291➠13 Leadership Essentialsthe key pointNot all man.docx

291➠
13 Leadership Essentials
the key point
Not all managers are leaders and not all leaders are managers.
In a managerial position, being a
leader requires understanding how to adapt one’s management
style to the situation to generate
willing and effective followership. As shown in the Zappos
example, the most successful leaders are
those who are able to generate strong cultures in which
employees work together to get things done.
chapter at a glance
What Is Leadership?
What Are Situational Contingency Approaches to Leadership?
What Are Follower-Centered Approaches to Leadership?
What Are Inspirational and Relational Leadership Perspectives?
what ’s inside?
ETHICS IN OB
CEO PAY—IS IT EXCESSIVE?
FINDING THE LEADER IN YOU

LOOKING FOR LEADER MATCH AT GOOGLE
OB IN POPULAR CULTURE
PATH-GOAL AND REMEMBER THE TITANS
RESEARCH INSIGHT
PARTICIPATORY LEADERSHIP AND PEACE
leaders make things happen
c13LeadershipEssentials.indd Page 291 6/29/11 8:28 PM ff-
446c13LeadershipEssentials.indd Page 291 6/29/11 8:28 PM
ff-446 Schermerhorn_OBSchermerhorn_OB
292 13 Leadership Essentials
Most people assume that anyone in management, particularly
the CEO, is a leader.
Currently, however, controversy has arisen over this
assumption. We can all think
of examples where managers do not perform much, if any,
leadership, as well as
instances where leadership is performed by people who are not
in management.
Researchers have even argued that failure to clearly recognize
this difference is a
violation of “truth in advertising” because many studies labeled
“leadership” may
actually be about “management.”1
Managers versus Leaders

A key way of differentiating between managers and leaders is to
argue that the
role of management is to promote stability or to enable the
organization to run
smoothly, whereas the role of leadership is to promote adaptive
or useful
changes.2 Persons in managerial positions could be involved
with both manage-
ment and leadership activities, or they could emphasize one
activity at the
expense of the other. Both management and leadership are
needed, however,
and if managers do not assume responsibility for both, then they
should ensure
that someone else handles the neglected activity. The point is
that when we dis-
cuss leadership, we do not assume it is identical to management.
For our purposes, we treat leadership as the process of infl
uencing others
to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to
do it, and the
process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to
accomplish shared objec-
tives.3 Leadership appears in two forms: (1) formal leadership,
which is exerted
by persons appointed or elected to positions of formal authority
in organizations,
and (2) informal leadership, which is exerted by persons who
become infl uential
because they have special skills that meet the needs of others.
Although both
types are important in organizations, this chapter will
emphasize formal leader-
ship; informal leadership will be addressed in the next chapter.4

The leadership literature is vast—thousands of studies at last
count—and
consists of numerous approaches.5 We have grouped these
approaches into two
chapters: Leadership Essentials, Chapter 13, and Leadership
Challenges and Orga-
nizational Change, Chapter 14. The present chapter focuses on
trait and behavioral
• Leadership is the
process of infl uencing
others and the process of
facilitating individual and
collective efforts to
accomplish shared
objectives.
LEARNING ROADMAP Managers versus Leaders / Trait
Leadership Perspectives /
Behavioral Leadership Perspectives
Leadership
Change Brings Out the Leader
in Us
Avon CEO Andrea Jung feels “there is a big difference
between being a leader and being a manager.” That
difference lies in being fl exible and willing to change.
According to Jung, if you have diffi culty with change you
will have a harder time being successful as a leader.

Leadership 293
theory perspectives, cognitive and symbolic leadership
perspectives, and transfor-
mational and charismatic leadership approaches. Chapter 14
deals with such
leadership challenges as how to be a moral leader, how to share
leadership, how
to lead across cultures, how to be a strategic leader of major
units, and, of course,
how to lead change. Many of the perspectives in each chapter
include several
models. Although each of these models may be useful to you in
a given work
setting, we invite you to mix and match them as necessary in
your setting, just as
we did earlier with the motivational models discussed in
Chapter 5.
Trait Leadership Perspectives
For over a century, scholars have attempted to identify the key
characteristics that
separate leaders from nonleaders. Much of this work stressed
traits. Trait per-
spectives assume that traits play a central role in differentiating
between leaders
and nonleaders in that leaders must have the “right stuff.”6 The
great person-trait
approach refl ects the attempt to use traits to separate leaders
from nonleaders.

