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.

Uhs 2062 Leadership


Published on

Slides prepared for my UHS 2062 UTM (Skudai, Malaysia ) students based on the references given. These are just guides to initiate further readings.

Published in: Education
  • Follow the link, new dating source: ❤❤❤ ❤❤❤
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Sex in your area is here: ♥♥♥ ♥♥♥
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Uhs 2062 Leadership

  1. 1. Prepared By: Siti Rokiah Siwok for UHS 2062 at UTM Skudai Johore.
  2. 2. Introduction  A leader can be defined as the “person who is appointed , elected or informally chosen to direct and co-ordinate the work of others in a group” (Fiedler, 1995, pg 7, in Arnold, 2005).  Leadership can be considered to be the personal qualities , behaviours, styles and decisions adopted by the leader. It concerns how the leader carries out her/his role. Although the role of the leader may be “listed” or described, leadership is not so easily pinned down.
  3. 3. “Food for thoughts”  The real leader of a group may not the person who was formally appointed to the role (Arnold, 2005).  There is no perfect indicator of leadership effectiveness, but the work performance of his or her workgroup or organisation is probably the best (Arnold, 2005).  Work organisations are increasingly reliant upon rapid and skilful innovation and use of information at all levels; leadership based upon monitoring and control of subordinates is no longer appropriate.
  4. 4. Leadership Theories associated with leadership Leaders are born? Or are they “bred”/developed? A set of specific skills and behaviours? What makes a good organizational leader? What about you?
  5. 5. Characteristics  Leaders have special characteristics . 17% ( study by Illies , Gerhardt and Le, 2004) of leaders are with genetic basis.  Recent reviews show that :  People high in openness, conscientiousness, extraversion and low in neuroticism are more likely to emerge as leaders (Judge, Bono, Ilies and Gerhardt, 2002)  High self monitors emerge as leaders more often then low self-monitors.  More intelligent  However, there are disagreements…..
  6. 6. Several perspectives  Motivation to lead  Affective identity motivation  Non-calculative motivation  Social-normative motivation
  7. 7. Characteristics and leader performance There is a relationship and three areas are given focus:  Traits  Needs  Orientation
  8. 8. Personal characteristics and leader performance: Traits  Meta-analysis by Youngjohn (1999) found that individual-difference variables were good predictors of leadership performance. Individuals who are charismatic, dominant, energetic and high in self- monitoring were more effective leaders than were people who scored lower on the four traits.  Youngjohn(1999) also found that management, decision making and oral-communication skills were highly correlated with leadership effectiveness.
  9. 9. Transformational leaders (TL)  TL develops, inspires and challenges the intellect of the followers in order to go beyond their self-interest in the service of a higher collective purpose, mission or vision.  TL are ambitious, but realistic; they also articulate clearly and in inspirational ways.  Followers feel motivated and emotionally attached to the leader.  Followers are aware ( and accept) the leader’s vision and goals.
  10. 10. Four component of transformational leadership  Individualised consideration : the leader treats each follower on his or her own merits and seeks to develop followers through delegation of projects and coaching/mentoring.  Intellectual stimulation: the leader encourages free thinking and emphasis reasoning before any action is taken.  Inspirational motivation: the leader creates an optimistic, clear and attainable vision of the future, thus encouraging others to raise their expectations.
  11. 11. Four component of transformational leadership  Idealised influence or charisma : the leader makes personal sacrifices, takes responsibility for his or her actions, shares any glory and shows great determination.
  12. 12. Charismatic leaders  Charismatic leaders tend to be viewed by researchers as a perception of a leader held by followers as well as the characteristics of the leader him/herself.  The perception need not necessarily stem from the leaders’ behaviours ( Gardner & Avolio, 1998, in Arnold 2005).  A leader is not charismatic unless described as such by his or her followers.
  13. 13. Charismatic leaders  Five aspects of charismatic leadership , according to data collected from 250 managers by Conger et al (2000, in Arnold 2005):  The leader formulates a strategic vision and articulates that vision.  The leader takes personal risks in pursuit of the vision.  The leader is sensitive to the opportunities and limitations provided by the environment (eg technology etc)  The leader is sensitive to other people’s needs.  The leader sometimes does unusual or unexpected things.
  14. 14. Transformational leadership and charisma  Conger et al’ s description of charismatic leadership qualities has a wider meaning than the charismatic component of transformational leadership (slides 10 & 11) (Arnold, 2005)  So Conger’s model of charismatic leadership is an alternative way of viewing transformational leadership (Arnold, 2005).  Yes! Transformational leadership works!
  15. 15. Transformational leadership and charisma  The extent to which leaders are perceived (by themselves, subordinates and their supervisors ) to use elements of transformational leadership is consistently positively correlated with perceptions of their effectiveness and satisfaction of their leadership.  Research by Conger et al (2000, in Arnold 2005) found that when followers perceive their leader as charismatic, they form more of a sense of group identity, empowerment and reverence for the leader.
