Authentic/Ethical leadership & psychological well being
LEADERSHIP AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING
Abstract This project focuses on two different types of leadership styles namely,Ethical and Authentic leadership. The study primarily focuses on authentic and ethical leadership styles and their relationship with the psychological wellbeing of leaders. The objective of this project is to study and understand these two types of leadership styles and their correlation with the psychological wellbeing of the leader,with the help of Leadership And WellBeing Scale.Leadership is a very important topic for research in todays work settings. Its very important to study different types of leadership styles and to find out how and in what ways each leadership style affects the psychological wellbeing of the leader. Authentic and Ethical leadershipstyles are also two very effective leadership styles and are being studied very extensively by industrial and organizational psychologists. The main objective of this study is to find the correlation between authentic/ethical leadership and psychological well being of the leaders.
Being a successful leader is not an easy job and it requires a lot of knowledge and expertise. From recruitment and training to decision making and problem solving ,a leader has many responsibilities. The pressure of all these responsibilities may also affect the personal life of the leader and may exert some effect on his physical as well as psychological health. Each distinct type of leadershipstyle has some effect on the leader. In this study,we try to find out if authentic/ethical leadership styles have some effect on the leaders psychological wellbeing and if its there,of what sort it is. The main objective of this project is to understand and explain the relationship between authentic/ethical leadership styles and the psychological wellbeing of the leader.This project will help the managers and leaders understand the importance of authentic/ethical leadership styles in different situations and also it will help them understand the correlation between these leadership styles and their own psychological well being. This project will help the leaders select the appropriate leadership style in order to improve their psychological wellbeing. This,in turn,will increase their efficacy and performance as group leaders.About the organizationNational Thermal Power Corporation(NTPC) is Indias largest power company. It was set
up in 1975 to accelerate power development in India. It is emerging as an ‘Integrated Power Major’, with a significant presence in the entire value chain of power generation business. NTPC ranked 341st in the ‘2010, Forbes Global 2000’ ranking of the World’s biggest companies. Human resources at NTPCPeople before PLF (Plant Load Factor) is the guiding philosophy behind the entire gamut of HR policies at NTPC. The human resources department at NTPC is strongly committed to the development and growth of all the employees as individuals and not just as employees. It currently employs approximately 26,000 people at NTPC.Competence building, Commitment building, Culture building and Systems building are the four building blocks on which its HR systems are based.NTPC has a well established talent management system in place, to ensure that it delivers on its promise of meaningful growth and relevant challenges for its employees. The talent management system comprises PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT, CAREER PATHS and LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT.
Introduction The concept of leadership Leadership can be defined as a process by which one individual influences others toward the attainment of group or organizational goals. Three points about the definition of leadership should be emphasized. First, leadership is a social influence process. Leadership cannot exist without a leader and one or more followers. Second, leadership elicits voluntary action on the part of followers. The voluntary nature of compliance separates leadership from other types of influence based on formal authority. Finally, leadership results in followers behavior that is purposeful and goaldirected in some sort of organized setting. Many, although not all, studies of leadership focus on the nature of leadership in the workplace.Leadership is probably the most frequently studied topic in the organizational sciences. Thousands of leadership studies have been published and thousands of pages on leadership have been written in academic books and journals, businessoriented
publications, and generalinterest publications. Despite this, the precise nature of leadership and its relationship to key criterion variables such as subordinate satisfaction, commitment, and performance is still uncertain, to the point where Fred Luthans, in his book Organizational Behavior (2005), said that "it [leadership] does remain pretty much of a black box or unexplainable concept."Leadership should be distinguished from management. Management involves planning, organizing, staffing, directing, and controlling, and a manager is someone who performs these functions. A manager has formal authority by virtue of his or her position or office. Leadership, by contrast, primarily deals with influence. A manager may or may not be an effective leader. A leaders ability to influence others may be based on a variety of factors other than his or her formal authority or position.In the sections that follow, the development of leadership studies and theories over time is briefly traced. Table 1 provides a summary of the major theoretical approaches. Historical Leadership TheoriesLeadership Time of Major TenetsTheory IntroductionTrait Theories 1930s Individual characteristics of leaders are different than those of non leaders.
Behavioral 1940s and The behaviors of effective leaders are different than the Theories 1950s behaviors of ineffective leaders. Two major classes of leader behavior are taskoriented behavior and relationshiporiented behavior.Contingency 1960s and Factors unique to each situation determine whether Theories 1970s specific leader characteristics and behaviors will be effective. Historical Leadership TheoriesLeadership Time of Major TenetsTheory IntroductionLeaderMember 1970s Leaders from highquality relationships with some Exchange subordinates but not others. The quality of leader subordinates relationship affects numerous workplace outcomes.Charismatic 1970s and Effective leaders inspire subordinates to commit Leadership 1980s themselves to goals by communicating a vision, displaying charismatic behavior, and setting a powerful personal example.Substitutes foe 1970s Characteristics of the organization, task, and Leadership subordinates may substitute for or negate the effects of leadership behaviors.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTThree main theoretical frameworks have dominated leadership research at different points in time. These included the trait approach (1930s and 1940s), the behavioral approach (1940s and 1950s), and the contingency or situational approach (1960s and 1970s). Leadership has been described as “a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task".Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. This definition is similar to Northouses (2007, p3) definition — Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership knowledge and skills. This is called Process Leadership (Jago, 1982). However, we know that we have traits that can influence our actions. This is called Trait Leadership (Jago, 1982), in that it was once common to believe that leaders were born rather than made. These two leadership types
are shown in the chart below (Northouse, 2007, p5):While leadership is learned, the skills and knowledge processed by the leader can be influenced by his or hers attributes or traits, such as beliefs, values, ethics, and character. Knowledge and skills contribute directly to the process of leadership, while the other attributes give the leader certain characteristics that make him or her unique. Skills, knowledge, and attributes make the Leader, which is one of the:
Four Factors of LeadershipLeaderYou must have an honest understanding of who you are, what you know, and what you can do. Also, note that it is the followers, not the leader or someone else who determines if the leader is successful. If they do not trust or lack confidence in their leader, then they will be uninspired. To be successful you have to convince your followers, not yourself or your superiors, that you are worthy of being followed. FollowersDifferent people require different styles of leadership. For example, a new hire requires more supervision than an experienced employee. A person who lacks motivation requires a different approach than one with a high degree of motivation. You must know your people! The fundamental starting point is having a good understanding of human nature, such as needs, emotions, and motivation. You must come to know your employees be, know, and do attributes.
