very relevant book, Leadership What Every Leader Needs to Know by John C. Maxwell, printing by Thomas Nelson. Maxwell believes in what he calls the. Leadership What Every Leader Needs to Know by John C. Maxwell. Book review by Reed Business Information, Inc. [Comment by Jack Bickel from Grace. Editorial Reviews. From Publishers Weekly. This diminutive tome is a particularly sketchy treatise on the already vague subject of leadership, stitched together.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|ePub File Size:||25.43 MB|
|PDF File Size:||16.17 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
It is often said that leadership at the top is a lonely place! It is never more lonely than when the leader has to stand all alone. Standing alone takes courage and. Author John C. Maxwell proves this with his refreshing book, Leadership ( Note: If you would like to download a high-quality PDF version of this summary. Drawing from John Maxwell's bestsellers Developing the Leader Within. DESCRIPTION Drawing from John Maxwell's bestsellers Developing the Leader Within You, The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader, and Becoming a Person of Influence.
THE FUTURE It is likely clear at this point that there is a multitude of questions researchers have attempted to address with regard to leadership, but it should also be noted that there is certainly no shortage of new questions. Expect it — People can sense your underlying attitude no matter what you say or do. This process of using what is learned in the study to inform future research Figure 3. Are there certain situations in which focusing on task-oriented actions would be harmful to a group? You can seize only what you can see. The researcher cannot be sure that the independent variable variable A causes the dependent variable variable B. Rather, the situation a leader is in has a strong influence on the effectiveness of any given leader trait or behavior.
Successfully reported this slideshow. We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime. PDF Leadership Upcoming SlideShare. Like this presentation? Why not share! An annual anal Embed Size px.
Start on. Show related SlideShares at end. WordPress Shortcode. Published in: Full Name Comment goes here. Are you sure you want to Yes No. No Downloads. Views Total views. Actions Shares. Embeds 0 No embeds. We felt it critical to take both a research and an applied focus, so that readers would understand not only how we know what we know about leadership, but also why it is important that we spend time researching these topics and what we can do with what we find. The layout of the book consists of three general sections—the first three chapters provide important introductory information, the next four chapters focus on specific leadership topic areas, and the final chapter provides a peek into the future of leadership research.
Within each chapter we have provided plenty of realworld examples to illustrate the concepts presented. Additionally, at the end of each chapter we have included key terms and phrases, review questions, supplemental readings, and activities that can be done as individuals or as groups to further develop an understanding of the information.
In chapter 1, we review ways of defining leadership and provide a chronological overview of the approaches that have been taken to studying leadership. In chapter 2, we specifically address many of the assumptions that have been made about leadership and some of the important questions that come up in discussions about leadership.
Providing a context for these questions and addressing these assumptions is important in order to help novice scholars understand leadership on a deeper level.
In chapter 3, we provide a summary of important information with regard to research methods. Because we review important leadership research xiv PREFACE throughout the book, it is critical that readers have a general understanding of how leadership research is conducted. Chapters 4 through 7 focus on specific areas of leadership research—leader traits, skills, and behaviors in chapter 4; follower and situational factors in chapter 5; how leaders think in chapter 6; and outstanding leadership in chapter 7.
Finally, in chapter 8, we review some of the important emerging topics in the study of leadership. Leadership is a very important topic, and as you read through this book we hope to not only address your questions about leadership but also continually inspire new ones for which this book can serve as a road map for future exploration. Mumford, PhD University of Oklahoma Department of Psychology Norman, Oklahoma xv We would like to acknowledge the editorial board members of the Leadership Quarterly, not only for their support and contribution to this book, but also for their continued commitment to the advancement of leadership research.
Friedrich He who has never learned to obey cannot be a good commander. Where some research topics may only affect a subsection of the population, nearly everyone is exposed to leaders and leadership at some point in their lives. Also contributing to this consistent interest in leadership is the abundance of questions—questions that may very well have led you to this 1 CHAPTER 1 book.
What makes a leader successful or unsuccessful? Are certain people more likely to become leaders? How do I become a better leader? Or, more generally, what is leadership, exactly?
Leadership researchers have sought to address these questions, and many others, and we hope you will find the answers to your questions as you read through the following chapters. We also hope, however, to inspire further questioning and critical thinking about the topic of leadership.
With regard to the format of this text, we will begin by providing the necessary background knowledge of leadership in the initial three chapters. Specifically, we will focus on the history of leadership theories, reviewing past assumptions made about leadership and how research has addressed these assumptions, and describing the general methods that leadership researchers have used to study leadership. Following the first three chapters, we will shift our focus to several emerging, or hot, topics with regard to leadership research; and finally, in the last chapter, we will take a look at the future of leadership research.
