Leaders draw on
five sources of power to influence the actions of followers: legitimate, reward, coercive,
referent, and expert. All leaders engage in political behavior to influence others—sometimes
ineffectively. Political behavior and organizational politics focus on efforts to
protect or enhance self-interests, goals, and preferred outcomes. The drivers of
political behavior were noted with special emphasis on how leaders can foster or minimize
political behaviors of subordinates in relation to the performance appraisal process.
Three of the legacy leadership models are the traits, Theory
X/Theory Y, and behavioral models. The traits model emphasizes the personal qualities of
leaders and attributes success to certain abilities, skills, and personality
characteristics. This model fails to explain why certain managers succeed and others fail as
leaders. The primary reason is that it ignores how traits interact with situational
variables. The Theory X/Theory Y model is based on the premise that the behavior of
managers is often influenced by their assumptions and beliefs about followers and
what motivates their followers. Theory X is a composite of propositions and underlying
beliefs that take a command-and-control approach to leadership that is
based on a negative view of human nature. In contrast, Theory Y is a composite of propositions
and beliefs that take an empowering approach to leadership that is based on a
positive view of human nature. The behavioral model emphasizes leaders’ actions instead of
their personal traits. We focused on two leader behaviors—consideration and
initiating structure— and how they affect employee performance and job satisfaction. The
behavioral model tends to ignore the situation in which the leader is operating.
This omission is the focal point of the two contingency models of leadership that we
reviewed. The contingency approach emphasizes the importance of various
situational factors for leaders and their leadership styles.
The Situational Leadership® Model states that leaders should choose
a style that matches the readiness of their subordinates. If subordinates are
not ready to perform a task, a directive leadership style will probably be more effective than a
relationship style. As the readiness level of the subordinates increases, the
leader’s style should become more participative and less directive.
The Vroom–Jago model presents a leader with choices among five
leadership styles based on seven situational (contingency) factors. Time requirements
and other costs associated with each style are recognized in the model. The
leadership styles lie on a continuum from decide (leader makes the decision) to delegate
(subordinate or team makes the decision). A solution matrix is used to diagnose the
situation and arrive at the recommended leadership style.
Comments
Post a Comment