CommunicationYou lead through twoway communication. Much of it is nonverbal. For instance, when you “set the example,” that communicates to your people that you would not ask them to perform anything that you would not be willing to do. What and how you communicate either builds or harms the relationship between you and your employees. SituationAll situations are different. What you do in one situation will not always work in another. You must use your judgment to decide the best course of action and the leadership style needed for each situation. For example, you may need to confront an employee for inappropriate behavior, but if the confrontation is too late or too early, too harsh or too weak, then the results may prove ineffective. Also note that the situation normally has a greater effect on a leaders action than his or her traits. This is because while traits may have an impressive stability over a period of time, they have little consistency across situations (Mischel, 1968). This is why a number of leadership scholars think the Process Theory of Leadership is a more accurate than the Trait Theory of Leadership.Various forces will affect these four factors. Examples of forces are your relationship with your seniors, the skill of your followers, the informal leaders within your organization, and how your organization is organized.
Bass Theory of Leadership Bass theory of leadership states that there are three basic ways to explain how people become leaders (Stogdill, 1989; Bass, 1990). The first two explain the leadership development for a small number of people. These theories are: • Some personality traits may lead people naturally into leadership roles. This is the Trait Theory. • A crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings out extraordinary leadership qualities in an ordinary person. This is the Great Events Theory. • People can choose to become leaders. People can learn leadership skills. This is the Transformational or Process Leadership Theory. It is the most widely accepted theory today and the premise on which this guide is based. Total LeadershipWhat makes a person want to follow a leader? People want to be guided by those they respect and who have a clear sense of direction. To gain respect, they must be ethical. A
sense of direction is achieved by conveying a strong vision of the future. When a person is deciding if she respects you as a leader, she does not think about your attributes, rather, she observes what you do so that she can know who you really are. She uses this observation to tell if you are an honorable and trusted leader or a selfserving person who misuses authority to look good and get promoted. Selfserving leaders are not as effective because their employees only obey them, not follow them. They succeed in many areas because they present a good image to their seniors at the expense of their workers. Be Know DoThe basis of good leadership is honorable character and selfless service to your organization. In your employees eyes, your leadership is everything you do that effects the organizations objectives and their wellbeing. Respected leaders concentrate on (U.S. Army, 1983): • what they are [be] (such as beliefs and character) • what they know (such as job, tasks, and human nature) • what they do (such as implementing, motivating, and providing direction). What makes a person want to follow a leader? People want to be guided by those they respect and who have a clear sense of direction. To gain respect, they must be ethical. A sense of direction is achieved by conveying a strong vision of the future.
The Two Most Important Keys to Effective LeadershipAccording to a study by the Hay Group, a global management consultancy, there are 75 key components of employee satisfaction (Lamb, McKee, 2004). They found that: • Trust and confidence in top leadership was the single most reliable predictor of employee satisfaction in an organization. • Effective communication by leadership in three critical areas was the key to winning organizational trust and confidence: 1. Helping employees understand the companys overall business strategy. 2. Helping employees understand how they contribute to achieving key business objectives. 3. Sharing information with employees on both how the company is doing and how an employees own division is doing — relative to strategic business objectives. Principles of LeadershipTo help you be, know, and do, follow these eleven principles of leadership (U.S. Army,
1983). The later chapters in this Leadership guide expand on these principles and provide tools for implementing them: 1. Know yourself and seek selfimprovement In order to know yourself, you have to understand your be, know, and do, attributes. Seeking selfimprovement means continually strengthening your attributes. This can be accomplished through self study, formal classes, reflection, and interacting with others. 2. Be technically proficient As a leader, you must know your job and have a solid familiarity with your employees tasks. 3. Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions Search for ways to guide your organization to new heights. And when things go wrong, they always do sooner or later — do not blame others. Analyze the situation, take corrective action, and move on to the next challenge. 4. Make sound and timely decisions Use good problem solving, decision making, and planning tools. 5. Set the example Be a good role model for your employees. They must not only hear what they are expected to do, but also see. We must become the change we want to see Mahatma Gandhi 6. Know your people and look out for their wellbeing Know human nature and the importance of sincerely caring for your workers. 7. Keep your workers informed Know how to communicate with not only them,
but also seniors and other key people. 8. Develop a sense of responsibility in your workers Help to develop good character traits that will help them carry out their professional responsibilities. 9. Ensure that tasks are understood, supervised, and accomplished Communication is the key to this responsibility. 10.Train as a team Although many so called leaders call their organization, department, section, etc. a team; they are not really teams...they are just a group of people doing their jobs. 11.Use the full capabilities of your organization By developing a team spirit, you will be able to employ your organization, department, section, etc. to its fullest capabilities. Attributes of LeadershipIf you are a leader who can be trusted, then those around you will grow to respect you. To be such a leader, there is a Leadership Framework to guide you: BE KNOW DO BE a professional. Examples: Be loyal to the organization, perform selfless service, take personal responsibility.
BE a professional who possess good character traits. Examples: Honesty, competence, candor, commitment, integrity, courage, straightforwardness, imagination. KNOW the four factors of leadership — follower, leader, communication, situation. KNOW yourself. Examples: strengths and weakness of your character, knowledge, and skills. KNOW human nature. Examples: Human needs, emotions, and how people respond to stress. KNOW your job. Examples: be proficient and be able to train others in their tasks. KNOW your organization. Examples: where to go for help, its climate and culture, who the unofficial leaders are. DO provide direction. Examples: goal setting, problem solving, decision making, planning. DO implement. Examples: communicating, coordinating, supervising, evaluating. DO motivate. Examples: develop morale and esprit de corps in the organization, train, coach, counsel. EnvironmentEvery organization has a particular work environment, which dictates to a considerable
degree how its leaders respond to problems and opportunities. This is brought about by its heritage of past leaders and its present leaders.Goals, Values, and ConceptsLeaders exert influence on the environment via three types of actions: 1. The goals and performance standards they establish. 2. The values they establish for the organization. 3. The business and people concepts they establish. Successful organizations have leaders who set high standards and goals across the entire spectrum, such as strategies, market leadership, plans, meetings and presentations, productivity, quality, and reliability. Values reflect the concern the organization has for its employees, customers, investors, vendors, and surrounding community. These values define the manner in how business will be conducted. Concepts define what products or services the organization will offer and the methods and processes for conducting business. These goals, values, and concepts make up the organizations personality or how the organization is observed by both outsiders and insiders. This personality defines the roles, relationships, rewards, and rites that take place.
