14
Leader Traits and Behavioral Styles
When leaders are effective, the people who are influenced by them tend to feel good and are most often productive. But when leaders are ineffective, people and performance suffer. This chapter explores why some leaders can be more successful than others, and identifies challenges facing leaders in today's changing organizational contexts. 
What's Inside?
Bringing OB to LIFE
STAYING THIN TO GAIN A LEADERSHIP EDGE
Worth Considering . . . or Best Avoided?
NEWLY PROMOTED TO MANAGER? “DO NOTHING” MAY BE YOUR KEY TO SUCCESS
Checking Ethics in OB
TACKLING UNETHICAL LEADERSHIP IN THE WORKPLACE
Finding the Leader in You
PATRICIA KARTER USES CORE VALUES AS HER GUIDE
OB in Popular Culture
LINCOLN AND LEADERSHIP
Research Insight
WHEN INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES MATTER MORE THAN CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Chapter at a Glance
- What Do We Know About Leader Traits and Behaviors?
- What Do Contingency Approaches Tell Us About leadership?
- What Are Charismatic and Transformational Theories of Leadership?
- What Are Complexity Leadership Views?
- How Do We Address Leadership Ethics?
Leader Traits and Behaviors
EARLY TRAIT APPROACHES 
LATER TRAIT APPROACHES
BEHAVIORAL LEADERSHIP APPROACHES ARE LEADERS BORN OR MADE?
We all have experience with many different kinds of leaders. Some are task oriented and authoritarian. Others are inspirational and motivating. Still others are hands off, with laissez-faire or ineffectual styles that can make it frustrating when situations require strong leadership.
These characteristics represent traits and behavioral styles of leaders. Trait and behavioral approaches help us understand how characteristics of leaders are associated with their effectiveness. The basic premise is that we can identify more and less effective leadership styles by studying how followers perceive and react to different kinds of leaders.
As any of us who have worked in organizations know, managers play a crucial role in creating the climates in which we work. When a manager fosters a supportive and motivating climate, our work is meaningful and going to work is fun. But when we have a bad manager, morale plummets and we are drained of the energy we need to be productive in work—and in life. Research has shown us what makes some managers more effective than others. In this chapter we build from this knowledge to understand how we can become more effective managers and leaders in the workplace.
Early Trait Approaches
For over a century, scholars have been on a quest to identify the elusive qualities that separate leaders from non-leaders. Based on the assumption that leaders are endowed with certain traits or characteristics, much of the early work focused on identifying qualities that predict who is a leader and who is not. These studies, collectively called trait approaches, assumed that if we could identify leadership qualities, we could select individuals for leadership positions based on their leadership traits.
Trait approaches assume that leaders are endowed with certain traits or qualities associated with leader status and success.
The focus in this early work was on personality, needs, motives, values, and even physical characteristics such as height and sex. For this reason, these theories were often called “great man theories” because one of the key traits they associated with leadership was being male.
Early review were discouraging. Scholars concluded that traits were not significantly associated with leadership. A primary reason was the failure to look for situational and mediating variables, such as communication or interpersonal behaviors, that would help explain how leader traits are causally linked to outcomes.1 Instead, researchers looked for significant correlations between traits and leadership outcomes, such as group performance or leader advancement. When they failed to find strong relationships, they concluded that traits were not a significant predictor of leadership or its effectiveness.
Later Trait Approaches
These early reviews saying there was not a pattern of significant correlations caused trait approaches to fall out of favor. In recent years, however, trait approaches have experienced a comeback as management scholars are developing new measures and new ways to analyze the relationship between a manager's traits and his or her leadership effectiveness.
Some scholars are using the Big Five dimensions of personality in an attempt to predict leader emergence (i.e., who is recognized as leader of a group) and leader effectiveness (i.e., how well a leader performs in the role). Findings show significant but small relationships for four of the Big Five traits: extraversion, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience.2 This means that effective leaders seem to have a bit more of these traits than ineffective and non-leaders.
“When we see a senior executive who's overweight, our initial reaction isn't positive. . . . If he can't keep his hand out of the cookie jar, how can he do his job?”
Staying Thin to Gain a Leadership Edge
A good workout may return more than good health and the body image you want. It might boost your leadership potential as well. Although OB scholarship has historically turned away from considering personal traits such as height, weight, and physical attractiveness in leadership, the real world may be moving in a different direction. OB researchers are starting to look at the workout as not only a personal wellness issue but also a leadership one.