This list of possible traits identifi ed only became longer as
researchers focused on
the leadership traits linked to successful leadership and
organizational perfor-
mance. Unfortunately, few of the same traits were identifi ed
across studies. Part
of the problem involved inadequate theory, poor measurement
of traits, and the
confusion between managing and leading.
Fortunately, recent research has yielded promising results. A
number of traits
have been found that help identify important leadership
strengths, as outlined in
Figure 13.1. As it turns out, most of these traits also tend to
predict leadership
outcomes.7
Key traits of leaders include ambition, motivation, honesty,
self-confi dence,
and a high need for achievement. They crave power not as an
end in itself but as
a means to achieve a vision or desired goals. At the same time,
they must have
enough emotional maturity to recognize their own strengths and
weaknesses, and
have to be oriented toward self-improvement. Furthermore, to
be trusted, they
must have authenticity; without trust, they cannot hope to
maintain the loyalty of
their followers. Leaders are not easily discouraged, and they
stick to a chosen
• Trait perspectives
assume that traits play a
central role in

differentiating between
leaders and nonleaders or
in predicting leader or
organizational outcomes.
Energy and adjustment or stress tolerance: Physical vitality and
emotional resilience
Prosocial power motivation: A high need for power exercised
primarily for the benefit
of others
Achievement orientation: Need for achievement, desire to excel,
drive to success,
willingness to assume responsibility, concern for task objectives
Emotional maturity: Well-adjusted, does not suffer from severe
psychological disorders
Self-confidence: General confidence in self and in the ability to
perform the job of a leader
Integrity: Behavior consistent with espoused values; honest,
ethical, trustworthy
Perseverance or tenacity: Ability to overcome obstacles;
strength of will
Cognitive ability, intelligence, social intelligence: Ability to
gather, integrate, and
interpret information; intelligence, understanding of social
setting
Task-relevant knowledge: Knowledge about the company,

industry, and technical aspects
Flexibility: Ability to respond appropriately to changes in the
setting
Positive Impact on Leadership Success
Figure 13.1 Traits with
positive implications for
successful leadership.
course of action as they push toward goal accomplishment. At
the same time,
they must be able to deal with the large amount of information
they receive on a
regular basis. They do not need to be brilliant, but usually
exhibit above-average
intelligence. In addition, leaders have a good understanding of
their social setting
and possess extensive knowledge concerning their industry, fi
rm, and job.
Even with these traits, however, the individual still needs to be
engaged. To lead
is to infl uence others, and so we turn to the question of how a
leader should act.
Behavioral Leadership Perspectives

How should managerial leaders act toward subordinates? The
behavioral per-
spective assumes that leadership is central to performance and
other outcomes.
However, instead of underlying traits, behaviors are considered.
Two classic
research programs—at the University of Michigan and at the
Ohio State Univer-
sity—provide useful insights into leadership behaviors.
Michigan Studies In the late 1940s, researchers at the
University of Michigan
sought to identify the leadership pattern that results in effective
performance.
From interviews of high- and low-performing groups in
different organizations,
the researchers derived two basic forms of leader behaviors:
employee-centered
and production-centered. Employee-centered supervisors are
those who place
strong emphasis on their subordinates’ welfare. In contrast,
production-centered
supervisors are more concerned with getting the work done. In
general, employee-
centered supervisors were found to have more productive
workgroups than did
the production-centered supervisors.8
These behaviors are generally viewed on a continuum, with
employee-
centered supervisors at one end and production-centered
supervisors at the other.
Sometimes, the more general terms human-relations oriented
and task oriented
are used to describe these alternative leader behaviors.

Ohio State Studies At about the same time as the Michigan
studies, an impor-
tant leadership research program began at the Ohio State
University. A questionnaire
was administered in both industrial and military settings to
measure subordinates’
perceptions of their superiors’ leadership behavior. The
researchers identifi ed two
dimensions similar to those found in the Michigan studies:
consideration and
initiating structure.9 A highly considerate leader was found to
be one who is
sensitive to people’s feelings and, much like the employee-
centered leader, tries
to make things pleasant for his or her followers. In contrast, a
leader high in ini-
tiating structure was found to be more concerned with defi ning
task requirements
and other aspects of the work agenda; he or she might be seen
as similar to a
production-centered supervisor. These dimensions are related to
what people
sometimes refer to as socioemotional and task leadership,
respectively.
At fi rst, the Ohio State researchers believed that a leader high
in consider-
ation, or socioemotional warmth, would have more highly satisfi
ed or better per-
forming subordinates. Later results suggested, however, that
many individuals in
leadership positions should be high in both consideration and
initiating structure.
This dual emphasis is refl ected in the leadership grid approach.