Roles and RelationshipsRoles are the positions that are defined by a set of expectations about behavior of any job incumbent. Each role has a set of tasks and responsibilities that may or may not be spelled out. Roles have a powerful effect on behavior for several reasons, to include money being paid for the performance of the role, there is prestige attached to a role, and a sense of accomplishment or challenge. Relationships are determined by a roles tasks. While some tasks are performed alone, most are carried out in relationship with others. The tasks will determine who the roleholder is required to interact with, how often, and towards what end. Also, normally the greater the interaction, the greater the liking. This in turn leads to more frequent interaction. In human behavior, its hard to like someone whom we have no contact with, and we tend to seek out those we like. People tend to do what they are rewarded for, and friendship is a powerful reward. Many tasks and behaviors that are associated with a role are brought about by these relationships. That is, new task and behaviors are expected of the present roleholder because a strong relationship was developed in the past, either by that roleholder or a prior roleholder. Culture and ClimateThere are two distinct forces that dictate how to act within an organization: culture and
climate. Each organization has its own distinctive culture. It is a combination of the founders, past leadership, current leadership, crises, events, history, and size (Newstrom, Davis, 1993). This results in rites: the routines, rituals, and the “way we do things.” These rites impact individual behavior on what it takes to be in good standing (the norm) and directs the appropriate behavior for each circumstance. The climate is the feel of the organization, the individual and shared perceptions and attitudes of the organizations members (Ivancevich, Konopaske, Matteson, 2007). While the culture is the deeply rooted nature of the organization that is a result of longheld formal and informal systems, rules, traditions, and customs; climate is a shortterm phenomenon created by the current leadership. Climate represents the beliefs about the “feel of the organization” by its members. This individual perception of the “feel of the organization” comes from what the people believe about the activities that occur in the organization. These activities influence both individual and team motivation and satisfaction, such as: • How well does the leader clarify the priorities and goals of the organization? What is expected of us? • What is the system of recognition, rewards, and punishments in the organization? • How competent are the leaders?
• Are leaders free to make decisions? • What will happen if I make a mistake? Organizational climate is directly related to the leadership and management style of the leader, based on the values, attributes, skills, and actions, as well as the priorities of the leader. Compare this to “ethical climate” — the feel of the organization about the activities that have ethical content or those aspects of the work environment that constitute ethical behavior. The ethical climate is the feel about whether we do things right; or the feel of whether we behave the way we ought to behave. The behavior (character) of the leader is the most important factor that impacts the climate. On the other hand, culture is a longterm, complex phenomenon. Culture represents the shared expectations and selfimage of the organization. The mature values that create tradition or the “way we do things here.” Things are done differently in every organization. The collective vision and common folklore that define the institution are a reflection of culture. Individual leaders, cannot easily create or change culture because culture is a part of the organization. Culture influences the characteristics of the climate by its effect on the actions and thought processes of the leader. But, everything you do as a leader will affect the climate of the organization.For information on culture, see LongTerm ShortTerm Orientation
The Process of Great LeadershipThe road to great leadership (Kouzes & Posner, 1987) that is common to successful leaders: • Challenge the process First, find a process that you believe needs to be improved the most. • Inspire a shared vision Next, share your vision in words that can be understood by your followers. • Enable others to act Give them the tools and methods to solve the problem. • Model the way When the process gets tough, get your hands dirty. A boss tells others what to do, a leader shows that it can be done. • Encourage the heart Share the glory with your followers hearts, while keeping the pains within your own. Theories of leadership Leadership is "organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal". The leader may or may not have any formal authority. Students of leadership have produced theories involving traits, situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values,
 charisma, and intelligence, among others. Somebody whom people follow: somebody who guides or directs others.Early western historyThe search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for centuries. Historys greatest philosophical writings from Platos Republic to Plutarchs Lives have explored the question "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the "trait theory of leadership".The trait theory was explored at length in a number of works in the 19th century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton, whose works have prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. In Galtons Hereditary Genius (1869), he examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when moving from first degree to second degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the
leader.Rise of alternative theoriesIn the late 1940s and early 1950s, however, a series of qualitative reviews of these studies (e.g., Bird, 1940; Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959) prompted researchers to take a drastically different view of the driving forces behind leadership. In reviewing the extant literature, Stogdill and Mann found that while some traits were common across a number of studies, the overall evidence suggested that persons who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations. Subsequently, leadership was no longer characterized as an enduring individual trait, as situational approaches (see alternative leadership theories below) posited that individuals can be effective in certain situations, but not others. This approach dominated much of the leadership theory and research for the next few decades.Reemergence of trait theoryTRAIT APPROACHThe scientific study of leadership began with a focus on the traits of effective leaders.
The basic premise behind trait theory was that effective leaders are born, not made, thus the name sometimes applied to early versions of this idea, the "great man" theory. Many leadership studies based on this theoretical framework were conducted in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s.Leader trait research examined the physical, mental, and social characteristics of individuals. In general, these studies simply looked for significant associations between individual traits and measures of leadership effectiveness. Physical traits such as height, mental traits such as intelligence, and social traits such as personality attributes were all subjects of empirical research.The initial conclusion from studies of leader traits was that there were no universal traits that consistently separated effective leaders from other individuals. In an important review of the leadership literature published in 1948, Ralph Stogdill concluded that the existing research had not demonstrated the utility of the trait approach.Several problems with early trait research might explain the perceived lack of significant findings. First, measurement theory at the time was not highly sophisticated. Little was known about the psychometric properties of the measures used to operationalize traits. As a result, different studies were likely to use different measures to assess the same construct, which made it very difficult to replicate findings. In addition, many of the trait studies relied on samples of teenagers or lowerlevel managers.
Early trait research was largely non theoretical, offering no explanations for the proposed relationship between individual characteristics and leadership.Finally, early trait research did not consider the impact of situational variables that might moderate the relationship between leader traits and measures of leader effectiveness. As a result of the lack of consistent findings linking individual traits to leadership effectiveness, empirical studies of leader traits were largely abandoned in the 1950s.New methods and measurements were developed after these influential reviews that would ultimately reestablish the trait theory as a viable approach to the study of leadership. For example, improvements in researchers use of the round robin research design methodology allowed researchers to see that individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks. Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct metaanalyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and summarize the findings from a wide array of studies. This advent allowed trait theorists to create a comprehensive picture of previous leadership research rather than rely on the qualitative reviews of the past. Equipped with new methods, leadership researchers revealed the following: • Individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks. • Significant relationships exist between leadership and such individual traits as: • intelligence
• adjustment • extraversion • conscientiousness • openness to experience • general selfefficacy While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, its reemergence has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in sophisticated conceptual frameworks.Specifically, Zaccaro (2007) noted that trait theories still: 1. focus on a small set of individual attributes such as Big Five personality traits, to the neglect of cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills, expertise, and problemsolving skills; 2. fail to consider patterns or integrations of multiple attributes; 3. do not distinguish between those leader attributes that are generally not malleable over time and those that are shaped by, and bound to, situational influences; 4. do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the behavioral diversity necessary for effective leadership.