After seeing a video replay of a presentation he made at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), Tim McNair was shocked at the prominence of his “gut.” He guessed co-workers back home were looking at the same thing every time he spoke with them. Even worse, he wondered if they were saying to each other “If he can't keep his hand out of the cookie jar, how can he do his job?”
That question doesn't surprise OB professor and leadership consultant Barry Posner of Santa Clara University. “When we see a senior executive who's overweight,” he says, “our initial reaction isn't positive.” Recent research by CCL backs him up. A study of 757 executives showed that a leader's weight had a strong correlation with how good she or he was perceived as a leader by peers, bosses, and subordinates. A BMI of 25 seemed to be the dividing line. Below it and you score well as a leader; above it you score more poorly.
OB places a lot of importance on how perceptions influence attitudes and behavior. So if perceptions of our leadership abilities are affected in any part by our physical appearance, maybe it's time to get both weight and perceptions under control. Whether you call it our “leadership image” or something else, we own it. Even the CEO of Weight Watchers International has had to own up. He started the job at 245 pounds on a six-foot-two frame and says, “I sucked my gut in a lot.” After losing 40 pounds he now says, “I probably carry myself with more confidence and authority.”
Other scholars are pulling from evolutionary psychology to identify genetic factors associated with leadership that have evolved through natural selection. These scholars argue that our predilections toward leadership and followership are likely due to natural selection that caused certain traits and behaviors to be retained because they solved adaptive problems faced by our ancestors.3 According to evolutionary psychology approaches, it may be engrained in some of us to voluntarily subordinate to others because our ancestors learned that, in certain situations, it is better to defer to a central command.
Behavioral Leadership Approaches
If you want to know whether a leader has a certain trait—that is, intelligence, extraversion, or persuasiveness—how would you find out? The answer is that you would look at his or her behaviors. Not surprisingly, then, when the early trait approaches failed to produce meaningful results, researchers began considering other types of leader characteristics, such as what leaders did, or how they behaved.
This led to what is known as the behavioral approach in management research. The behavioral approach focuses on identifying categories of relevant leadership behavior and examining their relationships with outcomes. It does this primarily through the use of interviews and questionnaires that gather subordinates' perceptions of the supervisors' behaviors.
The behavioral approach focuses on identifying categories of relevant leadership behavior and examining their effects on performance and other outcomes.
Much of the early work on behavioral approaches was centered at two universities, so they became known as the Ohio State and Michigan studies.4 These studies discovered that the majority of a manager's leadership behaviors could be divided into two meta-categories: relations-oriented and task-oriented behavior. Relations-oriented behavior, or consideration, involves concern for relationships and interpersonal support. It focuses on employee-centered, or socioemotional, concerns. Task-oriented behavior, or initiating structure, involves directive behavior focused on providing clarity and task focus. It addresses production-centered, or task-related, concerns of management.
Relations-oriented behavior, also known as consideration, involves concern for relationships and socioemotional support.
Task-oriented behavior, also known as initiating structure, involves providing direction and enforcing performance standards needed to drive production.
Research Insight
When Individual Differences Matter More than Cultural Differences
When it comes to transformational leadership, whether subordinates like it or not may depend more on individual differences than cultural differences. At least this is what researchers found in a study of managers and subordinates in the United States and China. The findings, published in the Academy of Management Journal, show that when individuals have a low power distance orientation they see transformational leaders as more fair (i.e., procedural justice) than when they have a high power distance orientation. And this finding seems to hold across both Chinese and American respondents.
The authors suggest that the difference lies in one's power distance orientation. When individuals have a high power distance orientation, they expect their leaders to communicate strong directives. And they don't want leaders to provide explanation or clarification—their expectation is that solutions should come from leaders, not from followers. Transformational leaders, however, are focused on stimulating followers to think for themselves and take on more leadership responsibility. They use intellectual stimulation to encourage followers to think more like leaders. For those with high power distance orientation, this use of intellectual stimulation is viewed with suspicion. They believe it is unfair for leaders to pass on to followers what they should be taking care of themselves.
These findings indicate that cultural differences may matter less than we think. Individuals both in the United States and China appear to respond negatively to transformational leadership when they have high power distance orientation. When power distance orientation is low, transformational leadership is seen as fair. But when power distance is high, transformational leaders better beware: Subordinates might not like their style!