Within each chapter we have integrated case studies, information on critical research, biographies and speeches of real-world leaders, discussion questions, and activities to supplement the content discussed within the chapter.
In addition, the important concepts within each chapter have been highlighted and defined in the margin and further readings are provided at the end of each chapter. The study of leadership, aside from being popular, is important because it also has quite serious implications. In recent years, it has become clear that errors in leadership have dramatic repercussions. Consider the effects of the unethical behaviors of the leaders of Enron, or the fumbling of response efforts following Hurricane Katrina.
Leaders are the ones who can set the tone, create the plan, and demonstrate to their followers the appropriate or inappropriate way to behave. They are the ones held accountable, and the critical decisions fall onto their laps. At a more basic level, we, ourselves, can take the findings of leadership researchers and apply them in our own lives, whether we are leaders or followers.
To begin our review of leadership research we now start, in chapter one, with a review of the history of leadership research. There are several important learning objectives for this chapter that are highlighted here.
However, leadership, as an area of research, did not really take off until the 20th century, but it made particularly great strides in the second half of the century.
Although this may seem like a relatively short period, significant progress was made in this short time. The questions of leadership are quite compelling, and interest in the field continues to grow at a rapid pace.
The first and most frequently asked, yet rarely agreed upon, question is—What is leadership? We turn now to the many definitions of leadership. Leadership has been defined in many ways. It is very likely that you believe you have a clear idea of what leadership is, given that you have likely been exposed to many leaders in your lifetime.
We can probably all agree that the president of the United States is a leader—but would you consider your teacher or professor a leader?
What about a manager? Is there a difference between a leader and a manager? Can leadership be exhibited by someone who is not in a formal leadership position? Can more than one person fulfill the leadership role? Clearly, the concept of leadership is quite complex, and questions about leadership can be framed in several ways. The main question that seems to emerge, when formulating a definition of leadership, is whether we are defining a person, a role, or a process.
If you were asked to define leadership, do you first think of a person who epitomizes certain characteristics? Or do you think of a position in an organization in which you are a member? Perhaps you may have even thought of what happens in the exchange between a manager and a subordinate. A person-focused definition of leadership would specify a given set of traits or skills that would identify a person as a leader.
A role-focused definition of leadership would focus on a set of bePerson-focused definition of haviors or actions leaders leadership—a mind-set that must engage in to do their defines leadership by the traits job. The person focus and or skills that make someone the role focus may seem a leader similar; however, by definRole-focused definition of ing leadership as a role, it is leadership—a mind-set that possible to consider that it defines leadership as a set may be occupied by more of behaviors or actions that than one person.
Finally, a someone acting as a leader process-focused definition engages in of leadership focuses on Process-focused definition how leaders interact with of leadership—a mind-set followers regardless of role. For instance, taking a person-focused view might lead to questions about what type of person is likely to emerge as a leader, who is likely to be more successful as a leader, what cognitive or decision-making processes a leader undergoes, and so on. A role-focused definition might lead to questions regarding the behaviors a person in a leadership position engages in, whether elements of the role can be shared, or whether there are differences between the management role and the leadership role.
Finally, a process approach may result in questions with regard to the relationship between a leader and a follower, or whether the process of leadership is influenced by changes in a situation. For the purpose of the current effort we will define leadership generally as to encompass all three concepts: In addition to defining leadership, it is critical to also identify some of the terms that will be used as we discuss leadership, and leadership research in particular.
For the purpose of our efforts we will use the most general of these terms—followers. Thus, followers are those individuals a leader influences for the purpose of achieving a collective goal. A second important term, which has already been used several Leadership—the influence of times, is influence.
Accordothers toward a collective goal ing to Yukl , influencFollowers—those individuing others involves altering als on whom a leader exerts the motives or perceptions influence for the purpose of of another to accomplish a achieving a collective goal given goal.
There are many Influence—altering the ways in which influence may motives or perceptions of be exerted, and these specific another to accomplish a methods will be reviewed given goal in chapter 5.
The concepts of power and influence are discussed further in chapter 5, a chapter focused on relational and situational theories of leadership. Finally, an important distinction that we must address is the distinction between leadership and management—two terms that are often used interchangeably.
