Transactional and Transformational Leadership Transactional leaders identify what subordinates need to do to achieve objectives, clarify organizational roles

and tasks, set up an organization structure, reward performance, and are considerate for the social needs of its followers Transformational leaders articulate a vision and inspire followers. They have the capacity to motivate, shape the organizational culture, and create a climate favorable for organizational change

Exhibit 3: Transactional and transformational leadership Transactional The transactional leader: Recognizes what it is that we want to get from work and tries to ensure that we get it if our performance merits it. Transformational The transformational leader: Raises our level of awareness, our level of consciousness about the significance and value of designated outcomes, and

Exchanges rewards and promises for our effort. Is responsive to our immediate self interests if they can be met by getting the work done.

ways of reaching them. Gets us transcend our own self-interest for the sake of the team, organization or larger polity. Alters our need level (after Maslow) and expands our range of wants and needs. (Based on Bass 1985 Wright 1996: 213)

Trait Theory

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership theories > Trait Theory Assumptions | Description | Discussion | See also

Assumptions People are born with inherited traits.

Some traits are particularly suited to leadership. People who make good leaders have the right (or sufficient) combination of traits. Description Early research on leadership was based on the psychological focus of the day, which was of people having inherited characteristics or traits. Attention was thus put on discovering these traits, often by studying successful leaders, but with the underlying assumption that if other people could also be found with these traits, then they, too, could also become great leaders. Stogdill (1974) identified the following traits and skills as critical to leaders.

Traits

Skills

Adaptable to situations Clever (intelligent) Alert to social environment Ambitious and achievementorientated Assertive Cooperative Conceptually skilled Creative Diplomatic and tactful Fluent in speaking Knowledgeable about group task

Decisive Dependable Dominant (desire to influence others) Energetic (high activity level) Persistent Self-confident Tolerant of stress Willing to assume responsibility

Organised (administrative ability) Persuasive Socially skilled

McCall and Lombardo (1983) researched both success and failure identified four primary traits by which leaders could succeed or 'derail': Emotional stability and composure: Calm, confident and predictable, particularly when under stress. Admitting error: Owning up to mistakes, rather than putting energy into covering up. Good interpersonal skills: Able to communicate and persuade others without resort to negative or coercive tactics.

Intellectual breadth: Able to understand a wide range of areas, rather than having a narrow (and narrow-minded) area of expertise. Discussion There have been many different studies of leadership traits and they agree only in the general saintly qualities needed to be a leader. For a long period, inherited traits were sidelined as learned and situational factors were considered to be far more realistic as reasons for people acquiring leadership positions. Paradoxically, the research into twins who were separated at birth along with new sciences such as Behavioral Genetics have shown that far more is inherited than was previously supposed. Perhaps one day they will find a 'leadership gene'.

Trait Theory of Leadership

The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders both

successful and unsuccessful and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting lists of traits are then compared to those of potential leaders to assess the likelihood of success or failure.

Scholars taking the trait approach attempted to identify physiological (appearance, height, and weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background), personality, self-confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence, decisive judgment, and knowledge), task-related (achievement drive, initiative, and persiste and social characteristics (sociability and cooperativeness) with leader emergence a leader effectiveness.

Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are different from those of the less effective leaders. Through many researches conduc the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of core traits of

successful leaders have been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to id whether a person will be a successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people with leadership potential. Among the core traits identified are: Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energy and initiative Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach shared goals Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open Self-confidence: Belief in one s self, ideas , and ability Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical abilities, and conceptually skilled

Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technical matters Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severe psychological disorders. Others: charisma, creativity and flexibility Strengths/Advantages of Trait Theory It is naturally pleasing theory. It is valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory. It serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be assessed. It gives a detailed knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the leadership process. Limitations of The Trait Theory There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a good or successful leader The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of successful leaders in various leadership positions have been identified. These descriptions are simply generalities. There is also a disagreement over which traits are the most important for an effective leader The model attempts to relate physical traits such as, height and weight, to effective leadership. Most of these factors relate to situational

factors. For example, a minimum weight and height might be necessary to perform the tasks efficiently in a military leadership position. In business organizations, these are not the requirements to be an effective leader. The theory is very complex Implications of Trait Theory The trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people at all levels in all types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the theory to evaluate their position in the organization and to assess how their position can be made stronger in the organization. They can get an in-depth understanding of their identity and the way they will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the manager aware of their strengths and weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they can develop their leadership qualities. Conclusion The traits approach gives rise to questions: whether leaders are born or made; and whether leadership is an art or science. However, these are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Leadership may be something of an art; it still requires the application of special skills and techniques. Even if there are certain inborn qualities that make one a good leader, these natural talents need encouragement and development. A person is not born with self-confidence. Self-confidence is developed, honesty and integrity are a matter of personal choice, motivation to lead comes from within the individual, and the knowledge of business can be acquired. While cognitive ability has its origin partly in genes, it still

needs to be developed. None of these ingredients are acquired overnight. Leadership Theories - Important Theories of Leadership Just as management knowledge is supported by various theories, the leadership function of management too is authenticated by various theories. While the behavioural theories of leadership focused on discovering the constant relationship between leadership behaviours and the group performance, the contemporary theories emphasized the significance of situational factors (such as stress level, job structure, leader s intelligence, followers traits, etc.) as well. Some of the important leadership theories are as follows: Blake and Mouton s Managerial Grid House s Path Goal Theory Great Man Theory Trait Theory Leadership-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory Transformational Leadership Transactional Leadership Continuum of Leadership Behaviour Likert s Management System Hersey Blanchard Model Fiedler s Contingency Model

Contingency Theory

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership theories > Contingency Theory Assumptions | Description | Discussion | See also

Assumptions The leader's ability to lead is contingent upon various situational factors, including the leader's preferred style, the capabilities and behaviors of followers and also various other situational factors. Description Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that contend that there is no one best way of leading and that a leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others. An effect of this is that leaders who are very effective at one place and time may become unsuccessful either when transplanted to another situation or when the factors around them change. This helps to explain how some leaders who seem for a while to have the 'Midas touch' suddenly appear to go off the boil and make very unsuccessful decisions. Discussion

Contingency theory is similar to situational theory in that there is an assumption of no simple one right way. The main difference is that situational theory tends to focus more on the behaviors that the leader should adopt, given situational factors (often about follower behavior), whereas contingency theory takes a broader view that includes contingent factors about leader capability and other variables within the situation.

Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership theories > Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory Assumptions | Description | Discussion | See also

Assumptions Leaders prioritize between task-focus and people-focus. Relationships, power and task structure are the three key factors that drive effective styles. Description Fiedler identified the a Least Preferred Co-Worker scoring for leaders by asking them first to think of a person with which they worked that they would like least to work with again, and then to score the person on a

range of scales between positive factors (friendly, helpful, cheerful, etc.) and negative factors (unfriendly, unhelpful, gloomy, etc.). A high LPC leader generally scores the other person as positive and a low LPC leader scores them as negative. High LPC leaders tend to have close and positive relationships and act in a supportive way, even prioritizing the relationship before the task. Low LPC leaders put the task first and will turn to relationships only when they are satisfied with how the work is going. Three factors are then identified about the leader, member and the task, as follows: Leader-Member Relations: The extent to which the leader has the support and loyalties of followers and relations with them are friendly and cooperative. Task structure: The extent to which tasks are standardised, documented and controlled. Leader's Position-power: The extent to which the leader has authority to assess follower performance and give reward or punishment. The best LPC approach depends on a combination of there three. Generally, a high LPC approach is best when leader-member relations are poor, except when the task is unstructured and the leader is weak, in which a low LPC style is better.

Leader# Member Relations 1 Good 2 Good 3 Good 4 Good

Task structure Structured Structured

Leader's Most Position- Effective power leader Strong Weak Low LPC Low LPC Low LPC High LPC High LPC High LPC High LPC Low LPC

Unstructured Strong Unstructured Weak

5 Poor

Structured

Strong

6 Poor

Structured

Weak

7 Poor 8 Poor Discussion

Unstructured Strong Unstructured Weak

This approach seeks to identify the underlying beliefs about people, in particular whether the leader sees others as positive (high LPC) or negative (low LPC). The neat trick of the model is to take someone where it would be very easy to be negative about them.

This is another approach that uses task- vs. peoplefocus as a major categorisation of the leader's style.

Managerial grid model From Wikipedia(View original Wikipedia Article)Last modified on 22 June 2010, at 19:34

A graphical representation of the Managerial Grid The managerial grid model (1957) is a behavioral leadership model developed by Robert Blakeand Jane Mouton. This model originally identified five different leadership styles based on theconcern for people and the concern for production. The optimal leadership style in this model is based on Theory Y.

The grid theory has continued to evolve and develop. Robert Blake updated it with (?) in (?) (Daft, 2008). The theory was updated with two additional leadership styles and with a new element, resilience. In 1999, the grid managerial seminar began using a new text, The Power to Change.

Table of Contents 1 The model 2 Behavioral Elements

3 See also 4 References The model The model is represented as a grid with concern for production as the X-axis and concern for people as the Y-axis; each axis ranges from 1 (Low) to 9 (High). The resulting leadership styles are as follows: The indifferent (previously called impoverished) style (1,1) : evade and elude. In this style, managers have low concern for both people and production. Managers use this style to preserve job and job seniority, protecting themselves by avoiding getting into trouble. The main concern for the manager is not to be held responsible for any mistakes, which results in less innovative decisions. The accommodating (previously, country club) style (1,9): yield and comply. This style has a high concern for people and a low concern for

production. Managers using this style pay much attention to the security and comfort of the employees, in hopes that this will increase performance. The resulting atmosphere is usually friendly, but not necessarily very productive. The dictatorial (previously, produce or perish) style (9,1): control and dominate. With a high concern for production, and a low concern for people, managers using this style find employee needs unimportant; they provide their employees with money and expect performance in return. Managers using this style also pressure their employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals. This dictatorial style is based on Theory Xof Douglas McGregor, and is commonly applied by companies on the edge of real or perceived failure. This style is often used in case of crisis management. The status quo (previously, middle-of-the-road) style (5,5): balance and compromise. Managers using this style try to balance between company goals and workers' needs. By giving some concern to both people and production, managers who use this style hope to achieve suitable performance but doing so gives away a bit of each concern so that neither production nor people needs are met. The sound (previously, team) style (9,9): contribute and commit. In this style, high concern is paid both to people and production. As suggested by the propositions of Theory Y, managers choosing to use this style encourage teamwork and commitment among employees. This method relies heavily on making employees feel themselves to be constructive parts of the company. The opportunistic style: exploit and manipulate. Individuals using this style, which was added to the grid theory before 1999, do not have a

fixed location on the grid. They adopt whichever behaviour offers the greatest personal benefit. The paternalistic style: prescribe and guide. This style was added to the grid theory before 1999. In The Power to Change, it was redefined to alternate between the (1,9) and (9,1) locations on the grid. Managers using this style praise and support, but discourage challenges to their thinking. Behavioral Elements Grid theory breaks behavior down into seven key elements: Element Initiative Inquiry Advocacy Description Taking action, driving and supporting Questioning, researching and verifying understanding Expressing convictions and championing ideas

Decision Making Evaluating resources, choices and consequences Conflict Resolution Resilience Critique Confronting and resolving disagreements Dealing with problems, setbacks and failures Delivering objective, candid feedback