The Leadership Grid Robert Blake and Jane Mouton developed
the leadership
grid approach based on extensions of the Ohio State dimensions.
Leadership grid
results are plotted on a nine-position grid that places concern
for production on
• The behavioral
perspective assumes that
leadership is central to
performance and other
outcomes.
• A leader high in
consideration is sensitive
to people’s feelings.
• A leader high in
initiating structure is
concerned with spelling
out the task requirements
and clarifying aspects of
the work agenda.
• Leadership grid is an
approach that uses a grid
that places concern for
production on the horizontal
axis and concern for people

on the vertical axis.
Leadership 295
the horizontal axis and concern for people on the vertical axis,
where 1 is mini-
mum concern and 9 is maximum concern. As an example, those
with a 1/9
style—low concern for production and high concern for
people—are termed
“country club management.” They do not emphasize task
accomplishment but
stress the attitudes, feelings, and social needs of people.10
Similarly, leaders with a 1/1 style—low concern for both
production and
people—are termed “impoverished,” while a 5/5 style is labeled
“middle of the
road.” A 9/1 leader—high concern for production and low
concern for people—
RESEARCH INSIGHT
In an unusual cross-cultural organizational behavior study,
Gretchen Spreitzer
examined the link between business leadership practices and
indicators of
peace in nations. She found that earlier research suggested that
peaceful
societies had (1) open and egalitarian decision making and (2)

social control
processes that limit the use of coercive power. These two
characteristics are
the hallmarks of participatory systems that empower people in
the collective.
Spreitzer reasoned that business fi rms can provide open
egalitarian decisions
by stressing participative leadership and empowerment.
Spreitzer recognized that broad cultural factors could also be
important.
The degree to which the culture is future oriented and power
distance
appeared relevant. And she reasoned that she needed specifi c
measures of peace. She selected two
major indicators: (1) the level of corruption and (2) the level of
unrest. The measure of unrest was a
combined measure of political instability, armed confl ict,
social unrest, and international disputes. While
she found a large leadership database that directly measured
participative leadership, she developed
the measures of empowerment from another apparently
unrelated survey. Two items appeared rel-
evant: the decision freedom individuals reported (decision
freedom), and the degree to which they felt
they had to comply with their boss regardless of whether they
agreed with an order (compliance).
You can schematically think of this research in
terms of the following model.
As one might expect with exploratory research,
the fi ndings support most of her hypotheses but
not all. Participative leadership was related to less
corruption and less unrest, as was the future-
oriented aspect of culture. Regarding empower-

ment, there were mixed results; decision freedom
was linked to less corruption and unrest, but the
compliance measure was only linked to more
unrest.
Participatory Leadership and Peace
Do the Research Do you agree that when business used
participatory leadership, it legitimated the
democratically based style and increased the opportunity for
individuals to express their voice? What other
research could be done to determine the link between leadership
and peace?11
Cultural Factors
Future Orientation
Power Distance
Empowerment
Decision Freedom
Compliance
Peace
Corruption
Unrest
Participative Leadership
Source: Gretchen Spreitzer, “Giving Peace a Chance:
Organizational Leadership, Empowerment, and Peace,” Journal
of
Organizational Behavior 28 (2007), pp. 1077–1095.

has a “task management” style. Finally, a 9/9 leader, high on
both dimensions, is
considered to have a “team management” style; this is the ideal
leader in Blake
and Mouton’s framework.
Cross-Cultural Implications It is important to consider whether
the fi ndings of
the Michigan, Ohio State, and grid studies transfer across
national boundaries. Some
research in the United States, Britain, Hong Kong, and Japan
shows that the behav-
iors must be carried out in different ways in alternative
cultures. For instance, British
leaders are seen as considerate if they show subordinates how to
use equipment,
whereas in Japan the highly considerate leader helps
subordinates with personal
problems.12 We will see this pattern again as we discuss other
theories. The concept
seems to transfer across boundaries, but the actual behaviors
differ. Sometimes the
differences are slight, but in other cases they are not. Even
subtle differences in the
leader’s situation can make a signifi cant difference in precisely
the type of behavior
needed for success. Successful leaders adjust their infl uence
attempts to the situation.
The trait and behavioral perspectives assume that leadership, by
itself, would