It is likely that Senator McCain was hoping to invoke the positive qualities that are more stereotypically associated with a leader—inspiration, motivation, a guide out of troubled times— and devalue the image of a manager as a more sterile figure. But when it comes down to it, is there really that stark a difference between leaders and managers? As Yukl pointed out, it is possible for a leader to not be a manager, and for a manager to not be a leader, but there is a great deal more overlap possible between the two than some may think.
This assumption will be discussed in greater detail in chapter 2, but for now it is important to note that the research on these two titles typically focuses on some differences.
According to Kotter , who devoted an entire book to addressing the differences between leaders and managers, the distinctions between the two can be drawn with regard to their outcomes. It is easy to see, however, that many of the behaviors managers engage in could also be undertaken by leaders and vice versa. For instance, several ancient scholars documented their observations of the rise and fall of leaders or their theories of how leaders should rule. Additionally, the lives of leaders have been documented by authors for centuries for the benefit of posterity, but also for future leaders to learn from leaders in the past.
Even religious documents are sources of observation and guidance on effective leadership. The focus of this current book, however, is on the scientific research of leadership, which is a much more modern occurrence— beginning in earnest over the last half century. As researchers over the last 50 years or so have sought to answer the many questions of leadership, there have been several broad changes in the way in which they have approached these questions.
In the beginning of the century, leadership scholars were interested in finding specific traits or characteristics that differentiated leaders from others. A lack of conclusive findings, however, led to a shift in which researchers began to focus more on the behaviors that managers and leaders exhibited and under 7 CHAPTER 1 what conditions they engaged in certain actions.
It became apparent, however, that there was more to leadership than just leader behavior, and scholars sought to understand the relational and situational dynamics involved, particularly the relationship between leaders and their followers. More recently, the field of leadership has focused more on the decision-making patterns of leaders, and what differentiates outstanding leadership from general leadership.
Several leadership frontiers remain to be explored, and in the last chapter we will discuss a few areas that are likely to be the focus of future scholars. Figure 1. In this chapter, we will briefly review each of these approaches to leadership research, and each of them will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapters.
It is important to note that, although we discuss the different times to which these approaches correspond, a particular approach was not the only one used during that time. In fact, these approaches have all been used by researchers throughout the years, but we will discuss the predominant approach taken during each time period.
BEFORE The Trait Approach Before the start of the information age, and with it the onslaught of sound bites that expose every error and transgression of individuals in leadership positions, the idea of leadership was highly romanticized.
Leaders were extraordinary individuals exhibiting exceptional qualities that set them apart from others. More specifically, it was believed that there was a set of characteristics, or traits, that made someone a leader. Imbedded in this approach was an overall positive spin on the characteristics of leaders.
Thus, early leadership researchers sought to identify these exceptional characteristics. Studies that took this approach to research used what is called the trait approach, which means researchers focused on identifying the personal attributes leaders possessed that set them apart. It was believed that the presence of these particular traits could cause individuals to emerge as leaders or make them more effective as leaders than others who did not possess these traits.
For instance, in an early review of research using the trait approach, Stogdill found that group leaders were different from group members with regard to characteristics such as intelligence, alertness, sociability, and self-confidence. Other studies over the years have identified different traits, along with situational factors that may influence whether these traits truly impact leadership.
However, the traditional trait approach focuses solely on the leader—a characteristic of this approach that some view as a weakness. This perceived weakness, and the generally inconclusive findings of early trait studies, resulted in a gradual shift by leadership researchers away from the trait approach. A more detailed review of the trait approach, including research findings, strengths, weaknesses, and applications, can be found in chapter 4. Two universities, Ohio State University and the University of Michigan, engaged in significant behavioral research efforts during this time that are considered the foundation of the behavioral approach.
The researchers involved in the Ohio State studies administered questionnaires to individuals about the behaviors of their supervisors. They found that the behavior of the leaders fell into two broad categories—behaviors related to initiating structure e.
The researchers involved in the University of Michigan studies used interviews and questionnaires given to real-world leaders to evaluate leader behaviors, and they examined the relationship of these behaviors to group-level indicators of effective leadership e.
Further, much of the behavioral approach work made generalized predictions about the effects of leader behaviors on desired outcomes. Similarly to researchers utilizing the trait approach, the impact of other variables, such as follower motivation, was not often considered by those using the behavioral approach.
Thus, leadership scholars began to question whether the success of leaders with certain traits, or engaged in certain types of behaviors, was contingent on these other variables. This led to a shift toward research that considered more situational variables in the leadership equation, the first of which was the contingency approach. The Contingency Approach The first concerted effort to consider situational variables in leadership studies was initiated by a model of leadership called the LPC contingency model Fiedler, Based on their LPC score, they were categorized as either task motivated or relationship motivated remind of you any other approaches we have learned about so far?
