowing when to change styles gives them the
tools to successfully deal with the varying nature of business decision making.
For those leaders who have a limited repertoire of leadership styles, they and
their superiors can use this information to better match work situations with
the styles that a specific leader possesses.
Within this continuum, or range, of leadership behaviors, each type of behavior
also relates to the degree of authority the manager can display, and inversly,
to the level of freedom that is made available to workers. On one end of this
continuum, business leaders exert a high level of control and allow little
employee autonomy; on the opposite end, leaders exert very little control,
instead allowing workers considerable autonomy and self-direction. Thus
leadership behavior as it progresses across the continuum reflects a gradual
change from autocratic to democratic leadership.
In today's business environment there are more complicated contexts and
relationships within which managers and subordinates must work than existed in
previous eras. And as contexts and relationships become increasingly
complicated, it becomes significantly more difficult for leaders to determine
how to lead. In addition, there are major societal and organizational forces
that cause confusion about how to lead.
THEORY X AND THEORY Y
Based on the work of psychologists, organizational theorists, and human
relations specialists in the 1960s and 1970s, two distinct assumptions, called
Theory X and Theory Y, evolved about why and how people work for others. Theory
X posits that people do not like to work and will avoid doing so if the
opportunity presents itself. Because of this, most people need to be coerced
into completing their required job duties and punished if they don't complete
the quantity of work assigned at the level of quality required. Again, because
of their dislike for work, most people do not want responsibility, prefer to be
directed by others, and have little ambition; all they want is job security.
With an almost completely opposite perspective, Theory Y posits that people
like to work and see it as a natural event in their lives. Therefore,
punishment and threats are not the only means of motivating them to complete
work assignments. People are willing to work hard for an organization; indeed,
they will use self-direction and control to work toward goals that are
understandable and communicated clearly. In this theory of human behavior and
motivation, people are seen as seekers of learning and responsibility who are
capable of and willing to be engaged with creative problem-solving activities
that will help the organization reach its goals. According to Theory Y, leaders
need to develop ways to expand the capabilities of their workers so that the
organization can benefit from this significant potential resource.
Although Theory Y has much to offer and is widely followed, many organizations
still use a variety of policies and practices that are based on Theory X
principles. A further development in explaining human work behavior and then
adjusting management/leadership practices to it is Theory Z.
THEORY Z
Probably the most prominent of the theories and practices coming from Japan is
the Theory Z approach, which combines typical practices from the United States
and Japan into a comprehensive system of management/leadership. This system
includes the following principles of best management/leadership practice:
tools of performance.
support of the individual both at work and at home (as regards family issues).
Theory Z has had a marked impact on the manner in which companies are led
today. Theory Z strategies have been instrumental in building stronger working
relationships between subordinates and their leaders because of the increased
level of worker participation in decision making as well as leaders' higher
level of concern for their subordinates.
MANAGERIAL GRID
Business researchers at the University of Texas have developed a
two-dimensional grid theory to explain a leadership style based on a person's
(1) concern for production and (2) concern for people. Each axis on the grid is
a 9-point scale, with 1 meaning low concern and 9 meaning high concern. "Team"
managers, often considered the most effective leaders, have strong concern both
for the people who work for them and for the output of the group/unit. "Country
club" managers are significantly more concerned about their subordinates than
about production output. "Authority-compliance" managers, in contrast, are
singularly focused on meeting production goals. "Middle-of-the-road" managers
attempt to balance people and production concerns in a moderate fashion. And,
finally, "impoverished" managers tend to be virtually bankrupt in both
categories, usually not knowing much or caring much about either. Grid analysis
can be quite useful in helping to determine managers' strengths, weak points,
areas where they might best be utilized, and types of staff development they
might need to progress.
PATH-GOAL LEADERSHIP THEORY
In path-goal leadership theory, the key strategy of the leader is to make
desirable and achievable rewards available to employees. These rewards are
directly related to achieving organizational goals. Basically, the manager
articulates the objectives (the goal) to be accomplished and how these can and
should be completed (the path) to earn rewards. This theory encourages managers
to facilitate job performance by showing employees how their work behaviors
directly affect their receiving desired rewards.
SYSTEMS THEORY AND THE LEADERSHIP/MANAGEMENT FUNCTION
A system is a group of interrelated and dependent components that function
holistically to meet common goals. Systems theory suggests that organizations
operate much like the human biological system, having to deal with entropy,
support synergy, and subsystem interdependence. The law of entropy states that
there are limited resources available and that as they are used/consumed, their
beneficial features are dispersed and are not available to the same degree as
they were originally. The other two considerations in a systems approach are
the achievement of synergy, or the creation of a total value greater than the
value of separate parts, and of subsystem interdependence or the linkage of
components in such a way that synergy can take place.
In the effort to enhance system performance, managers/leaders must consider the
openness and responsiveness of their business organization and the external
environment in which it operates. In this environment, leaders must consider
the four major features of business system theory: inputs, organizational
features, outputs, and feedback. The inputs for most systems include human
labor, information, hard goods, and financing. Organizational features include
the work process, management functions, and production or service technology.
Outputs include employee satisfaction, products or services, customer and
supplier relationships, and profits/losses. In guiding a unit or the whole
organization, business leaders need to consider features of their
organization's system as it interacts with and responds to customers,
suppliers, competitors, and government agencies.