have a strong impact on outcomes. Another development in
leadership thinking
has recognized, however, that leader traits and behaviors can act
in conjunction
with situational contingencies—other important aspects of the
leadership situa-
tion—to predict outcomes. Traits are enhanced by their
relevance to the leader’s
situational contingencies.13 For example, achievement
motivation should be most
effective for challenging tasks that require initiative and the
assumption of per-
sonal responsibility for success. Leader fl exibility should be
most predictive in
unstable environments or when leaders lead different people
over time.
Prosocial power motivation, or power oriented toward benefi
ting others,
is likely to be most important in situations where decision
implementation
requires lots of persuasion and social infl uence. “Strong” or
“weak” situations also
make a difference. An example of a strong situation is a highly
formal organiza-
tion with lots of rules, procedures, and policies. An example of
a weak situation
is one that is ambiguous and unstructured. In a strong situation
traits will have
less impact than in a weaker, more unstructured situation
because the leader has
less ability to infl uence the nature of the situation. In other
words, leaders can’t
show dynamism as much when the organization restricts them.
Traits may also make themselves felt by infl uencing leader

behaviors (e.g., a
leader high in energy engages in directive, take-charge
behaviors).14 In an attempt
to isolate when particular traits and specifi c combinations of
leader behavior and
situations are important, scholars have developed a number of
situational contin-
gency theories and models. Some of these theories emphasize
traits, whereas
others deal exclusively with leader behaviors and the setting.
Fiedler’s Leadership Contingency View
Fred Fiedler’s leadership contingency view argues that team
effectiveness depends
on an appropriate match between a leader’s style, essentially a
trait measure, and the
• Prosocial power
motivation is power
oriented toward benefi ting
others.
LEARNING ROADMAP Fiedler’s Leadership Contingency
View / Path-Goal View of Leadership /
Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership Model /
Substitutes for Leadership
Situational Contingency Leadership

Situational Contingency Leadership 297
demands of the situation.15 Specifi cally, Fiedler considers
situational control—the
extent to which a leader can determine what his or her group is
going to do—and
leader style as important in determining the outcomes of the
group’s actions and
decisions.
To measure a person’s leadership style, Fiedler uses an
instrument called the
least–preferred co-worker (LPC) scale. Respondents are asked
to describe the
person with whom they have been able to work least well—their
least preferred
co-worker, or LPC—using a series of adjectives such as the
following two:
Unfriendly ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Friendly
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Pleasant ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Unpleasant
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Fiedler argues that high-LPC leaders (those describing their
LPC very posi-
tively) have a relationship-motivated style, whereas low-LPC
leaders have a task-
motivated style. Because LPC is a style and does not change
across settings, the
leaders’ actions vary depending on the degree of situational
control. Specifi cally,
a task-motivated leader (low LPC) tends to be nondirective in
high- and low-

control situations, and directive in those in between. A
relationship-motivated
leader tends to be the opposite. Confused? Take a look at Figure
13.2 to clarify
the differences between high-LPC leaders and low-LPC leaders.
Figure 13.2 shows the task-motivated leader as being more
effective when
the situation is high and low control, and the relationship-
motivated leader as
being more effective when the situation is moderate control.
The fi gure also
shows that Fiedler measures situational control with the
following variables:
• Leader-member relations (good/poor)—membership support
for the leader
• Task structure (high/low)—spelling out the leader’s task
goals, procedures,
and guidelines in the group
• Position power (strong/weak)—the leader’s task expertise and
reward or
punishment authority
• Situational control is
the extent to which leaders
can determine what their
groups are going to do and
what the outcomes of their
actions are going to be.
• The least-preferred
co-worker (LPC) scale is
a measure of a person’s
leadership style based on a

description of the person
with whom respondents
have been able to work
least well.
1 2 3
Task-Motivated
Leader
Leader–Member Relations
Task Structure
Position Power
Relationship-
Motivated Leader
Good
High Low
Weak StrongStrong
High-Control
Situations
4 5 6 7
Good Poor
High LowLow