Attribute pattern approachConsidering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several researchers have begun to adopt a different perspective of leader individual differences—the leader attribute pattern approach. In contrast to the traditional approach, the leader attribute pattern approach is based on theorists arguments that the influence of individual characteristics on outcomes is best understood by considering the person as an integrated totality rather than a summation of individual variables. In other words, the leader attribute pattern approach argues that integrated constellations or combinations of individual differences may explain substantial variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness beyond that explained by single attributes, or by additive combinations of multiple attributes.Behavioral and style theoriesLEADER BEHAVIOR APPROACHPartially as a result of the disenchantment with the trait approach to leadership that occurred by the beginning of the 1950s, the focus of leadership research shifted away from leader traits to leader behaviors. The premise of this stream of research was that the behaviors exhibited by leaders are more important than their physical, mental, or emotional traits. The two most famous behavioral leadership studies took place at Ohio
State University and the University of Michigan in the late 1940s and 1950s. These studies sparked hundreds of other leadership studies and are still widely cited.The Ohio State studies utilized the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), administering it to samples of individuals in the military, manufacturing companies, college administrators, and student leaders. Answers to the questionnaire were factoranalyzed to determine if common leader behaviors emerged across samples. The conclusion was that there were two distinct aspects of leadership that describe how leaders carry out their role.Two factors, termed consideration and initiating structure, consistently appeared. Initiating structure, sometimes called taskoriented behavior, involves planning, organizing, and coordinating the work of subordinates. Consideration involves showing concern for subordinates, being supportive, recognizing subordinates accomplishments, and providing for subordinates welfare.The Michigan leadership studies took place at about the same time as those at Ohio State. Under the general direction of Rensis Likert, the focus of the Michigan studies was to determine the principles and methods of leadership that led to productivity and job satisfaction. The studies resulted in two general leadership behaviors or orientations: an employee orientation and a production orientation. Leaders with an employee orientation showed genuine concern for interpersonal relations. Those with a production orientation focused on the task or technical aspects of the job.
The conclusion of the Michigan studies was that an employee orientation and general instead of close supervision yielded better results. Likert eventually developed four "systems" of management based on these studies; he advocated System 4 (the participativegroup system, which was the most participatory set of leader behaviors) as resulting in the most positive outcomes.One concept based largely on the behavioral approach to leadership effectiveness was the Managerial (or Leadership) Grid, developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. The grid combines "concern for production" with "concern for people" and presents five alternative behavioral styles of leadership. An individual who emphasized neither production was practicing "impoverished management" according to the grid. If a person emphasized concern for people and placed little emphasis on production, he was terms a "countryclub" manager.Conversely, a person who emphasized a concern for production but paid little attention to the concerns of subordinates was a "task" manager. A person who tried to balance concern for production and concern for people was termed a "middleoftheroad" manager.Finally, an individual who was able to simultaneously exhibit a high concern for production and a high concern for people was practicing "team management." According to the prescriptions of the grid, team management was the best leadership approach. The Managerial Grid became a major consulting tool and was the basis for a considerable
amount of leadership training in the corporate world.The assumption of the leader behavior approach was that there were certain behaviors that would be universally effective for leaders. Unfortunately, empirical research has not demonstrated consistent relationships between taskoriented or personoriented leader behaviors and leader effectiveness. Like trait research, leader behavior research did not consider situational influences that might moderate the relationship between leader behaviors and leader effectiveness.Managerial grid modelresponse to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to research leadership as a set of behaviors, evaluating the behavior of successful leaders, determining a behavior taxonomy, and identifying broad leadership styles. David McClelland, for example, posited that leadership takes a strong personality with a welldeveloped positive ego. To lead, selfconfidence and high selfesteem are useful, perhaps even essential.
Illustration 1: A graphical representation of the managerial grid modelA graphical representation of the managerial grid modelKurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal work on the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers evaluated the performance of groups of elevenyearold boys under different types of work climate. In each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of group decision making, praise and criticism (feedback), and the management of the group tasks (project management) according to three styles: authoritarian, democratic, and laissezfaire.The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model was
developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964 and suggests five different leadership styles, based on the leaders concern for people and their concern for goal achievement.Positive reinforcementB.F. Skinner is the father of behavior modification and developed the concept of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement occurs when a positive stimulus is presented in response to a behavior, increasing the likelihood of that behavior in the future.The following is an example of how positive reinforcement can be used in a business setting. Assume praise is a positive reinforcer for a particular employee. This employee does not show up to work on time every day. The manager of this employee decides to praise the employee for showing up on time every day the employee actually shows up to work on time. As a result, the employee comes to work on time more often because the employee likes to be praised. In this example, praise (the stimulus) is a positive reinforcer for this employee because the employee arrives at work on time (the behavior) more frequently after being praised for showing up to work on time.The use of positive reinforcement is a successful and growing technique used by leaders
to motivate and attain desired behaviors from subordinates. Organizations such as FritoLay, 3M, Goodrich, Michigan Bell, and Emery Air Freight have all used reinforcement to increase productivity. Empirical research covering the last 20 years suggests that reinforcement theory has a 17 percent increase in performance. Additionally, many reinforcement techniques such as the use of praise are inexpensive, providing higher performance for lower costs.CONTINGENCY (SITUATIONAL) APPROACHContingency or situational theories of leadership propose that the organizational or work group context affects the extent to which given leader traits and behaviors will be effective. Contingency theories gained prominence in the late 1960s and 1970s. Four of the more wellknown contingency theories are Fiedlers contingency theory, pathgoal theory, the VroomYettonJago decisionmaking model of leadership, and the situational leadership theory. Each of these approaches to leadership is briefly described in the paragraphs that follow.Introduced in 1967, Fiedlers contingency theory was the first to specify how situational factors interact with leader traits and behavior to influence leadership effectiveness. The theory suggests that the "favorability" of the situation determines the effectiveness of task and personoriented leader behavior.
Favorability is determined by (1) the respect and trust that followers have for the leader; (2) the extent to which subordinates responsibilities can be structured and performance measured; and (3) the control the leader has over subordinates rewards. The situation is most favorable when followers respect and trust the leader, the task is highly structured, and the leader has control over rewards and punishments.Fiedlers research indicated that taskoriented leaders were more effective when the situation was either highly favorable or highly unfavorable, but that personoriented leaders were more effective in the moderately favorable or unfavorable situations. The theory did not necessarily propose that leaders could adapt their leadership styles to different situations, but that leaders with different leadership styles would be more effective when placed in situations that matched their preferred style.Fiedlers contingency theory has been criticized on both conceptual and methodological grounds. However, empirical research has supported many of the specific propositions of the theory, and it remains an important contribution to the understanding of leadership effectiveness.Pathgoal theory was first presented in a 1971Administrative Science Quarterly article by Robert House. Pathgoal theory proposes that subordinates characteristics and characteristics of the work environment determine which leader behaviors will be more effective. Key characteristics of subordinates identified by the theory are locus of control, work experience, ability, and the need for affiliation. Important environmental
characteristics named by the theory are the nature of the task, the formal authority system, and the nature of the work group. The theory includes four different leader behaviors, which include directive leadership, supportive leadership, participative leadership, and achievementoriented leadership.According to the theory, leader behavior should reduce barriers to subordinates goal attainment, strengthen subordinates expectancies that improved performance will lead to valued rewards, and provide coaching to make the path to payoffs easier for subordinates. Pathgoal theory suggests that the leader behavior that will accomplish these tasks depends upon the subordinate and environmental contingency factors.Pathgoal theory has been criticized because it does not consider interactions among the contingency factors and also because of the complexity of its underlying theoretical model, expectancy theory. Empirical research has provided some support for the theorys propositions, primarily as they relate to directive and supportive leader behaviors.The VroomYettonJago decisionmaking model was introduced by Victor Vroom and Phillip Yetton in 1973 and revised by Vroom and Jago in 1988. The theory focuses primarily on the degree of subordinate participation that is appropriate in different situations. Thus, it emphasizes the decisionmaking style of the leader.There are five types of leader decisionmaking styles, which are labeled AI, AII, CI, CII, and G. These styles range from strongly autocratic (AI), to strongly democratic (G).