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Transformational leadership inspires organizational success by dramatically
affecting workers' attitudes about what an organization should be as well as
their basic values, such as trust, fairness, and reliability. Transformational
leadership, which is similar to charismatic or inspirational leadership,
creates in workers a sense of ownership of the organization, encourages new
ways of solving problems and promotes lifelong learning for all members of the
organization. Although the topic of transformational leadership is both
appealing and exciting, more research is needed to develop insights regarding
how one becomes a successful transformational leader.
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Of all the skills that a manager/leader needs, none is more important than
managing the conflicts that inevitably arise in any organization. Conflicts can
arise between members in the same work unit, between the work group and its
leader, between group leaders, and between different work groups. Some of the
most common causes of conflict are communications breakdowns, personality
clashes, power and status differences, goal discrepancies, disputed authority
boundaries, and allocation of resources.
The following processes are among those usually suggested to eliminate, reduce,
and prevent conflict:
personality.
the adversarial parties to view the issue from a different perspective.
down in a never-ending debate to achieve one.
outside person can add objectivity and reduce personality issues.
common understanding of the facts and issues.
There is a widely accepted model for understanding how individuals approach
situations involving conflict resolution. This model is two dimensional. On one
axis is the dimension of cooperativeness; on the other, the dimension of
assertiveness. As discussed earlier, effective leaders vary their style to meet
the needs of a specific situation. Hence, during a conflict situation in which
time is a critical concern, an assertive style is needed to resolve the
conflict so that time is not lost during a drawn-out negotiation process.
Oppositely, when harmony is critical, especially when relationships are new or
in their early stages, a collaborative and cooperative approach to conflict
resolution is needed. This model for conflict resolution fits well with and
supports the notion of contingency and situational leadership.
JAPANESE MANAGEMENT/LEADERSHIP METHODS
In the decades since the end of World War II, business leaders around the world
have marveled at the ability of Japanese managers to motivate and successfully
lead their subordinates to levels of outstanding performance in terms of both
the quantity and quality of production. Therefore, Japanese approaches to
management and leadership have been studied intensely to find similarities and
differences between local practices and theirs. Among the approaches that have
been cited as contributing to Japanese success are the following:
rather than a shorter period of time. This helps workers to feel a close
relationship with the organization and helps build employee ownership of the
organization's success.
of management by leveling the playing field with regard to dress, benefit
packages, support services/amenities, restrooms, stock ownership plans, and so
forth.
This is done by having ceremonies to honor employees, providing housing at
nominal cost to employees, having facilities for social activities that are
sponsored by the organization, offering competitive salaries, and so forth.
relationships between leaders and their subordinates. This includes making sure
that leaders take time to get to know their employees and become cognizant of
their main concerns. Such a relationship can have a marked impact on the extent
to which employees value the organization and their leaders.
Individual accountability is downplayed to the climate that prevails in U.S.
organizations.
categories over the course of their tenure so that they can gain a broader
sense of the nature of all the work that is done in the organization.
and their leaders take the time to assist employees with personal issues and
work opportunities.
individual work groups perform rather than how an individual performs.
Therefore, incentives for individuals are less likely to be effective than
incentives associated with the performance of a work group or of a whole unit.
In addition, Japanese leaders and workers focus much less on monetary rewards
than on esteem and social rewards.
Another major development in the manufacturing and handling of goods was
developed in Japan. This development was kanban, or what we know as the
just-in-time (JIT) inventory and materials handling system. In this system
managers/leaders locate high-quality suppliers within a short distance of their
operations. They also establish specific quality standards and delivery
requirements, as well as materials handling procedures, that these suppliers
are contractually obligated to adhere to.
Although these techniques have proven to be successful in Japan, attempts to
duplicate them in another culture may have disappointing results. The
importance of cultural mores cannot be underestimated. What may work in Japan,
France, or the United States may not work anywhere else simply because of
cultural factors. Yet Japanese management/leadership principles have taught
managers around the world to consider new approaches in order to achieve the
higher standards of organizational effectiveness necessary in today's global
economy. Business leaders around the world are examining their practices in
light of the success that the Japanese and others have had in the areas of
strategy building, organizational development, group/team cooperation, and
establishing competitive advantage.
Posted: 2008380@679.36
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
stranger
Situational management
executing existing directions as efficiently as possible.
about acting creatively to to bring about a change of direction regardless of
your formal role. Hence it can be directed up as well as down. Obviously upward
leadership has nothing to do with decision-making style because you cannot
decide unilaterally for your superiors - a career limiting move if you dared
try it!
situation.
arises if you see it as a problem that we can't define one universal style to
apply in all situations.
focuses too exclusively on what the person in charge does.
an initiative to get others to change direction regardless of the source of the
leadership within the group - this is quite a mindshift away from our
traditional way of thinking about leadership as something that a person is or a
way of behaving for the person in charge.
leaders in personality terms - hence leaders are supposedly dynamic and
managers not. The whole style issue arose because of problems with these
personality definitions - that is it was obvious that some leaders are dynamic
while others were not.
in functional terms - leaders serve the function of generating new directions,
managers execute existing directions efficiently. This view then says that how
you influence or motivate people is totally open, not part of the definition of
leadership or management.
situations but that is just a trivial fact of life rather than anything
profound in terms of our basic understanding of what it means to lead or
manage.