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

1. Prepared By:
Siti Rokiah Siwok
for UHS 2062 at UTM Skudai Johore.
srsiwwok@gmail.com

2. Introduction
 A leader can be defined as the “person who is
appointed , elected or informally chosen to direct and
co-ordinate the work of others in a group” (Fiedler,
1995, pg 7, in Arnold, 2005).
 Leadership can be considered to be the personal
qualities , behaviours, styles and decisions adopted
by the leader. It concerns how the leader carries out
her/his role. Although the role of the leader may be
“listed” or described, leadership is not so easily pinned
down.

3. “Food for thoughts”
 The real leader of a group may not the person who
was formally appointed to the role (Arnold, 2005).
 There is no perfect indicator of leadership
effectiveness, but the work performance of his or her
workgroup or organisation is probably the best
(Arnold, 2005).
 Work organisations are increasingly reliant upon rapid
and skilful innovation and use of information at all
levels; leadership based upon monitoring and control
of subordinates is no longer appropriate.

4. Leadership
Theories associated with leadership
Leaders are born?
Or are they “bred”/developed?
A set of specific skills and behaviours?
What makes a good organizational
leader?
What about you?

5. Characteristics
 Leaders have special characteristics . 17% ( study by Illies ,
Gerhardt and Le, 2004) of leaders are with genetic basis.
 Recent reviews show that :
 People high in openness, conscientiousness, extraversion and
low in neuroticism are more likely to emerge as leaders
(Judge, Bono, Ilies and Gerhardt, 2002)
 High self monitors emerge as leaders more often then low
self-monitors.
 More intelligent
 However, there are disagreements…..

6. Several perspectives
 Motivation to lead
 Affective identity motivation
 Non-calculative motivation
 Social-normative motivation

7. Characteristics and leader
performance
There is a relationship and three areas
are given focus:
 Traits
 Needs
 Orientation

8. Personal characteristics and leader
performance: Traits
 Meta-analysis by Youngjohn (1999) found that
individual-difference variables were good predictors of
leadership performance. Individuals who are
charismatic, dominant, energetic and high in self-
monitoring were more effective leaders than were
people who scored lower on the four traits.
 Youngjohn(1999) also found that management,
decision making and oral-communication skills were
highly correlated with leadership effectiveness.

9. Transformational leaders (TL)
 TL develops, inspires and challenges the intellect of
the followers in order to go beyond their self-interest
in the service of a higher collective purpose, mission or
vision.
 TL are ambitious, but realistic; they also articulate
clearly and in inspirational ways.
 Followers feel motivated and emotionally attached to
the leader.
 Followers are aware ( and accept) the leader’s vision
and goals.

10. Four component of
transformational leadership
 Individualised consideration : the leader treats each
follower on his or her own merits and seeks to develop
followers through delegation of projects and
coaching/mentoring.
 Intellectual stimulation: the leader encourages free
thinking and emphasis reasoning before any action is
taken.
 Inspirational motivation: the leader creates an
optimistic, clear and attainable vision of the future,
thus encouraging others to raise their expectations.

11. Four component of
transformational leadership
 Idealised influence or charisma : the leader makes
personal sacrifices, takes responsibility for his or her
actions, shares any glory and shows great
determination.

12. Charismatic leaders
 Charismatic leaders tend to be viewed by researchers
as a perception of a leader held by followers as well as
the characteristics of the leader him/herself.
 The perception need not necessarily stem from the
leaders’ behaviours ( Gardner & Avolio, 1998, in
Arnold 2005).
 A leader is not charismatic unless described as such
by his or her followers.

13. Charismatic leaders
 Five aspects of charismatic leadership , according to data
collected from 250 managers by Conger et al (2000, in
Arnold 2005):
 The leader formulates a strategic vision and articulates that
vision.
 The leader takes personal risks in pursuit of the vision.
 The leader is sensitive to the opportunities and limitations
provided by the environment (eg technology etc)
 The leader is sensitive to other people’s needs.
 The leader sometimes does unusual or unexpected things.

14. Transformational leadership and
charisma
 Conger et al’ s description of charismatic leadership
qualities has a wider meaning than the charismatic
component of transformational leadership (slides 10
& 11) (Arnold, 2005)
 So Conger’s model of charismatic leadership is an
alternative way of viewing transformational leadership
(Arnold, 2005).
 Yes! Transformational leadership works!

15. Transformational leadership and
charisma
 The extent to which leaders are perceived (by
themselves, subordinates and their supervisors ) to use
elements of transformational leadership is
consistently positively correlated with perceptions of
their effectiveness and satisfaction of their leadership.
 Research by Conger et al (2000, in Arnold 2005) found
that when followers perceive their leader as
charismatic, they form more of a sense of group
identity, empowerment and reverence for the leader.

16. Personal characteristics and leader
performance: Traits
 In another meta-analysis (Judge et al, 2002), these
traits are found to be positively correlate to leader
performance:
 Extraversion
 Openness
 Agreeableness
 Conscientiousness
Neuroticism negatively relates to leader performance.