Source: See Bradley Kirkman, Gilad Chen, Jiing-Lih Harh, Zhen Xiong Chen, and Kevin Lowe, “Individual Power Distance Orientation and Follower Reactions to Transformational Leaders: A Cross-Cultural Examination,” Academy of Management Journal 52 (2009), pp. 744–764.
These two behavioral categories form the foundation for much of the management research that was to follow. Relations-oriented behavior focuses on the human relations aspects of management. It shows that highly considerate managers are sensitive to people's feelings and try to make things pleasant for followers. They do this by listening to subordinates and treating them as respected colleagues, defending subordinates when needed, being willing to accept suggestions, and consulting with subordinates on important matters.5
Task-oriented behavior focuses on production. Its key concern is to provide structure for subordinates by defining task requirements and specifying the work agenda. Task-oriented behaviors include maintaining performance standards, assigning tasks, identifying standard procedures, enforcing deadlines, correcting performance problems, and coordinating activities.6
Are Leaders Born or Made?
The focus on traits and behaviors raises another issue at the center of leadership. Is leadership restricted to those who are born with leadership ability, or can anyone be made into a leader? This is known as the “born/made” argument in leadership. The “born” argument aligns with trait theory, which says that leaders have certain traits—that they are natural-born leaders. The “made” argument aligns with the behavior approaches, which say that leadership is associated with behaviors (i.e., if you behave like a leader you are a leader). The made argument implies that anyone can be made into a leader through training and development.
Where do you fall on this issue? Do you think anyone can be made into a leader? Or do you think people have to have certain skills to be a leader? If the born argument is right, then we should focus on selection by screening new hires for leadership traits and skills. If the made argument is correct then we should focus on development by training individuals to better demonstrate leadership behaviors.
Potential insight into the answer can be found in a series of research studies by Rich Arvey and colleagues based on samples of fraternal and identical twins from the Minnesota Twin Registry. Examining how much leadership is determined by nature (i.e., genetics) and how much by nurture (i.e., environment), they found that 30 percent to 32 percent of the variance in role occupancy among twins could be accounted for by genetic factors. This means that roughly 70 percent can be developed.7 The implication of these findings is that not everyone can be a leader. Instead, individuals must possess at least some set of basic leadership skills and abilities. In other words, just like being a musician or a star athlete, leadership is a talent—and some people have it more than others.
Contingency Theories
THE CONTINGENCY MODEL FINDINGS FROM CONTINGENCY THEORIES
FIEDLER'S LEADER MATCH PROBLEMS WITH CONTINGENCY APPROACHES
Common sense would tell us that not all traits or behaviors of leaders are positively related to effectiveness all of the time. Instead, whether a leader behavior is effective will depend on the situation. On the first day of class, what do you want from your professor: Do you want more considerate behavior, or do you want more structuring behavior? Most students want more structuring behavior. If your professor comes in and is nice and friendly (i.e., consideration) but does not hand out a syllabus (i.e., initiating structure), the response will likely not be very positive. In other words, some situations call for certain types of behaviors more than others.
This is the premise behind the contingency approaches in leadership theory. Contingency approaches state that whether a leader style or behavior is positively associated with leadership effectiveness depends on (i.e., is contingent upon) the situation. In situations requiring more direction and structure, task-oriented behavior will be more effective and desired. In situations requiring more support and consideration, relations-oriented behavior will be more effective.
Contingency approaches state that the relationship between leader behavior and leadership effectiveness depends on the situation.
The Contingency Model
A general contingency model is shown in Figure 14.1. It indicates that a manager's leadership behavior or style (e.g., the independent variable) is related to leadership effectiveness (e.g., the outcome variable) depending on the situation (e.g., the moderator variable).
Contingency theories start with a manager's behavioral style. The most common leadership behaviors used by managers are task oriented and relations oriented. In contingency approaches, these are often referred to as directive leadership and supportive leadership styles. Two additional behavioral styles were added later: achievement-oriented and participative leadership.8 Achievement-oriented leadership focuses on building subordinates' confidence in their ability to achieve high standards of performance through a focus on excellence and goal setting. Participative leadership focuses on consulting with subordinates and taking their suggestions into account before making decisions.
Directive leadership provides clarity and direction for subordinates.