Thus, they found that a situation could, in fact, have an impact on whether different leader traits or behaviors were more appropriate. The strengths and weakness of this approach will be discussed in greater detail in chapter 5; however, it is important to note that a major criticism of the contingency approach is that it did not address the how or why.
Although a relationship between certain leader traits and group performance was found, we do not understand the mechanism of this effect.
For instance, we are still unable to determine why a leader that scores high on the LPC scale is better in a situation with poor leader-member relations. The next shift in focus saw leadership researchers attempting to expand on the contingency approach method of considering the situation, but also making a greater effort to answer the how and why questions.
For example, in a situation that is particularly stressful, a leader may engage in supportive behavior to make his or her subordinates feel they are capable of accomplishing the task and thus reduce anxiety and increase performance and satisfaction.
Follow-up studies, however, have resulted in inconclusive findings, which some researchers attribute to the fact that leader behaviors are considered separately, such that each leader would be classified into a behavioral type. It is more likely, however, that leaders engage in different mixtures of behaviors, and this interaction between different kinds of behaviors at any given time may cause effects that are harder to interpret. Along these lines, Hersey and Blanchard proposed the situational leadership theory, which evaluated the interaction of two types of leadership behaviors in different situations.
Specifically, they proposed that different combinations of supportive and directive leadership behaviors would be appropriate depending on the development level of the followers involved. Where the path-goal theory looked at supportive and directive behaviors separately, the situational theory evaluated combinations of different levels of each type of behavior. For instance, leaders who were engaging in low levels of supportive behavior and low levels of directive behavior were considered to be delegating, whereas leaders who were engaging in low levels of supportive behavior but high levels of directive behavior were considered to be directing.
Delegating and directing, along with coaching and supporting, were four leadership styles proposed to be differentially appropriate depending on the level of development of the followers. Central to this theory is the concept that the levels of development are not static, and, thus, a leader must know which combination of behaviors to engage in for different situations. For instance, the coaching style is considered to be high on both supportive and directive behaviors and would be advisable for leading subordinates who fall into the moderate developmental range—indicating some competence and marginal commitment.
Although practical, the contingency, path-goal, and situational theories all suffer from a similar criticism in that they seem to address how the leader should respond to group situations e. The relational approach to leadership sought to address the situation at the dyadic, or leader-follower, level. The Relational Approach The relational approach to leadership research focuses in on the one-on-one, or dyadic, relationships between leaders and followers.
While the prior approaches to the study of leadership typically assumed that leaders treat all followers the same, the dyadic approach examines the differences in the relationships a leader has with each of his or her followers. Consider a situation in which you were in a work group. Did the leader provide an equal amount of attention to all members? Did the leader seem to trust some members more than others, giving them more responsibility or more challenging tasks? Did some members interact with the leader beyond what was required of the task?
The predominant theory related to these exchange relationships, originally referred to as the vertical dyad theory, is the leader-member exchange LMX theory.
Graen and Uhl-Bien outlined several stages an exchange relationship may go through. As expectations are met or exceeded, the exchange relationship may develop further. Those relationships that are based solely on the exchange of formal job requirements are considered low-exchange or out-group relationships. Relationships that develop beyond these formal requirements, in which there is a sense of trust or loyalty between the two parties, are considered high-exchange or in-group relationships.
Finally, some relationships may develop to a third stage, referred to as a mature relationship, in which there is an equal commitment to each other and to the ultimate goal of the effort.
Hundreds of studies have been conducted examining how different variables may be related to the different exchange relationships established between leaders and followers. The findings of LMX research, however, are often plagued by criticisms with regard to the measurement of the exchange relationship. It is difficult to discern what constitutes whether a relationship between a leader and follower is high or low, and whether two followers that are in the in-group are there for the same reasons.
For instance, one follower may have a high-exchange relationship because they put extra time into the group task, while another individual has a high-exchange relationship because he or she has a strong interpersonal relationship with the leader. Both are categorized as high-exchange relationships, but would they have the same outcomes? Questions such as this one, along with others regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the LMX theory and the relational approach in general, will be discussed in chapter 5.
This may include research on the cognitive resources of leaders or followers, such as intelligence or problem-solving skills which overlap somewhat with the trait approach ; research on the cognitive steps involved in actions associated with leadership, such as planning, evaluating problem situations, monitoring social interactions, or developing a mission or vision; or research on perceptions related to leaders and leadership.