WeakWeak StrongStrong
Moderate-Control
Situations
8
Poor
Low
Weak
Low-Control
Situations
Figure 13.2 Fiedler’s situational variables and their preferred
leadership styles.
Consider an experienced and well-trained production supervisor
of a group
that is responsible for manufacturing a part for a personal
computer. The leader
is highly supported by his group members and can grant raises
and make hiring

and fi ring decisions. This supervisor has very high situational
control and is oper-
ating in situation 1 in Figure 13.2. For such high-control
situations, a task-oriented
leader style is predicted as the most effective. Now consider the
opposite setting.
Think of the chair of a student council committee of volunteers
who are unhappy
about this person being the chair. They have the low-structured
task of organizing
a Parents’ Day program to improve university–parent relations.
This low-control
situation also calls for a task-motivated leader who needs to
behave directively to
keep the group together and focus on the task; in fact, the
situation demands it.
Finally, consider a well-liked academic department chair who is
in charge of
determining the fi nal list of students who will receive
departmental honors at the
end of the academic year. This is a moderate-control situation
with good leader–
member relations, low-task structure, and weak position power,
calling for a
relationship-motivated leader. The leader should emphasize
nondirective and
considerate relationships with the faculty.
Fiedler’s Cognitive Resource Perspective Fiedler later
developed a cogni-
tive resource perspective that built on his earlier model.16
Cognitive resources are
abilities or competencies. According to this approach, whether a
leader should
use directive or nondirective behavior depends on the following
situational con-

tingencies: (1) the leader’s or subordinates’ ability or
competency, (2) stress,
(3) experience, and (4) group support of the leader. Cognitive
resource theory is
useful because it directs us to leader or subordinate group-
member ability, an
aspect not typically considered in other leadership approaches.
The theory views directiveness as most helpful for performance
when the
leader is competent, relaxed, and supported. In this case, the
group is ready, and
directiveness is the clearest means of communication. When the
leader feels
stressed, his or her attention is diverted. In this case, experience
is more impor-
tant than ability. If support is low, then the group is less
receptive, and the leader
has less impact. Group-member ability becomes most important
when the leader
is nondirective and receives strong support from group
members. If support is
weak, then task diffi culty or other factors have more impact
than either the leader
or the subordinates.
Evaluation and Application The roots of Fiedler’s contingency
approach
date back to the 1960s and have elicited both positive and
negative reactions.
The biggest controversy concerns exactly what Fiedler’s LPC
instrument mea-
sures. Some question Fiedler’s behavioral interpretations that
link the style mea-
sure with leader behavior in all eight conditions. Furthermore,
the approach

makes the most accurate predictions in situations 1 and 8 and 4
and 5; results
are less consistent in the other situations.17 Tests regarding
cognitive resources
have shown mixed results.18
In terms of application, Fiedler has developed leader match
training, which
Sears, Roebuck and Co. and other organizations have used.
Leaders are trained to
diagnose the situation in order to “match” their LPC score. The
red arrows in
Figure 13.2 suggest a “match.” In cases with no “match,” the
training shows how
each of these situational control variables can be changed to
obtain a match. For
instance, a leader with a low LPC and in setting 4 could change
the position
• In leader match
training, leaders are
trained to diagnose the
situation to match their
high and low LPC scores
with situational control.
Situational Contingency Leadership 299

power to strong and gain a “match.” Another way of getting a
match is through
leader selection or placement based on LPC scores.19 For
example, a low LPC
leader would be selected for a position with high situational
control, as in our
earlier example of the manufacturing supervisor. A number of
studies have been
designed to test this leader match training. Although they are
not uniformly sup-
portive, more than a dozen such tests have found increases in
group effectiveness
following the training.20
We conclude that although unanswered questions concerning
Fiedler’s con-
tingency theory remain, especially concerning the meaning of
LPC, the perspec-
tive and the leader match program have relatively strong
support.21 The approach
and training program are especially useful in encouraging
situational contingency
thinking.
Finding the Leader in You
LOOKING FOR LEADER MATCH AT GOOGLE
The news came as a surprise: Eric
Schmidt was out as CEO of Google,
and Larry Page was in. Schmidt had
been brought in by board of
directors in 2001 to provide “adult
supervision” to then 27-year-old
founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin.
For 10 years Google’s management
structure was described as some-
thing of a three-ring circus, with

co-founders Larry Page and Sergey
Brin running the business behind the
scenes, and Schmidt as the public
face. Now, the three decided, it was
time for Page to take the stage.
“For the last 10 years, we have
all been equally involved in making
decisions. This triumvirate
approach has real benefi ts in terms
In many ways, Page is taking
over at an ideal time. Google’s
business is doing well, with the
company reporting revenues of
$29.3 billion, up 24 percent from
the year before and profi ts
soaring. But the concern isn’t for
the present; it is for the future.
As reported in Newsweek, “there
has been a gnawing sense that
Google’s best days may be
behind it.” Google is facing
tough competition from Face-
book and Microsoft, and has
been losing top talent to younger
tech shops.
Page’s job is clear: Shake things
up and knock loose some new ideas.
But it’s a risky move. As reported in
Newsweek, “Page is a computer
scientist, not a business strategist.
And not all founders make great
leaders. Page is no Steve Jobs.”