According to the theory, the appropriate style is determined by answers to up to eight diagnostic questions, which relate to such contingency factors as the importance of decision quality, the structure of the problem, whether subordinates have enough information to make a quality decision, and the importance of subordinate commitment to the decision.The VroomYettonJago model has been criticized for its complexity, for its assumption that the decision makers goals are consistent with organizational goals, and for ignoring the skills needed to arrive at group decisions to difficult problems. Empirical research has supported some of the prescriptions of the theory.The situational leadership theory was initially introduced in 1969 and revised in 1977 by Hersey and Blanchard. The theory suggests that the key contingency factor affecting leaders choice of leadership style is the taskrelated maturity of the subordinates. Subordinate maturity is defined in terms of the ability of subordinates to accept responsibility for their own taskrelated behavior. The theory classifies leader behaviors into the two broad classes of taskoriented and relationshiporiented behaviors. The major proposition of situational leadership theory is that the effectiveness of task and relationshiporiented leadership depends upon the maturity of a leaders subordinates.Situational leadership theory has been criticized on both theoretical and methodological grounds. However, it remains one of the betterknown contingency theories of leadership and offers important insights into the interaction between subordinate ability and
leadership style. Situational theory also appeared as a reaction to the trait theory of leadership. Social scientists argued that history was more than the result of intervention of great men as Carlyle suggested. Herbert Spencer (1884) (and Karl Marx) said that the times produce the person and not the other way around. This theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics; according to this group of theories, no single optimal psychographic profile of a leader exists. According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions."Some theorists started to synthesize the trait and situational approaches. Building upon the research of Lewin et al., academics began to normalize the descriptive models of leadership climates, defining three leadership styles and identifying which situations each style works better in.The authoritarian leadership style, for example, is approved in periods of crisis but fails to win the "hearts and minds" of followers in daytoday management; the democratic leadership style is more adequate in situations that require consensus building; finally, the laissezfaire leadership style is appreciated for the degree of freedom it provides, but as the leaders do not "take charge", they can be perceived as a failure in protracted or thorny organizational problems.
Thus, theorists defined the style of leadership as contingent to the situation, which is sometimes classified as contingency theory. Four contingency leadership theories appear more prominently in recent years: Fiedler contingency model, VroomYetton decision model, the pathgoal theory, and the HerseyBlanchard situational theory.The Fiedler contingency model bases the leaders effectiveness on what Fred Fiedler called situational contingency. This results from the interaction of leadership style and situational favorability (later called situational control). The theory defined two types of leader: those who tend to accomplish the task by developing good relationships with the group (relationshiporiented), and those who have as their prime concern carrying out the task itself (taskoriented). According to Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both taskoriented and relationshiporiented leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation. When there is a good leadermember relation, a highly structured task, and high leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable situation". Fiedler found that taskoriented leaders are more effective in extremely favorable or unfavorable situations, whereas relationshiporiented leaders perform best in situations with intermediate favorability.Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton (1973)and later with Arthur Jago (1988), developed a taxonomy for describing leadership situations, which was used in a normative decision model where leadership styles were connected to situational variables, defining which approach was more suitable to which situation. This approach
was novel because it supported the idea that the same manager could rely on different group decision making approaches depending on the attributes of each situation. This model was later referred to as situational contingency theory.The pathgoal theory of leadership was developed by Robert House (1971) and was based on the expectancy theory of Victor Vroom. According to House, the essence of the theory is "the meta proposition that leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviors that complement subordinates environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance".The theory identifies four leader behaviors, achievementoriented, directive, participative, and supportive, that are contingent to the environment factors and follower characteristics. In contrast to the Fiedler contingency model, the pathgoal model states that the four leadership behaviors are fluid, and that leaders can adopt any of the four depending on what the situation demands. The pathgoal model can be classified both as a contingency theory, as it depends on the circumstances, and as a transactional leadership theory, as the theory emphasizes the reciprocity behavior between the leader and the followers.The situational leadership model proposed by Hersey and Blanchard suggests four leadershipstyles and four levels of followerdevelopment. For effectiveness, the model
posits that the leadershipstyle must match the appropriate level of followerdevelopment. In this model, leadership behavior becomes a function not only of the characteristics of the leader, but of the characteristics of followers as well.Functional theoryFunctional leadership theory (Hackman & Walton, 1986; McGrath, 1962) is a particularly useful theory for addressing specific leader behaviors expected to contribute to organizational or unit effectiveness. This theory argues that the leaders main job is to see that whatever is necessary to group needs is taken care of; thus, a leader can be said to have done their job well when they have contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion (Fleishman et al., 1991; Hackman & Wageman, 2005; Hackman & Walton, 1986). While functional leadership theory has most often been applied to team leadership (Zaccaro, Rittman, & Marks, 2001), it has also been effectively applied to broader organizational leadership as well (Zaccaro, 2001). In summarizing literature on functional leadership (see Kozlowski et al. (1996), Zaccaro et al. (2001), Hackman and Walton (1986), Hackman & Wageman (2005), Morgeson (2005)), Klein, Zeigert, Knight, and Xiao (2006) observed five broad functions a leader performs when promoting organizations effectiveness. These functions include environmental monitoring, organizing subordinate activities, teaching and coaching subordinates, motivating others,
and intervening actively in the groups work.A variety of leadership behaviors are expected to facilitate these functions. In initial work identifying leader behavior, Fleishman (1953) observed that subordinates perceived their supervisors behavior in terms of two broad categories referred to as consideration and initiating structure. Consideration includes behavior involved in fostering effective relationships. Examples of such behavior would include showing concern for a subordinate or acting in a supportive manner towards others. Initiating structure involves the actions of the leader focused specifically on task accomplishment. This could include role clarification, setting performance standards, and holding subordinates accountable to those standards.Transactional and transformational theoriesEric Berne first analyzed the relations between a group and its leadership in terms of transactional analysis.The transactional leader (Burns, 1978) is given power to perform certain tasks and reward or punish for the teams performance. It gives the opportunity to the manager to lead the group and the group agrees to follow his lead to accomplish a predetermined