Cognitive traits, particularly general cognitive ability, or intelligence, have been studied in the area of leadership for decades; however, a specific focus on developing a theory related to the cognitive abilities of leaders was not undertaken until the late s and early s with the development of the cognitive resources theory Fiedler, This theory proposed that the stress leaders undergo affects how they utilize their cognitive resources— intelligence and experience—when making decisions.
A second body of research related to cognition and leadership is that of implicit leadership theories. Consider your idea of what the prototypical leader is. If your mental image of an effective leader is a charismatic speaker motivating followers from a podium, you may be more critical of a leader who is not as good a speaker but still influences others toward the ultimate team goal. More recently, leadership scholars have made attempts at understanding the cognitive steps that occur as leaders work through typical leadership activities.
Clearly, understanding the complex cognitive processes of leaders is a daunting task; however, most of these efforts evaluate leader cognition within a specific domain e. Understanding the processes, however, is critical to understanding exactly how other variables e. Although significant preliminary steps have been taken in researching cognition and leadership, the future likely holds significant expansion of this area of research. Chapter 6 will evaluate these leader cognition theories and more, along with their implications, strengths, and weaknesses.
Outstanding Leadership The final approach to studying leadership that has been quite dominant in recent years is the focus on instances of outstanding or exceptional leadership.
For instance, although Adolf Hitler had a quite negative impact on the world, he still had a significant impact nonetheless—making him an outstanding leader. Prior research may have shied away from evaluating outstanding leadership because it is more rare than standard instances of leadership, and it is quite difficult to contact and study outstanding leaders.
It is important, however, to evaluate these most exemplary instances of leadership if we are to gain a complete understanding of the leadership phenomenon. Additionally, it is important to understand these particular leaders given the outstanding impact these individuals have on individuals, groups, and organizations.
Both charismatic and transformational leadership are held to be based on the vision-defining behaviors of a leader—a quite powerful behavior that leaders use to motivate followers toward a change. Vision-defining behaviors refers to behaviors that a leader engages in to define a vision, or desired outcome, for his or her followers. The imagery of an impassioned leader conveying a vision can be quite powerful, and theories that sought to evaluate the effects of transformational and charismatic leadership easily found popularity among both leadership scholars and the general public.
This trend, however, may be shifting as it becomes clear that these two categorizations of leadership may be somewhat limiting. As Mumford notes, there are other leaders that have had a significant impact on the world but are not necessarily transformational or charismatic.
Consider the impact that Bill Gates has had on the course of the modern world. Clearly, in his direction of Microsoft, he would qualify as an outstanding leader. He is not, however, particularly charismatic. Thus, Mumford proposes three types of outstanding leadership—charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic.
The differences in these three types of outstanding leaders lie in their developmental patterns, the way in which they view the world, and how they interact with their followers and seek to accomplish their goals.
For instance, both charismatic and ideological leadership are considered vision based; however, charismatic leaders have visions oriented toward an idealized future, whereas ideological leaders have visions oriented toward an idealized past. The leadership behavior of pragmatic leaders, on the other hand, is based more on problem solving than vision. The specific differences outlined in this taxonomy, among other theories of outstanding leadership, are discussed further in chapter 7.
THE FUTURE It is likely clear at this point that there is a multitude of questions researchers have attempted to address with regard to leadership, but it should also be noted that there is certainly no shortage of new questions. As organizations, or the nature of work, change over time, so will the nature of leadership and the types of questions that will need to be addressed.
For example, organizations are becoming flatter, with fewer levels in the leadership hierarchy; in addition, the use of work teams is becoming more prevalent. Globalization will also play a critical role in driving the direction of leadership research in the future.
Significant work has been done comparing workforces in different countries, but as organizations begin to span several countries, it will be critical to understand the differences, if there are differences, between leadership across cultures. For instance, it may be important to examine what the implications are for U.
A third, and quite important, trend in leadership research is toward understanding the dark side of leadership. As was discussed previously, the general approach to leadership has been one that considers most leadership in a positive light. It is often the case, however, that leadership results in negative outcomes. This can be a result of leadership with the intention of causing harm e. To hopefully prevent, or at least learn from, instances in which leadership goes awry, leadership researchers will likely focus more on evaluating the trait, behavioral, situational, relationship, and cognitive factors that play into the dark side of leadership.
For instance, research that evaluates the situations in which leader errors are likely to occur e. This potential avenue of future leadership research, along with those mentioned previously, will be discussed in greater detail in chapter 9. The most significant developments, however, have been made more recently, with most happening after the middle of the 20th century.
