Leadership

Dr. David Hughes

Twitter: david_j_hughes
E-mail: [email protected]
Overview
• Traditional approaches to leadership
– Trait Theories
– Behavioural Approaches
– Contingency
• New directions
– Transformational and charismatic leaders
– Role of the follower – leader-member exchange (LMX)
– When leadership goes wrong
What is leadership?
• The process whereby one individual influences other group
members toward the attainment of defined group or
organisational goals (Yukl, 2010)
What is leadership?
• Three key elements in the process of leadership:
1. Influence. Primarily a process of influencing actions or attitudes of
group members. Influence usually non-coercive (i.e., not dictators)
2. Goal-directed. Influence is for a purpose; to attain defined group or
organisational goals
3. Followers. Leaders only exist in relation to followers, even though
many theories forget this!
Leadership vs. management
• Vroom and Jago (1988)
– Good managers possess both management and leadership skills which
they can swap between depending of the situation
Trait approaches
Time Approach Core theme
1930s/1940s and Trait Some people have the characteristics to lead,
modern day others, do not: who will make a good leader?

• Often referred to as the ‘great man approach’

• Leader-focused; described typical characteristics of leaders vs. non-leaders:
ˉ Leaders possess special qualities that set them apart from others

• Often incorporated idea that great leaders are born, not developed
ˉ Implications that leaders must be selected rather than developed
The best boss you ever had?
Think about you experiences of leadership
(e.g. a boss, your boss, working in a team)

What made them a good leader?

What made them a bad leader?

Reviewing the evidence…
• Factors that distinguish leaders from non-leaders:
• Stogdill (1948) reviewed studies from 1904-1947.
Intelligence or GMA most important factor

• GMA and leaders own job performance: r = .69 (Bertua,

Anderson, Salgado, 2005)

• GMA and leader effectiveness (rated by team): r = .27

(Judge, 2004)
All good?
Personality
• Judge et al., 2002: Meta analysis of 73 studies of Big 5
Personality Traits and Leadership

Leader Emergence Leader

Effectiveness
β β
Neuroticism -.09 -.10
Extraversion .30 * .18 *
Openness .21 * .19 *
Agreeableness -.14 .10
Conscientiousness .36 * .12
(Judge, et al., 2002, JAP)
Practical Implications
• Traits are considered to be ‘relatively’ stable and
partially innate/heritable

• If leadership is determined by traits, organisations need

to focus on selecting the right leaders.

• Negates the idea of leadership development training?

• Nope… traits are correlated with performance because they
shape behaviour, inter personal relations, and decision-
making. All of these things can be developed!
Style approaches
Time Approach Core theme
Late 1940s to Style Leadership is about behaviour – what
early 1960s do good leaders do?

• What do leaders do that make them effective?

• Several theories about leadership behaviour and how

different types of leaders can be distinguished
 Lewin et al. (1939)
• Leadership style can be understood along a continuum:

• Autocratic leadership. Directive, sometimes coercive; leader makes all

decisions him/herself. Leader defines and structures their own role and
subordinates’ roles. Workers viewed as a means for getting work
accomplished.
• Democratic leadership. Leader involves subordinates in decision-making and
allows them greater autonomy over their work. Employee oriented: leader
demonstrates trust in subordinates, respect their ideas and shows
Effects of Leader Style
Leadership Consideration/ Initiating
Structure/
Behaviour People Orientation
Task Orientation
r/p
r/p

Leader effectiveness .39 *

.28 *
Followers’ motivation .40 *
.26 *
Satisfaction with leader .68 *
.27 *
Job satisfaction .40 *
.19 *
Group/Org. performance .23 *
Evaluation of style approaches
• More ‘optimistic’ – just because you’re not born with particular
traits doesn’t mean you can’t lead… though, traits shape styles
• Easier to link to leadership development (e.g. training of
behaviour)
• Still fairly simplistic; is the same style right for all situations
and all followers?
Contingency approaches
Time Approach Core theme
Late 1960s to Contingenc Leadership is affected by context –
early 1980s y under a given condition what kind of
leader or leadership style will be
effective?

• Idea is that the type of leader/leadership behaviour that

is best will depend on contingencies
• Organisational context
• Task context
• Follower context
• Focus on leader effectiveness and context
• Multiple theories proposed
Situational leadership theory
• Hersey and Blanchard (1969)
– Leaders are effective when they select the right style for the
‘readiness’ of their followers – should adjust style

Able High/moderate High readiness

readiness = = delegating
participative style style

Unable Low readiness Low/moderate

readiness = selling
= telling style style

Unconfident
Contingency: Evaluation
• Theories are criticised for being primarily intuitive
• Empirical support is weak (Chen & Silverthorne, 2005;
Thompson & Vecchio, 2009)

• But…..
• Consideration of match between context and leader
style is an advance
• Suggests that leadership style needs to be dynamic
to adapt to meet changing needs of employees and
situation.
Summary so far…

Time Approach Core theme

1930s/1940s Trait Leaders are born, they have certain

(and revisited) stable characteristics – who will make a
good leader?

Late 1940s to Style Leadership is about behaviour – what do

early 1960s good leaders do?