  16. 16. Personal characteristics and leader performance: Traits  In another meta-analysis (Judge et al, 2002), these traits are found to be positively correlate to leader performance:  Extraversion  Openness  Agreeableness  Conscientiousness Neuroticism negatively relates to leader performance.
  17. 17. Transformational leadership and charisma  The concepts of transformational leadership and charismatic leadership represent an important advance in understanding how leadership can be described and how to be an effective leader.  However, subordinates or followers need to be cautious so that :  Transformational and charismatic leaders are not treated “God-like” or persons who do “no wrong”.  Transformational and charismatic leaders’ visions are appropriate and cause no harm.  Other elements in the organization are taken into account.
  18. 18. Self-monitoring  The concept of self-monitoring focus on what leaders do, not what they are. Example: a high self- monitoring leader may posses the trait of shyness and tend to prefer “ alone”. Knowing that part of her job is to communicate with her employs such as saying hello when she arrives at work, so she says hello to her employs when she arrives in the morning etc. thus the leader has the trait of shyness but adapt s her outward behaviour to the need of the situation.
  19. 19. Leadership and gender A complex issue
  20. 20. Personal characteristics and leader performance :Needs  Research by Mc Clelland and Burnham (1976) and McClelland and Boyatzis (1982) demonstrates that high performance managers have a leadership motive pattern; high need for power and low need for affiliation. The need for power is NOT for personal power but for ORGANIZATIONAL POWER.  Needs for power, achievement and affiliation can be measured through various psychological tests; such as the Thematic Appreciation Test(TAT) or the Job Choice Exercise(JCE) or by examining their themes in their speeches and writings.
  21. 21. Personal characteristics and leader performance :orientation  Three major school of thoughts have postulated that differences in leader performance can be attributed to the extent to which leaders are TASK vs PERSON ORIENTED.
  22. 22. Consequences of leader orientation Low performance Low turnover Low grievance rate High performance Low turnover Low grievance rate Low performance High turnover High grievance rate High performance High turnover High grievance rate High Low Person orientation Low High Task orientation
  23. 23. Task vs Person-Oriented leaders  Task -oriented leaders such as task centered leaders, Theory X leaders and leaders high in initiating structure , define and structure their own roles and subordinates’ roles to attain the group’s formal goals.  Task -oriented leaders see their employees as lazy, extrinsically motivated, wanting security, undisciplined and shirking responsibility.  Because of the above assumptions, task-oriented leaders tend to lead or manage by giving directives, setting goals and making decision without consulting their subordinates.
  24. 24. Task vs Person- Orientated leaders  Person orientated leaders such as “country club leaders”, Theory Y leaders, and those leaders high in consideration act in a warm and supportive manner and show concern for their subordinate. Person oriented leaders believe that employees are intrinsically motivated, seek responsibility, are self controlled and do not necessarily dislike work.  Because of the above, person-oriented leaders consult their subordinates before making decisions, praise their subordinates and concern about the employees families etc
  25. 25. Unsuccessful or poor leaders  According to Hogan (1989):  Lack of leadership training  Trained after being hired  Cognitive deficiencies  Unable to learn from experience  Do not able to think strategically  Personality  Insecure ..and adopting one of these : Paranoid, Passive –aggressive, narcissist, high-likeability floater
  26. 26. Leader and situation  Fiedler’s contingency model holds that any leader is effective only in certain situations.  Thus Fiedler argue that rather than change the leadership style , leadership training should concentrate on helping people understand their leadership style and manipulate the environment to make a perfect match.  Fiedler developed Least Preferred coworker scale  Fiedler’s ideas supported by researches  Fiedler’s training : Leader match
  27. 27. Leader and situation  IMPACT theory, developed by Geier, Downey and Johnson (1980).  Leaders have 6 behaviour styles : informational, magnetic, position, affiliation, coercive and tactical.  Each style is effective with only one particular situation or organizational climate
  28. 28. IMPACT THEORY  Informational style in climate of ignorance  Magnetic style in a climate of despair  Position style in a climate of instability  Affiliation style in a climate of anxiety  Coercive style in a climate of crisis  Tactical style in a climate of disorganization
  29. 29. IMPACT THEORY: STRATEGIES  Find a climate consistent with your leadership style  Change your leadership style to better fit the climate  Change your followers perception of the climate  Change the actual climate
  30. 30. Situational leadership theory  Developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1988); four leadership styles :  Delegating  Directing  Supporting  Coaching
  31. 31. Leaders and subordinate goals  Leaders’ behaviour accepted by subordinate if leaders are perceived by subordinate to help them achieve their goals.  Several theories , such as:  Path goal theory
  32. 32. Means to be a leader  Leadership through decision making (Vroom-Yetton model)  Leadership through contact (management by walking around)  Leadership through power ( exepert power, legitimate power, reward and coercive powers, referent power)  Leadership through vision (transformational leadership).
  33. 33. What about culture?
  34. 34. Reference  Aamodt, M.G (2007). Industrial /organizational psychology. An applied approach. Belmont, CA: Thomson.  Arnold, J. ( 2005). Work Psychology (4th ed). England: Prentice Hall