Not only is the topic popular, but the implications of leadership research are quite important, as leaders have the potential to significantly impact our lives. There is not always agreement among scholars about how to define leadership; however, general definitions indicate it involves a process of influencing others toward a collective goal. Just as there is not complete agreement in how to define leadership, there are also many approaches to studying leadership.
Several large shifts in how researchers typically approach the study of leadership have occurred over the years. Prior to the s, researchers focused on identifying specific traits or attributes that distinguished leaders from nonleaders. Inconclusive findings, however, led researchers to focus on what leaders do—their behaviors, rather than their characteristics.
This behavioral approach was dominant in the s and s, along with the contingency approach, which began to take situational characteristics into account when examining leader behaviors. The s and s saw another shift in research focus, where situational variables and the interactions between leaders and individual followers were of greater interest.
More recent research, in the s and today, has looked closer at instances of exceptional or outstanding leadership, as well as examined the cognitive aspects of leadership. The future of leadership research will likely be affected by changes in how work and organizations are structured, such that team leadership and shared 21 CHAPTER 1 leadership will be of critical concern, along with determining whether differences exist in leadership across cultures.
Finally, in light of recent instances of severe leader errors e. What is the definition of leadership that will be used in this book? What is the difference between person-focused, role-focused, and process-focused definitions of leadership? Which approach focuses on the one-on-one relationship between leaders and followers?
What are some of the emerging topics that researchers are focusing on now and in the future?
What is the basic argument of the situational approach? Why are you interested in studying leadership? Why is it important to study leadership? Why is it important to have one definition of leadership? Why have researchers taken different approaches to studying leadership? What do you think are the most important things about leadership that we need to understand? As you read it, take the perspective of an early leadership scholar—what characteristics of President Roosevelt might you identify that are indicative of leadership?
President Hoover, Mr. Chief Justice, my friends: This is a day of national consecration, and I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our nation impels. This is pre-eminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today.
This great nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So first of all let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves, which is 23 CHAPTER 1 essential to victory.
I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days. In such a spirit on my part and on yours we face our common difficulties.
Yet our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.
True, they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit, they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored conditions.
They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish. The money changers have fled their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.
Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money, it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow-men.
We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will hind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.
With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people, dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems. Action in this image and to this end is feasible under the form of government which we have inherited from our ancestors.
For the trust reposed in me I will return the courage and the devotion that befit the time. I can do no less. We aim at the assurance of a rounded and permanent national life. We do not distrust the future of essential democracy. The people of the United States have not failed. In their need they have registered a mandate that they want direct, vigorous action.
They have asked for discipline and direction under leadership. They have made me the present instrument of their wishes. In the spirit of the gift I will take it. In this dedication of a nation we humbly ask the blessing of God. May He protect each and every one of us! May He guide me in the days to come!
What is it that makes the good leader good? What is it that makes the bad leader bad? Look at what you wrote and determine whether you were focusing on them as a person, their role, or the process of leadership.
Everyone in the group or class should answer the following question and write down their response: How do you define leadership?
Discuss the definitions and identify some common themes among them. As a group you must come up with a plan to develop a new club. As you develop the club, you must define your general purpose e. After the group has finished the task, think about who emerged in the group as the leader. Was there more than one person that served in a leadership role?
Why are you saying that this person is the leader? What behaviors did they engage in? Why do you think this particular person became the leader? Part I: Introduction to concepts and theories of leadership. Bass Ed.
Theory, research, and managerial applications pp. New York: The Free Press. Hackman, J. Asking the right questions about leadership: Discussion and conclusions.
American Psychologist, 62, 43— Northouse, P. Northouse Ed. Theory and practice pp. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Yukl, G. The nature of leadership. Yukl Ed.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Caughron Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. As mentioned earlier, leadership is a topic that has interested not only scholars but people in general for thousands of years. This inherent interest in leadership is most likely because we all have seen leaders in action or maybe have even been in a leadership role. However, because people have a variety of beliefs, values, and experiences with regard to leadership, a wide variety of opinions, myths, assumptions, and misconceptions about leadership have developed.
This chapter will be organized around a set of six controversial statements commonly discussed with regard to leadership. Each of these comments will be examined in light of what leadership research has revealed over the course of the last century or more of study.
This will help you to begin thinking about leadership as a complex topic and let you get more familiar with the current research and theories of leadership before jumping into the nuts and bolts in subsequent chapters.