Late 1960s to Contingenc Leadership is affected by context – under

early 1980s y a given condition what kind of leader or
leadership style will be effective?
Newer approaches

Approach Core theme

Transformati Leadership is a mixture of style and traits; the

onal/ key is vision and inspiration
charismatic

LMX The relationship between leader and follower is

central to understanding good leadership

Destructive / Leaders may exhibit destructive as well as

Abusive constructive behaviours
Transformational / Charismatic
• Style approach
Approach Core theme
Transformati Leadership is a mixture of style
onal/ and traits; the key is vision and
charismatic inspiration
(Bass, 1990)

• Transformational • Transactional leader

leader inspires followers motivates subordinate by
to go beyond self- observing performance,
interest in the service of identifying rewards and
a higher collective distribute rewards for
purpose appropriate behaviour
Transformational leaders – 4i’s
• Individualised consideration • Intellectual stimulation
– Followers treated on own merits – Encourages free thinking and
– Aims to develop followers emphasises reasoning
• Idealised influence
– Setting a personal example/role • Inspirational motivation
model – Creates a vision of the future
– Transcends self interest, makes – Gives meaning to goals & creates
personal sacrifices sense of purpose
– Takes responsibility for own actions – Above creates intrinsic motivation
Transformational / Charismatic

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dKimoybmEo
Charisma (Antonakis, 2012)
Charismatic speeches:

1. Use metaphors, similes, analogies

2. Tell stories and anecdotes
3. Use contrasts
4. Ask rhetorical questions
5. Use three-part lists
6. Express moral conviction and (7) reflect the group’s views
8. Set high goals & (9) project confidence they can be achieved
10. Use animated voice, (11) facial expressions & (12) gestures

• JFK: https://www.youtube.com/embed/WZyRbnpGyzQ?start=358&end=579
 How does TL/Charismatic
influence followers?
• Numerous mechanisms have been suggest linking TL with positive
outcomes:
• Emotional Regulation (e.g. mood/positive affect; Chuang, Judge, &
Liaw, 2012)
• Intrinsic motivation (e.g. Conchie, 2013)
• Trust in leader (Braun, Peus, Weisweiler, & Frey, 2013)
 Evaluation of transformational & charismatic
theories
• Judge and Piccolo (2004) meta-analysis, TL linked with:
– Follower satisfaction, motivation and performance
– Leader Performance and effectiveness
– Group and Organisational effectiveness

• But?
• Is this style appropriate for all (task) contexts?
• People can be trained to be transformational
• Researchers often pick and choose dimensions
• Measures are confounded with effects and studies can fail to reproduce dimensions (Van
Knippenberg, & Sitkin, 2013)
Integrating Traits & Behaviours

Results from Cavazotte

et al. (2012). See also:
DeRue et al. (2011)
Leader Member eXchange
Approach Core theme
LMX The relationship between leader and
follower is central to understanding
good leadership

• Rather than focusing purely on leader or follower,

LMX examines the relationship between the two.
• Premise: the essence of leadership is the relationship
that develops through social-exchanges (Graen & Uhl-
Bien, 1995)
LMX Exchanges
• High-quality LMX is defined by trust, mutual respect, and
felt obligations.

• In these relationships, leaders may offer….

• Mentoring (Scandura & Schriesheim, 1994)
• Sponsorship (Sparrowe & Liden, 2005)
• Empowerment (Chen et al., 2007)
• In exchange for….
• Higher levels of subordinate OCB (e.g. Blau et al., 2010)
• Task performance (e.g. Cogliser et al., 2009).
LMX
• Strong LMX (e.g., Martin et • Strong relationships come from
al., 2016, meta-analyses) (Dulebohn, 2012, meta-analysis):
related with: – Follower Competence
– Task performance – Follower Positivity
– Citizenship behaviour – Leader Transformational Behaviour
– Lower counterproductive – Leader contingent reward
performance behaviour (e.g. receiving feedback,
clarification, recognition, and
– Well-being and Satisfaction
praise for their work)
– Perceived Similarity and liking
– Self-Promotion tactics
Leadership: The Dark
Side
Destructive Leadership
Approach Core theme
Destructi Leaders may exhibit destructive as
ve well as constructive behaviours
 Leader dark traits
• What we ‘know’, leader psychopathy and narcissism
related to:
Outcome Annual cost of
phenomenon (in UK)
↓ Job Satisfaction (e.g. Mathieu & Babiak, £16,000 (per employee)
2016)
↓ Psychological Wellbeing (e.g. Mathieu et £105.2 billion (Centre for
al., 2014; Volmer et. al., 2016) mental health, 2012)
↓ Employee career success (Volmer et. al., ? Lower productivity ?
2016)
↑ CWB (Boddy, 2014; Braun et al., 2015) £50 billion (McGurn, 1988)
Leadership
• Leader counterproductive behaviours
Hogan Development Survey
But we all have potential derailers. Under pressure, we can all act
poorly
Hogan Development Survey
But we all have potential derailers. Under pressure, we can all act
poorly
– Overused strengths become weaknesses
– What happens on a bad day: Coping mechanisms
– ‘Blind spots’ - People rarely tell you!
– Shapes how your staff see you & whether they feel they can
trust you
Moving away
37
Hogan Development Survey
Moving Away Moving Against

Excitable Enthusiastic... But quickly

fades
Sceptical Suspicious of others’ motives
Cautious Afraid of or paralysed by fear
of failure
Reserved Indifferent to the concerns of
others
Leisurely Stubborn, irritable, privately
resentful
Moving against
Hogan Development Survey

Moving Against Moving Towards

Bold Narcissism, arrogance
Mischievous Machiavellian
Colourful Show off/Drama
queen
Imaginative Many new ideas…
none complete
Moving towards
Hogan Development Survey

Moving
Towards
Diligent Perfectionistic
Dutiful Rule following to the
extreme. Doesn’t ‘stand up
to’ superiors even to protect
subordinates
Summary
Theory Which leaders are best

Trait Those with particular traits like intelligence,

assertiveness
Style Those who behave democratically, and who balance
relationship- and task-orientation
Contingency Those who adjust style to the situation and their
followers
Transformation Those who inspire a vision in their followers
al / charismatic

LMX Those who build high quality relations with their

followers
Destructive / Those who act in the interests of both followers and the
Abusive organisation
De-railers We all have them, they need to be managed!