Supportive leadership promotes a friendly work climate by focusing on subordinate needs and well-being.
Achievement-oriented leadership is motivation focused and builds subordinates' confidence to achieve high standards through its focus on excellence and goal setting.
Participative leadership is a democratic form of leadership that consults with subordinates and takes their suggestions into account before making decisions.
Contingency theories try to predict leadership effectiveness. The most common effectiveness variables are subordinate job satisfaction and performance. As described in previous chapters, job satisfaction is the positive feelings one has about the work and work setting. Performance is the quality and quantity of work produced. Performance can be measured at the individual level (i.e., the performance of a particular subordinate) or at the group level (i.e., the performance of a work unit).
FIGURE 14.1 A comprehensive contingency model.
The central argument of contingency theories is that situational factors moderate the association between a manager's leadership style and his or her effectiveness. Situational variables are assessed in a variety of ways. They include characteristics of the follower, such as follower readiness, or ability to do the task. They can be characteristics of the task, such as task structure (e.g., high or low task structure). Or they can be characteristics of the organizational structure, such as leader position power (e.g., formal or informal authority system).
Follower readiness is the amount of experience or ability the follower has to do the job.
Task structure describes whether the task is highly defined (high structure) or ambiguous (low structure).
Leader position power describes the amount of formal authority associated with the position of the leader.
Findings from Contingency Theories
Findings from contingency approaches show, in general, that certain situations favor certain leadership styles. Managers, therefore, need to understand, what the situation is and how to adjust their style to fit it.
Directive Leadership Directive leadership is needed when subordinates want guidance and direction in their jobs. It helps increases role clarity, self-efficacy, effort, and performance. When the task is clear, directive leadership will have a negative impact, as it will be seen as overly domineering—a “micromanaging” style—by subordinates.
Supportive Leadership Supportive leadership is needed when subordinates want emotional, not task, support. Supportive leadership is beneficial for highly repetitive or unpleasant tasks. It helps reduce stress by letting employees know the organization cares and will provide help.
Achievement-Oriented Leadership Achievement-oriented leadership is needed for challenging tasks or when subordinates need to take initiative. It helps employees gain confidence and strive for higher standards. It increases expectations that effort will lead to desired performance.
Participative Leadership Participative leadership is best when subordinates need limited direction and support. It allows employees to provide input. When tasks are repetitive, nonauthoritarian subordinates appreciate being involved to help break up the monotony.
Fiedler's Leader-Match
One contingency theory that differs from the others in how it handles the issue of fit between leader style and the situation is Fiedler's LPC (least-preferred co-worker) model. Fiedler's LPC model suggests that a manager's leadership style does not change. A manager has a certain style and that is the style he or she has to work with. Therefore, instead of modifying their style, managers need to match (i.e., leader-match) the situation to their style.
Leader-match means the leader cannot change his or her style and therefore needs to change the situation to match the style.
A match can be achieved in two ways: by selecting managers with the appropriate style to fit the situation, or by training managers to change the situation to make it fit their leadership style. In the latter case, Fiedler developed leader-match training, which Sears, Roebuck and Co. and other organizations used for training managers to diagnose the situation and match their style to it. A number of studies have been designed to test this leader match training. Although they are not uniformly supportive, more than a dozen such tests found increases in work unit effectiveness following the training.9
Problems with Contingency Approaches
Although contingency approaches focus managers on the importance of matching their styles to the situation, they do not describe exactly how to do this. The problem is that the guidelines coming out of contingency approaches are broad, and therefore not very informative. In the workplace, managers face leadership situations that are complex and dynamic, and each situation is unique in its own way. There is no “magic toolbox” we can give managers for how to deal with these situations. Leaders need to understand the basic concepts but then be able to adapt their style to fit the needs of the particular situation.
Newly Promoted to Manager? “Do Nothing” May Be Your Key to Success
Do nothing! Really? This sounds like the complete opposite of what leaders are supposed to be doing. After all they worked really hard to get the promotion. Shouldn't they be showing everyone else that they're still the best workers on the team?
Northwestern's Keith Murnighan has spent a lot of time studying leaders and people at work. He's the one pushing the “do nothing” approach to leadership. But he doesn't mean not showing up for work and being out of touch with what's going on. He does mean, however, not trying to do other people's jobs for them and continuing to do the tasks you excelled at before getting the promotion. Leaders need to understand that their jobs are to help others do great work, not do that work for them. They also need to understand that leadership today is more like coaching a team full of talented players: they need strategy, they need support, and they need encouragement and reminders to stay focused. When given all that, the likelihood is that teams they can deliver great results.