This myth is that leadership only occurs at the top. It is easy to see high-positioned leaders such as presidents or chief executive officers; however, leadership occurs all around us every day.
Chief executives lead their companies, but they could not be successful if the managers under their guidance did not lead the groups of employees that make up companies.
Similarly, a president can only be effective at marshaling the armed forces because of the generals, colonels, and squad leaders directing the followers under their care and direction.
Leadership in organizations occurs not just at the top of the organization, but rather at multiple levels, and it should be examined at each of those levels.
Leadership at all levels is important. Organizations could not function without leadership occurring at multiple levels, and, thus, leadership at multiple levels will be examined here. This question is one you hear often in discussions of leadership, and it was the driving force behind early theories of leadership.
According to this line of research, leaders have unique traits that enable them to be leaders. Thus, if you were to ask a trait theorist whether leaders are born or made, they would likely argue that they are born.
According to trait theories of leadership, people who are smart, self-confident, and sociable tend to be effective leaders. People without these certain traits may try to lead, and may perform well in leadership roles, but they will never be as good at leading as someone who has leadership-oriented traits. The behavioral theories of leadership offer a stark contrast to trait theories.
As interest in trait theories began to wane after WWII, researchers began to question whether leadership could only be displayed by special people with certain attributes. Researchers began Trait theory of leadership—a looking into whether leadtheory that says leaders have ership was more about how unique traits that enable a person acted rather than them to be leaders their personality, intelliBehavioral theory of gence, motivation, or other leadership—a theory that characteristics.
Researchers describes leaders in terms of at Ohio State University and the actions they take rather the University of Michigan than the traits they possess suggested that leadership 29 CHAPTER 2 behaviors tended to fall into two categories. For behavioral theorists, leadership was much more about what people did rather than the traits they were born with.
It follows, then, that even if someone was not born with a certain set of traits that would make him or her a good leader, that person could learn the behaviors associated with effective leadership. Thus, if you were to ask a behavioral leadership theorist whether leaders are born or made, they would probably argue that they can be made if they take on actions that are leadership oriented.
To summarize, early theories of leadership tended to emphasize the characteristics of individuals who became leaders, suggesting that leaders are born rather than made. Indeed, some traits, such as intelligence, were shown to have an influence on how well a leader performs.
However, as leadership research continued to unfold, it became apparent that being a leader is far more complicated than being intelligent, sociable, and self-confident. As researchers at Ohio State University and the University of Michigan demonstrated, a great deal of leadership is about the actions one takes. Leadership also involves action. The types of actions taken by a leader can have a strong influence on whether or not that leader is successful.
Chapter 4 provides more details about what traits and behaviors in particular are related to effective leadership. Although there are traits and behaviors associated with effective leadership, considering only these factors is not enough to understand leadership.
Rather, the situation a leader is in has a strong influence on the effectiveness of any given leader trait or behavior. This takes us to our next major topic of discussion: As psychological research has advanced over the course of the last century, it is interesting, and somewhat ironic, that one of the most fundamental conclusions psychologists have uncovered is not really about the mind as much as it is about what goes on outside of the mind. More specifically, psychologists have concluded, over the course of countless studies, that the situation a person is in can have a very profound impact on his or her behavior.
There are countless instances in which a leader who has flourished at one organization leaves to take on a different leadership position and fails miserably.
It is not that the leader has suddenly lost all ability to lead; it is that the situation the leader is facing has changed, and this has hindered his or her ability to be successful. This begs the question: How much of leadership is really about the leader? There are two theories regarding the influence of a situation on a leader. Both agree that a situation has a large influence on 31 CHAPTER 2 leaders, but they differ about how a leader should handle outside influences.
Those who espouse the contingency theory of leadership would argue that leaders tend to have a certain style of leadership and that it is best for them not to stray from this style when they are leading.
However, the situational theory of leadership suggests that leaders should be able to adapt their style to fit with the challenges of their circumstances. Fred Fiedler, whose research was introduced in the previous chapter, developed the most widely accepted and applied contingency theory of leadership.
Based on work done by previous researchers, Fiedler and his colleagues borrowed the task-oriented and relations-oriented leadership styles but then went on to suggest that the situations leaders face can be classified in one of three ways: Furthermore, these researchers suggested that leaders who are task oriented tend to perform well in two conditions: In highly favorable situations, a leader does not need to waste time building relationships or being supportive of his or her followers.