goal in exchange for something else. Power is given to the leader to evaluate, correct, and train subordinates when productivity is not up to the desired level, and reward effectiveness when expected outcome is reached. Idiosyncrasy Credits, first posited by Edward Hollander (1971) is one example of a concept closely related to transactional leadership.Emotions and leadership Leadership can be perceived as a particularly emotionladen process, with emotions entwined with the social influence process. In an organization, the leaders mood has some effects on his/her group. These effects can be described in three levels: 1. The mood of individual group members. Group members with leaders in a positive mood experience more positive mood than do group members with leaders in a negative mood. The leaders transmit their moods to other group members through the mechanism of emotional contagion. Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which charismatic leaders influence followers. 2. The affective tone of the group. Group affective tone represents the consistent or homogeneous affective reactions within a group. Group affective tone is an
aggregate of the moods of the individual members of the group and refers to mood at the group level of analysis. Groups with leaders in a positive mood have a more positive affective tone than do groups with leaders in a negative mood. 3. Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy. Public expressions of mood impact how group members think and act. When people experience and express mood, they send signals to others. Leaders signal their goals, intentions, and attitudes through their expressions of moods. For example, expressions of positive moods by leaders signal that leaders deem progress toward goals to be good. The group members respond to those signals cognitively and behaviorally in ways that are reflected in the group processes.In research about client service, it was found that expressions of positive mood by the leader improve the performance of the group, although in other sectors there were other findings.Beyond the leaders mood, her/his behavior is a source for employee positive and negative emotions at work. The leader creates situations and events that lead to emotional response. Certain leader behaviors displayed during interactions with their employees are the sources of these affective events. Leaders shape workplace affective
events. Examples – feedback giving, allocating tasks, resource distribution. Since employee behavior and productivity are directly affected by their emotional states, it is imperative to consider employee emotional responses to organizational leaders. Emotional intelligence, the ability to understand and manage moods and emotions in the self and others, contributes to effective leadership within organizations.Neoemergent theoryThe Neoemergent leadership theory (from the Oxford school of leadership) espouses that leadership is created through the emergence of information by the leader or other stakeholders, not through the true actions of the leader himself. In other words, the reproduction of information or stories form the basis of the perception of leadership by the majority. It is well known that the great naval hero Lord Nelson often wrote his own versions of battles he was involved in, so that when he arrived home in England he would receive a true heros welcome. In modern society, the press, blogs and other sources report their own views of a leader, which may be based on reality, but may also be based on a political command, a payment, or an inherent interest of the author, media, or leader. Therefore, it can be
contended that the perception of all leaders is created and in fact does not reflect their true leadership qualities at all.RECENT DEVELOPMENTSAlthough trait, behavioral, and contingency approaches have each contributed to the understanding of leadership, none of the approaches have provided a completely satisfactory explanation of leadership and leadership effectiveness. Since the 1970s, several alternative theoretical frameworks for the study of leadership have been advanced. Among the more important of these are leadermember exchange theory, transformational leadership theory, the substitutes for leadership approach, and the philosophy of servant leadership.LEADERMEMBER EXCHANGE THEORYLeadermember exchange (LMX) theory was initially called the vertical dyad linkage theory. The theory was introduced by George Graen and various colleagues in the 1970s and has been revised and refined in the years since. LMX theory emphasizes the dyadic (i.e., oneonone) relationships between leaders and individual subordinates, instead of the traits or behaviors of leaders or situational characteristics.The theorys focus is determining the type of leadersubordinate relationships that
promote effective outcomes and the factors that determine whether leaders and subordinates will be able to develop highquality relationships.According to LMX theory, leaders do not treat all subordinates in the same manner, but establish close relationships with some (the ingroup) while remaining aloof from others (the outgroup). Those in the ingroup enjoy relationships with the leader that is marked by trust and mutual respect. They tend to be involved in important activities and decisions. Conversely, those in the outgroup are excluded from important activities and decisions.LMX theory suggests that highquality relationships between a leadersubordinate dyad will lead to positive outcomes such as better performance, lower turnover, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Empirical research supports many of the proposed relationships.TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORIESBeginning in the 1970s, a number of leadership theories emerged that focused on the importance of a leaders charisma to leadership effectiveness. Included within this class of theories are Houses theory of charismatic leadership, Basss transformational leadership theory, and Conger and Kanungos charismatic leadership theory.These theories have much in common. They all focus on attempting to explain how
leaders can accomplish extraordinary things against the odds, such as turning around a failing company, founding a successful company, or achieving great military success against incredible odds. The theories also emphasize the importance of leaders inspiring subordinates admiration, dedication, and unquestioned loyalty through articulating a clear and compelling vision.Tranformational leadership theory differentiates between the transactional and the transformational leader. Transactional leadership focuses on role and task requirements and utilizes rewards contingent on performance. By contrast, transformational leadership focuses on developing mutual trust, fostering the leadership abilities of others, and setting goals that go beyond the shortterm needs of the work group.Basss transformational leadership theory identifies four aspects of effective leadership, which include charisma, inspiration, intellectual stimulation, and consideration. A leader who exhibits these qualities will inspire subordinates to be high achievers and put the longterm interest of the organization ahead of their own shortterm interest, according to the theory. Empirical research has supported many of the theorys propositions.SUBSTITUTES FOR LEADERSHIP THEORYKerr and Jermier introduced the substitutes for leadership theory in 1978. The theorys focus is concerned with providing an explanation for the lack of stronger empirical
support for a relationship between leader traits or leader behaviors and subordinates satisfaction and performance. The substitutes for leadership theory suggests that characteristics of the organization, the task, and subordinates may substitute for or negate the effects of leadership, thus weakening observed relationships between leader behaviors and important organizational outcomes.Substitutes for leadership make leader behaviors such as taskoriented or relationshiporiented unnecessary. Characteristics of the organization that may substitute for leadership include formalization, group cohesiveness, inflexible rules, and organizational rewards not under the control of the leader. Characteristics of the task that may substitute for leadership include routine and repetitive tasks or tasks that are satisfying. Characteristics of subordinates that may substitute for leadership include ability, experience, training, and jobrelated knowledge.The substitutes for leadership theory has generated a considerable amount of interest because it offers an intuitively appealing explanation for why leader behavior impacts subordinates in some situations but not in others. However, some of its theoretical propositions have not been adequately tested. The theory continues to generate empirical research.