Steve Jobs or not, Page is a
brilliant entrepreneur who has
been heavily involved in running
the business and gets along well
with the engineers. The question
now is whether the new leader-
ship structure will work, and if
Google has found its match
between leader capabilities and
company needs.
of shared wisdom, and we will con-
tinue to discuss the big decisions
among the three of us. But we have
also agreed to clarify our individual
roles so there’s clear responsibility
and accountability at the top of the
company,” said Eric Schmidt.
The objective is to simplify the
management structure and speed
up decision making. …
College of Administrative and Financial Sciences
Assignment 2
Deadline: 28/03/2020 @ 23:59
Course Name: Organizational Behavior
Student’s Name:
Course Code: MGT301
Student’s ID Number:
Semester: II
CRN:

Academic Year: 1440/1441 H
For Instructor’s Use only
Instructor’s Name: Dr xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Students’ Grade: 00/10
Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low
Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY
· The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD
format only) via allocated folder.
· Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
· Students are advised to make their work clear and well
presented, marks may be reduced for poor presentation. This
includes filling your information on the cover page.
· Students must mention question number clearly in their
answer.
· Late submission will NOT be accepted.
· Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words,
copying from students or other resources without proper
referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
· All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12,
double-spaced) font. No pictures containing text will be
accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
· Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.
Course Learning Outcomes-Covered
1
Develop the problem-solving skills for teamwork especially if
the problem relates to the task (Lo 3.2).
2
Ability to communicate and share information within the team
and organization in professional manner (Lo 4.4).
Assignment 2

Reference Source: Book-Ch:-13 & 14(10 Marks)
Critical Thinking:-Leadership
Use at least 3 scientific references to support your answers.
Follow APA-style when referencing.
Assignment Question(s):
1. Define leadership and explain the difference between being a
manager and being a leader. Which boss would you rather have?
Why? (02 Marks)
2. The leadership style theories, which you have learned in the
chapter 13 & 14 based on that determine which leadership styles
are suitable for managers who are managing workers ( both Blue
collar & White collar) in the organizations.(03 Marks)
3. Describe directive leadership and supportive leadership,
Explain their importance. (02 Marks)
4. How organizations are benefitted from supportive leadership?
Give an example of such organization which you might have
come across. (03 Marks)
Answer:

1. Leadership is the process of influencing others and the
process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to
accomplish shared objectives.
A key way of differentiating between managers and leaders is to
argue that the role of management is to promote stability or to
enable the organization to run smoothly, whereas the role of
leadership is to promote adaptive or useful changes.2 Persons in
managerial positions could be involved with both management
and leadership activities, or they could emphasize one activity
at the expense of the other. Both management and leadership are
needed, however, and if managers do not assume responsibility
for both, then they should ensure that someone else handles the
neglected activity. The point is that when we discuss
leadership, we do not assume it is identical to management.
For our purposes, we treat leadership as the process of inl
uencing others process of inl uencing
to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to
do it, and the others and the process of process of facilitating
individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objec-
facilitating individual and
tives.3 Leadership appears in two forms: (1) formal leadership,
which is exerted collective efforts to by persons appointed or
elected to positions of formal authority in organizations,
accomplish shared
and (2) informal leadership, which is exerted by persons who
become inl uential objectives.
because they have special skills that meet the needs of others.
Although both types are important in organizations, this chapter
will emphasize formal leadership; informal leadership will be
addressed in the next chapter.4
The leadership literature is vast—thousands of studies at last
count—and consists of numerous approaches.5 We have
grouped these approaches into two chapters: Leadership
Essentials, Chapter 13, and Leadership Challenges and Orga-
nizational Change, Chapter 14. The present chapter focuses on
trait and behavioral

291➠13 Leadership Essentialsthe key pointNot all man.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 291➠13 Leadership Essentialsthe key pointNot all man.docx

Similar to 291➠13 Leadership Essentialsthe key pointNot all man.docx (20)

More from jesusamckone

More from jesusamckone (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

291➠13 Leadership Essentialsthe key pointNot all man.docx