In his book Do Nothing: How to Stop Overmanaging and Become a Great Leader, Murnighan identifies micromanaging—or overmanaging—as one of a leader's most common and costly mistakes. This basically means not trusting others to use their talents and instead trying to direct them in every last detail of their work. Murnighan describes this as a natural human tendency, one linked in part to the desire to be in control of things. He also says a good leader recognizes this tendency and guards against it. “As you move up,” Murnighan points out, “you can't help but remember what made you successful and think that you should ‘do’ more of that. But as you get more responsibility you should actually do less.”
The point is that leaders need time to work on the big picture and putting resources and support systems in place. They also need time to listen and learn from those reporting to them so that they can do these things best. Everyone, says Murnighan, wants leaders who are willing to say “You're on the front lines and I'm not, so I want to hear your voice as I formulate strategy.” If they try to do everything, they won't have time for these really important things. But if they “do nothing”—meaning nothing that someone else can do—they'll have time and energy left to do the right things, the things leaders are paid for and expected to do in support of their teams.
Do the Analysis
Can you buy into this notion of “doing nothing”? Is Murnighan on the right track, or is his advice potentially misleading in causing leaders to think that they don't have to be in charge of things at all? What's the proper dividing line between managing just enough and overmanaging? Does this line depend on the nature of the work being done, the skills of the work team, and even the industry? In other words, is “Do nothing” a universal prescription for leadership action or more of a useful reminder that leaders need to tread carefully and make sure they're doing the right things?
Frustration with these limitations led to what some refer to as the “doom and gloom” period in leadership research. This period (the 1970s to 1980s) was characterized by disillusionment and criticism from scholars that leadership research had told us very little.10 To address these criticisms, scholars turned to a new way to think about leadership. Instead of focusing on leadership contexts, they focused on leaders. This led to visionary, charismatic, and transformational approaches in leadership.
Charismatic/Transformational Views
CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP BURNS'S TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP THEORY
BASS'S TRANSACTIONAL/TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY
PROBLEMS OF “HEROIC” LEADERSHIP VIEWS
Charismatic Leadership
We are all familiar with charismatic leadership. We have been witness to the powerful effects, both good and bad, charismatic leaders can have on those around them. But what exactly is charisma, and how does it operate in leadership?
Charisma Charisma is a special personal quality or attractiveness that enables an individual to influence others. It is often characterized as personal magnetism or charm. Charisma evokes enthusiasm and commitment among followers. For example, John F. Kennedy, Oprah Winfrey, and Nelson Mandela are often described as charismatic leaders.
Charisma is a special personal quality or attractiveness that enables an individual to influence others.
Charisma has its roots in Christianity. The earliest usage depicts leaders set apart from ordinary people by their divine calling, personal sacrifice, and devotion to a spiritual mission and duty.11 People follow out of a sense of obedience and trust in the leader and his or her revelation. Mother Theresa and Gandhi were able to amass large followings because of their self-sacrifice and dedication to their mission. Their calling had broad appeal to the needs and hopes of the people around them.
Although charisma is often considered an individual trait, it is more aptly described as a relational process involving a leader, followers, and a situation. Katherine Klein and Robert House describe charisma as “a fire” produced by three elements: (1) a “spark”—a leader with charismatic qualities, (2) “flammable material”—followers who are open or susceptible to charisma, and (3) “oxygen”—an environment, such as a crisis or a situation of unrest among followers, that is conducive to charisma.12 For example, Martin Luther King was a leader with charismatic qualities (a skilled communicator), who tapped into the needs of followers hungry for change (protestors for equality), in a time of great unrest (the Civil Rights Movement).
Charismatic Traits and Behaviors What most distinguishes charismatic leaders is their skill as communicators. Charismatic leaders connect with followers on a deep, emotional level. They use metaphors and symbols to articulate their vision in ways that captivate followers and build identification. Their vision may offer promises that otherwise appear impossible. For many, this was the appeal of Barack Obama's 2008 election platform of “Change We Can Believe In” and “Yes We Can.” Charismatic leaders often use unconventional behavior to demonstrate their exceptional qualities. Virgin Group founder Richard Branson is often described as a charismatic leader, and his record-breaking crossing of the Pacific Ocean in a hot air balloon certainly qualifies as unconventional and exceptional behavior.