In fact, if a leader does this it will likely distract the followers from performing their assigned task. Relationshiporiented leaders were expected to perform better in situations that were moderately favorable. This is because leaders in this type of situation have the time and energy to devote to building relationships with their followers, and the followers become more productive by experiencing this support from their leader.
These researchers suggested that leaders should change their leadership style depending on the maturity of their followers. Experienced, or mature, followers are described as having relevant job experience, appropriate levels of motivation, and a willingness to accept responsibility. Hersey and Blanchard suggested that leaders who have less experienced followers should focus on task-oriented behaviors and de-emphasize relationship building.
As his or her followers gain experience, the leader can focus less and less on task-oriented behaviors. However, the situation is more complex with relationship-oriented behaviors. As the group matures, the leader should focus more on relationship building, but only to a point. Once the group is fairly mature and the relationship between the leader and his or her followers is well established, the leader should start focusing less and less on relationship-oriented behaviors. These beliefs, opinions, and expectations followers have about their leaders can have an important impact on how effective a leader can be, especially if he or she does not live up to those expectations.
The proponents of these theories suggest that followers tend to respond more positively to leaders who meet their expectations for what a leader should be. The implication here is not that leaders should do what their followers think they should.
Rather, leaders should be mindful of the opinions and expectations their followers may have. By being mindful of these factors, the leader can be more cautious about violating those assumptions or can use the opinions others have to help facilitate team performance.
In conclusion, research into how leaders are influenced by their situation has revealed many interesting and important points. First and foremost is that leadership may not be entirely about the person leading.
Some people may be well suited to lead in one set of circumstances but ill equipped to lead in another. So now a new question arises: Path-goal theory suggests that leaders are primarily responsible for two types of activities: Goal-oriented activities include setting, changing, defining, or revising goals.
Path-oriented activities involve doing things that shape the way a group pursues its goals. This includes obtaining materials, finding new group members, providing rewards for helping the group, and providing guidance to group members House, Specifically, this theory suggests that leaders can be categorized into four different groups: Interestingly, inspired by path-goal theory, some researchers began to question the need for a leader at all. This is called leader substitutes theory.
Basically, this theory suggests that if the path- and goal-oriented duties associated with a leader can be resolved without a leader, then the group should be able to function without a leader. To summarize this section, it would appear that, indeed, in some instances, groups can function with a minimal amount of leadership. However, it should be noted that a leaderless group cannot be expected to function well in all circumstances. While it is possible for a group to function without a leader, it may not be the optimal setup in many, if not most, situations.
Additionally, coordination between group members, and between the group and the larger organization, may become more difficult if the group does not have a leader Bass, At some point, someone has to be responsible for communicating information between the group and the organization the group is embedded within. In most circumstances, someone must be responsible for making decisions and giving the group a direction; that person is a leader, whether or not they are recognized as one by an organization.
Leaders often find themselves in situations requiring them to make decisions. The research methods that study this topic are called cognitive theories of leadership. Although this is a relatively new area of leadership research, there are a few tidbits of knowledge that can be passed along regarding how leaders make decisions, the difficulties of making decisions as a leader, and what to consider when you are facing tough decisions as a leader.
Another important factor to consider, especially when it comes to leader decision making, is time. Leaders often have to manage multiple sources of information and deal with constant demands for their time and attention. These may be information from followers who are giving a report or the demands of a group of stockholders. The number of requests that a leader receives and must respond to can be very draining and can end up putting a great deal of stress on the leader.
This stress, which is the result of having limited time to respond to multiple demands and having to make an unending flow of decisions, can have a strong influence on Cognitive resources leaderleader decision making. Rather, it appears that leaders with high intelligence perform better when their situation is not very stressful. The reasons for these findings are still being investigated, but it appears that intelligent leaders who lack experience tend to focus on issues that are not directly tied to the problem at hand when they are stressed.
Basically, they get distracted; the amount of information a leader attempts to think about overloads his or her system. The reverse is true for leaders with a great deal of experience.
Experienced leaders are able to fall back on their experience in stressful conditions. This allows them to chart a course of action that leads their group out of their troubling circumstances and back onto steady ground. Thus, the situation a leader faces may go a long way toward determining how successful a leader will be, given his or her individual attributes and stylistic preferences Fiedler, When you consider the different types of decisions leaders must make, the number of different situations leaders face, and the fact that there are multiple groups of people often depending on leaders to make good decisions, it becomes clear that this is a very complex question to answer.
However, researchers are beginning to examine exactly how leaders make decisions; that is, how leaders go about solving the problems they are faced with on a day-to-day basis. These are called leader Leader problem-solving theproblem-solving theories.