17. Transformational leadership and
charisma
 The concepts of transformational leadership and
charismatic leadership represent an important advance in
understanding how leadership can be described and how
to be an effective leader.
 However, subordinates or followers need to be cautious so
that :
 Transformational and charismatic leaders are not treated
“God-like” or persons who do “no wrong”.
 Transformational and charismatic leaders’ visions are
appropriate and cause no harm.
 Other elements in the organization are taken into account.

18. Self-monitoring
 The concept of self-monitoring focus on what leaders
do, not what they are. Example: a high self-
monitoring leader may posses the trait of shyness and
tend to prefer “ alone”. Knowing that part of her job is
to communicate with her employs such as saying hello
when she arrives at work, so she says hello to her
employs when she arrives in the morning etc. thus the
leader has the trait of shyness but adapt s her outward
behaviour to the need of the situation.

19. Leadership and gender
A complex issue

20. Personal characteristics and
leader performance :Needs
 Research by Mc Clelland and Burnham (1976) and
McClelland and Boyatzis (1982) demonstrates that
high performance managers have a leadership motive
pattern; high need for power and low need for
affiliation. The need for power is NOT for personal
power but for ORGANIZATIONAL POWER.
 Needs for power, achievement and affiliation can be
measured through various psychological tests; such as
the Thematic Appreciation Test(TAT) or the Job
Choice Exercise(JCE) or by examining their themes in
their speeches and writings.

21. Personal characteristics and leader
performance :orientation
 Three major school of thoughts have postulated that
differences in leader performance can be attributed to
the extent to which leaders are TASK vs PERSON
ORIENTED.

22. Consequences of leader
orientation
Low performance
Low turnover
Low grievance rate
High performance
Low turnover
Low grievance rate
Low performance
High turnover
High grievance rate
High performance
High turnover
High grievance rate
High
Low
Person
orientation
Low High
Task orientation

23. Task vs Person-Oriented leaders
 Task -oriented leaders such as task centered leaders,
Theory X leaders and leaders high in initiating
structure , define and structure their own roles and
subordinates’ roles to attain the group’s formal goals.
 Task -oriented leaders see their employees as lazy,
extrinsically motivated, wanting security,
undisciplined and shirking responsibility.
 Because of the above assumptions, task-oriented
leaders tend to lead or manage by giving directives,
setting goals and making decision without consulting
their subordinates.

24. Task vs Person- Orientated leaders
 Person orientated leaders such as “country club
leaders”, Theory Y leaders, and those leaders high in
consideration act in a warm and supportive manner
and show concern for their subordinate. Person
oriented leaders believe that employees are
intrinsically motivated, seek responsibility, are self
controlled and do not necessarily dislike work.
 Because of the above, person-oriented leaders consult
their subordinates before making decisions, praise
their subordinates and concern about the employees
families etc

25. Unsuccessful or poor leaders
 According to Hogan (1989):
 Lack of leadership training
 Trained after being hired
 Cognitive deficiencies
 Unable to learn from experience
 Do not able to think strategically
 Personality
 Insecure ..and adopting one of these : Paranoid,
Passive –aggressive, narcissist, high-likeability floater

26. Leader and situation
 Fiedler’s contingency model holds that any leader is
effective only in certain situations.
 Thus Fiedler argue that rather than change the
leadership style , leadership training should
concentrate on helping people understand their
leadership style and manipulate the environment to
make a perfect match.
 Fiedler developed Least Preferred coworker scale
 Fiedler’s ideas supported by researches
 Fiedler’s training : Leader match

27. Leader and situation
 IMPACT theory, developed by Geier,
Downey and Johnson (1980).
 Leaders have 6 behaviour styles : informational,
magnetic, position, affiliation, coercive and
tactical.
 Each style is effective with only one particular
situation or organizational climate

28. IMPACT THEORY
 Informational style in climate of ignorance
 Magnetic style in a climate of despair
 Position style in a climate of instability
 Affiliation style in a climate of anxiety
 Coercive style in a climate of crisis
 Tactical style in a climate of disorganization

29. IMPACT THEORY: STRATEGIES
 Find a climate consistent with your
leadership style
 Change your leadership style to better fit the
climate
 Change your followers perception of the
climate
 Change the actual climate

30. Situational leadership theory
 Developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1988); four
leadership styles :
 Delegating
 Directing
 Supporting
 Coaching

31. Leaders and subordinate goals
 Leaders’ behaviour accepted by subordinate if leaders
are perceived by subordinate to help them achieve
their goals.
 Several theories , such as:
 Path goal theory

32. Means to be a leader
 Leadership through decision making (Vroom-Yetton
model)
 Leadership through contact (management by walking
around)
 Leadership through power ( exepert power, legitimate
power, reward and coercive powers, referent power)
 Leadership through vision (transformational
leadership).

33. What about culture?

34. Reference
 Aamodt, M.G (2007). Industrial /organizational
psychology. An applied approach. Belmont, CA:
Thomson.
 Arnold, J. ( 2005). Work Psychology (4th ed). England:
Prentice Hall