Consequences of Charisma For charisma to achieve positive outcomes, it needs to be used from a socialized charismatic power orientation, where power is used for collective rather than personal benefit. When used for personal interests, or a personalized charismatic power orientation it can have destructive consequences. Personalized charismatics dominate followers and keep them weak and dependent on the leader. For example, many dictators oppress their people by not allowing access to schooling or meaningful employment. In organizations, personalized charismatics reduce followers' power by centralizing decision making, restricting information, and doing what they can to make themselves look more important than others.13
Socialized charismatics focus on power for collective (e.g., societal) rather than personal benefit.
Personalized charismatics focus on power for personal rather than collective benefit.
Research findings suggest that charisma is not a beneficial attribute for most chief executives.14 Studies of CEO charisma have shown that financial performance was predicted by past performance but not by CEO charisma. Although charismatics are often able to persuade boards of directors to give them higher compensation, there is no evidence that these CEOs improve financial performance for their companies. One exception is in times of crisis or change management. For example, Steve Jobs's charisma was critical to the turnaround of Apple Computer in the late 1990s.
Dangers of Charismatic Leadership Charisma is a powerful force, and can be a dangerous one. Because charismatic leaders arouse strong emotions among followers, they can produce radical behaviors, even when that is not their intention. This occurs because followers often have psychological needs causing them to want hero figures who make them feel motivated, special, or secure.15 This can lead followers to interpret leaders as wanting them to do things even when leaders do not. For example, in the movie Dead Poet's Society, Robin Williams plays a charismatic teacher, John Keating, who inspires students in a conservative and aristocratic boarding school in Vermont to “seize the day” and live their lives to the fullest. His charisma goes out of control, however, when one of the students, Neil Perry, interprets Keating's message to mean he should rebel against his parents. When that doesn't work, Neil is so distraught that he commits suicide.
Followers' heroizing of charismatic leaders can also lead to disbelief and frustration when leaders don't live up to their expectations. Followers of charismatic leaders often put the leader on a pedestal and expect superhuman behavior. But the problem is all leaders are human, and rarely will they live up to these expectations.
Charismatic leaders can try to address these problems by reducing power distance. Power distance is the extent to which followers see the leader as having much higher status than them.16 When power distance is high, followers are reluctant to speak up or question because they believe the leader knows best. Leaders can address these problems by empowering followers to think critically and encouraging them to push back when they have concerns. They can also share in the credit for success, letting followers know that it is the combined actions that allowed the success—not the leader acting alone.
Power distance is the extent to which followers see leaders as having much higher status than them.
Burns's Transforming Leadership Theory
Transformational leadership theory is another approach that helped lift leadership out of the doom and gloom period in leadership studies. It began with publication of a book by political scientist James MacGregor Burns in 1978 analyzing the leadership styles of prominent political leaders.17 Burns's approach focused on leadership from the standpoint of power, purpose, and relationships.18 Key to his analysis was the distinction between leaders and power wielders.
According to Burns, leaders take followers' goals, motivations, needs, and feelings into consideration and use power for good. Power wielders, on the other hand, are egocentric and Machiavellian. They use power to advance their own interests without considering followers' needs. Whereas leaders elevate followers (and themselves) to new heights, power wielders gain power over followers in ways that cause followers to engage in behaviors they otherwise would not. In Burns's view, power wielders are not leaders.
Power wielders use power to advance their own interests without considering followers' needs.
FINDING THE LEADER
IN YOU
Patricia Karter Uses Core Values as Her Guide
Sweet is what one gets when digging into one of Dancing Deer Baking's Cherry Almond Ginger Chew cookies. Co-founded by Trish Karter, Dancing Deer sells over $10 million of cookies, cakes, and brownies each year. Each product is made with all-natural ingredients, packaged in recycled materials, and comes from inner-city Boston.
This story began for Karter in 1994 when she and her husband made a $20,000 angel investment in a talented baker and set her up in a former pizza shop. Karter hadn't planned on working in the company, but growth came quickly and their baker partner, Suzanne Lombardi, needed more support for the company to prosper and Karter jumped in. Customer demand led to product development and expansion; many positive press callouts and industry awards, such as being recognized on national TV as having the “best cake in the nation” and winning (the first of eleven) Sophie awards, the food industry's equivalent of the Oscars, fueled growth further.