SERVANT LEADERSHIPThis approach to leadership reflects a philosophy that leaders should be servants first. It suggests that leaders must place the needs of subordinates, customers, and the community ahead of their own interests in order to be effective. Characteristics of servant leaders include empathy, stewardship, and commitment to the personal, professional, and spiritual growth of their subordinates. Servant leadership has not been subjected to extensive empirical testing but has generated considerable interest among both leadership scholars and practitioners.Leadership continues to be one of the most written about topics in the social sciences. Although much has been learned about leadership since the 1930s, many avenues of research still remain to be explored as we enter the twentyfirst century.Leadership StylesLeadership style refers to a leaders behavior. It is the result of the philosophy, personality, and experience of the leader. Rhetoric specialists have also developed models for understanding leadership (Robert Hariman, Political Style,PhilippeJoseph Salazar, LHyperpolitique. Technologies politiques De La Domination).Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is
little time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of expertise, a more democratic or laissezfaire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing the interests of its individual members.Autocratic or authoritarian styleUnder the autocratic leadership style, all decisionmaking powers are centralized in the leader, as with dictators.Leaders do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits quick decisionmaking, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision to him/herself until he/she feels it needs to be shared with the rest of the group.In an autocratic leadership style, the person in charge has total authority and control over decision making. By virtue of their position and job responsibilities, they not only
control the efforts of the team, but monitor them for completion –often under close scrutinyThis style is reminiscent of the earliest tribes and empires. Obviously, our historical movement toward democracy brings a negative connotation to autocracy, but in some situations, it is the most appropriate type of leadership. That, of course, doesn’t mean a blank check to ignore the wellbeing of his subordinate. When is it used? The autocratic leadership style is best used in situations where control is necessary, often where there is little margin for error. When conditions are dangerous, rigid rules can keep people out of harm’s way. Many times, the subordinate staff is inexperienced or unfamiliar with the type of work and heavy oversight is necessary. Rigid organizations often use this style. It has been known to be very paternalistic, and in highlyprofessional, independent minded teams, it can lead to resentment and strained morale. Good fits for Autocratic Leadership: • Military • Manufacturing • Construction
How to be effective with this positionIt’s easy to see the immediate goal of this type of leadership: use your expertise to get the job done. Make sure that everyone is exactly where they need to be and doing their job, while the important tasks are handled quickly and correctly. In many ways this is the oldest leadership style, dating back to the early empires. It’s very intuitive to tell people what needs to be done by when.It is difficult balancing the use of authority with the morale of the team. Too much direct scrutiny will make your subordinates miserable, and being too heavy handed will squelch all group input. Being an effective autocratic leader means being very intentional about when and how demands are made of the team. Here are some things to keep in mind to be an effective when acting as an autocratic leader: • Respect your Subordinates: It’s easy to end up as rigid as the rules you are trying to enforce. It’s important that you stay fair and acknowledge that everyone brings something to the table, even if they don’t call the shots. Making subordinates realize they are respected keeps moral up and resentment low; every functional team is built on a foundation of mutual respect.
• Explain the rules: Your people know they have to follow procedure, but it helps them do a better job if they know why. • Be consistent: If your role in the team is to enforce the company line, you have to make sure you do so consistently and fairly. It’s easy to respect someone objective, but hard to trust someone who applies policy differently in similar circumstances. • Educate before you enforce: Having everyone understand your expectations up front will mean less surprises down the road. Being above board from the outset prevents a lot of miscommunications and misunderstandings. • Listen, even if you don’t change: We all want to feel like our opinions are appreciated, even if they aren’t going to lead to immediate change and being a leader means that your team will want to bring their opinions to you. It’s important to be clear that they are heard, no matter the outcome. Participative or democratic styleThe democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decisionmaking abilities with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by practicing social equality.A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic decisions, seeks to involve other
people in the process, possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates, most participative activity is within the immediate team. The question of how much influence others are given thus may vary on the managers preferences and beliefs, and a whole spectrum of participation is possible, as in the table below. < Not participative Highly participative > Leader Team proposes Joint Full proposes Autocratic decision, decision with delegation of decision, decision by listens to team as decision to leader has leader feedback, equals team final decision then decides There are many varieties on this spectrum, including stages where the leader sells the idea to the team. Another variant is for the leader to describe the what of objectives or goals and let the team or individuals decide the how of the process by which the how
will be achieved (this is often called Management by Objectives).The level of participation may also depend on the type of decision being made. Decisions on how to implement goals may be highly participative, whilst decisions during subordinate performance evaluations are more likely to be taken by the manager.There are many potential benefits of participative leadership, as indicated in the assumptions, above.This approach is also known as consultation, empowerment, joint decisionmaking, democratic leadership, Management By Objective (MBO) and powersharing.Participative Leadership can be a sham when managers ask for opinions and then ignore them. This is likely to lead to cynicism and feelings of betrayal.Laissezfaire or free rein styleA person may be in a leadership position without providing leadership, leaving the group to fend for itself. Subordinates are given a free hand in deciding their own policies and methods.The Laissez Faire Leadership Style was first described by Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938, along with the autocratic leadership and the democratic leadership styles. The
laissez faire style is sometimes described as a "hands off" leadership style because the leader provides little or no direction to the followers.The characteristics of the laissez faire style include: • Allows followers to have complete freedom to make decisions concerning the completion of their work or ask questions of the leader • The leader provides the followers with the materials they need to accomplish their goals and answers the followers questionsIn this type of leadership style,the leader totally trusts their employees/team to perform the job themselves. He just concentrates on the intellectual/rational aspect of his work and does not focus on the management aspect of his work. The team/employees are welcomed to share their views and provide suggestions which are best for organizational interests. This leadership style works only when the employees are skilled, loyal, experienced and intellectual.Narcissistic leadershipVarious academics such as Kets de Vries, Maccoby, and Thomas have identified narcissistic leadership as an important and common leadership style.
Narcissistic leadership is a common form of leadership. The narcissism may be healthy or destructive although there is a continuum between the two. To critics, "narcissistic leadership (preferably destructive) is driven by unyielding arrogance, selfabsorption, and a personal egotistic need for power and admiration."here are four basic types of leader with narcissists most commonly in type 3 although they may be in type 1: 1. authoritarian with task orientated decision making 2. democratic with task orientated decision making 3. authoritarian with emotional decision making 4. democratic with emotional decision making Toxic leadershipA toxic leader is someone who has responsibility over a group of people or an organization, and who abuses the leaderfollower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worseoff condition than when he/she first found them.The phrase was coined by Marcia Whicker in 1996 and is linked with a number of dysfunctional leadership styles.Other names include the little Hitler, manager from hell
and boss from hell.Basic traits of toxic leadershipThe basic traits of a toxic leader are generally considered to be either/or insular,intemperate, glib, operationally rigid, callous, inept, discriminatory, corrupt or aggressive by scholars such as Barbara Kellerman. These may occur as either: • Oppositional behaviour. • Poor selfcontrol and or restraint. • Plays corporate power politics. • Physical and/or psychological • An overcompetitive attitude to other bullying. employees. • Procedural inflexibility. • Perfectionistic attitudes. • Discriminatory attitudes (sexism, • Abuse of the disciplinary system etc.). (such as to remove a workplace rival). • Causes workplace division instead of • A condescending/glib attitude. harmony. • Use "divide and rule" tactics on their employees.
AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP Authenticity is a great word with great meanings. An authentic person is someone who is true to himself or herself, someone who is honest and open, and someone who believes in his or her abilities. As such an authentic person does not hide anything from others and lives with integrity. Authentic leadership is about guiding others with sincerity. It is about setting directions with integrity. It is about taking the lead while being open to others. It is about standing up for others with sincerity and taking full responsibility by being true to the self and others. Before the year 2000, leadership was not a popular word in the management world let alone authentic leadership. It was all about management and how to manage and control people. It was thought that leaders were born and not made. Leadership was limited to political leaders who would take risks and fight for their people. It was not practiced by executives in companies.
With the beginning of the 21st century, however, books on leadership started to show up more and more. Management books, on the other hand, started to decline. It was thought that management was no longer enough. Leaders needed to be developed. Companies gradually believed that without leadership they could not thrive in their business. Recently, authentic leadership is being preached. For leaders to be successful in leading people and companies, they need to be vulnerable, honest, and trustworthy. They should not try to imitate others. They need to be themselves and stick to their core values at all times. That is the key to real success.In his book, the True North, Bill George says, “the authentic leader brings people together around a shared purpose and empowers them to step up and lead authentically in order to create value for all stakeholders”. This is indeed a great definition of authentic leadership. Authentic leadership is about being true to the self, acting with passion and integrity, having respect and love for others, and not following the crowd but inspiring the crowd to move toward achieving a great vision with hope and faith.According to Bob Terry “Authenticity is knowing, and acting on, what is true and real inside yourself, your team and your organization AND knowing and acting on what is true and real in the world. It is not enough to walk one’s talk if one is headed off, or leading one’s organization, community or nation,of a cliff.”
Terry believes that the central organizing principle of leadership is authenticity. And he shows how authenticity and action joined together form a sure foundation for effective leadership. Authenticity is the "State of being committed to the truth." "An authentic leader is a person who chooses to live a life of integrity. They are not only honest in relationship with others but most importantly they are honest and true to themselves. Does this mean they dont make mistakes? Of course they do..we are all human! And yet they have the courage to take responsibility for their ways, learn and grow. Why? because they care!...They care about you, they care about me and they care about our world. " (Kim Elkovich MD A Higher Self.The benefits of Authentic Leadership include: • An individual continually grows and learns how to creatively adjust to the conditions that are facing them. • Decision making involves "and" instead of "or". • People become more honest with themselves and those they are in contact developing higher levels of trust.
• An individual connects with and aligns decisions to their personal conscience. This means higher levels of ethics and personal integrity. • Leaders appreciate and utilize ‘difference versus sameness’. This fosters innovation and an ability to resolve conflict. • New ways of thinking develop. This provides an opportunity to view the world differently and solve issues of great complexity . A Higher Self guides and mentors leaders to: • Assist them to identify certain practices and ways of thinking, feeling and behaving that are no longer benefiting them. • Support leaders to take risks and make the changes necessary in order to grow themselves and their relationship with the world.Overtime, this change process develops within the leader a capacity (confidence, resourcefulness) and inner resilience that allows them to face future challenges without mentoring. They become self sufficient. Not only is this cost effective but most importantly liberating! Following is some theoretical and philosophical insight into Authenticity: The profession of psychology and those spiritual have been exploring, theorising and researching authenticity for decades. The central premise is that human beings are born
into the world as unique. Their uniqueness can be scientifically attributed to the random aggregation of DNA code derived from both parents, or from a spiritual perspective (eg a unique spirit enters the world in human form to fulfill a life purpose; contributing to their spiritual growth).Regardless of the point of view, the truth is that in order to survive in the world a child is reliant on others. Children learn through sensing and experience about attachment further what to do in order to have their needs met. By interacting with and mirroring their parents (or primary caregiver), extended family, school, community and society they learn how to think, feel, act and form relationships with others. They develop values and beliefs that support them in their immediate world. They learn Unfortunately, this conditioning takes them away from who they really are the authentic self. Adding to the basic premise of psychological /spiritual existence and personal growth, is that adult life circumstances can challenge who we are and the way we live.Individuals can discover that the way they were taught to exist in the world is in fact creating problems for them. Their learnt behaviour, thinking, values and beliefs are not sufficient enough to solve the problem, or no longer serve them (relationship problems, feeling stressed are common signs). This creates tension with individuals often feeling
frustrated or stuck. This tension builds until the person is required to question themselves and their predicament. They begin to think of new possibilities and eventually, if able to take a leap of faith, choose to do something different and/or change themselves.This process of change provides the opportunity for continued growth with many possibilities. However when this process is not embraced we see personal turmoil, relationship breakdowns, workplace bullying, poor decision making and sometimes mental illness in the form of panic attacks, anxiety and depression. Selfawareness and personal choice being the keys that allow an individual to shed layers of conditioning that no longer benefit them. This in effect brings a person closer to who they really are. They become more authentic. A number of psychological modalities refer to this as the Onion Skin Model, ie peeling the onion. Some researches refer to this process as the evolution of human consciousness.Finally, we are not designed to run faster and faster behaving the same old way and making the same old mistakes, until we collapse. Instead we are designed to evolve. ETHICAL LEADERSHIPResearchers in the field of applied psychology define ethical leadership as the demonstration of appropriate conduct through personal actions and
relationships and the promotion of such conduct to subordinates through twoway communication, reinforcement, and decision making. This definition highlights three key components of ethical leadership. A discussion of each follows. First, leaders become credible and authentic as ethical role models by engaging in ongoing behaviors that subordinates deem unselfish and ethically appropriate. These behaviors include being honest, showing consideration for others, and treating people fairly and with respect. As noted by M.E. Brown and colleagues, ethical leadership entails engaging in transparent, fair, and caring actions.1 By so doing, leaders become an example of how to behave and a model for others to identify with and imitate. This is an ongoing process; subordinates are continuously evaluating their leaders, so a leader who is ethical at one point in time and not at another sends mixed messages that damage his authenticity.Second, ethical leadership entails directing attention to ethical issues and standards. Ethical leadership requires emphasizing the importance and significance of ethics. Communicating about ethics on a consistent basis is a key component to ethical leadership; leaders who behave ethically but never talk to their subordinate about ethics will fall short in ethical leadership.