It isn't always easy for a leader to stay on course and in control while changing structures, adding people, and dealing with competition. For Karter, though, the anchor point has always been clear: let core values be the guide. Dancing Deer's employees get stock options and a package of benefits well above the industry standard; 35 percent of the sales price from the firm's Sweet Home line of cake and cookie gifts are donated to fund scholarships for homeless and at-risk mothers. When offered a chance to make a large cookie sale to Williams-Sonoma, Karter declined. Why? Because to fulfill the order would have required the use of preservatives, and that violated the company's values.
Williams-Sonoma was so impressed that it contracted to develop bakery mixes and, eventually, many more products and a substantial relationship. Instead of losing an opportunity, by sticking with her values Karter's firm gained more sales.
“There's more to life than selling cookies,” says the Dancing Deer's Web site, “but it's not a bad way to make a living.” Karter hopes growth will soon make Dancing Deer “big enough to make an impact, to be a social economic force.” As she says on www.dancingdeer.com: “It has been an interesting journey. Our successes are due to luck, a tremendous amount of dedication and hard work, and a commitment to having fun while being true to our principles. We have had failures as well—and survived them with a sense of humor.”
What's the Lesson Here?
Do you know your core values? Do those core values guide your leadership decisions? Have you ever had your core values tested, and how did you respond?
Through his analysis, Burns noticed different styles and approaches used by leaders. Some used transactional leadership styles, in which they focused on exchanging valued goods in return for something they want (e.g., economic, political, or social exchanges, such as exchange of money for goods or support for votes). The focus here is purely instrumental. There is no expectation beyond the exchange. Other leaders—the ones Burns was most interested in learning about—used what he called transformational leadership styles. Transformational leaders developed inspirational relationships with followers in which both leaders and followers were positively transformed in the process. This transformation raised human conduct and enhanced the moral aspirations of both leaders and followers. In Burns's transforming leadership theory, the transformation is based on both leaders and followers attaining higher levels of moral purpose as they accomplished common goals.
Transformational leadership involves inspirational relationships in which both leaders and followers are positively transformed in the process.
Transactional leadership involves a focus on exchanging valued goods in return for something leaders want.
The key element of Burns's theory is the moral foundation upon which transforming leadership rests.19 A transforming leader is one who, though initially impelled by the quest for individual recognition, ultimately advances collective purpose by being attuned to the aspirations and needs of his or her followers. In Burns's theory, the transformation is a moral accomplishment because its outcome raises human conduct. According to Burns, Mao and Gandhi were quintessential transforming leaders. Instead of exploiting power they remained sensitive to higher purposes and aspirations.20 Hitler, on the other hand, was not a leader in Burns's analysis, but a power wielder who used his power for selfish and destructive purpose.
Bass's Transactional/Transformational Leadership Theory
Bernard Bass drew from Burns's theory of political leadership to develop a theory of leadership for organizations. He called his approach “performance beyond expectations.” Contrary to Burns's focus on transformation as a higher moral purpose and values, Bass's focus on transformation was on organizational performance. In his theory, the transformation occurs when followers are inspired to set aside their self-interest for organizational interest. In other words, they accept the purpose is attainment of pragmatic task objectives for the good of the organization.21
Bass's Transformational Leadership Bass's transformational leadership styles move the follower beyond immediate self-interests by using four types of leader behaviors shown in Figure 14.2. Idealized influence and inspirational leadership are similar to charismatic leadership, described earlier in this chapter. They are displayed when the leader envisions a desirable future, articulates how it can be reached, sets an example to be followed, sets high standards of performance, and shows determination and confidence. Intellectual stimulation is displayed when the leader helps followers to become more innovative and creative. Individualized consideration is displayed when leaders pay attention to the developmental needs of followers by providing support, encouragement, and coaching.22
Bass's transformational leadership involves leaders motivating followers to transcend self-interest for the sake of the organization or team.
FIGURE 14.2 Key Differences in Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles.
Transformational leaders articulate a shared vision of the future, intellectually stimulate subordinates, provide a great deal of support to individuals, recognize individual differences, and set high expectations for the work unit.23 They increase followers' social identity by enhancing pride in contributing to a higher purpose, and make followers feel more secure in their membership and status in the group.
Bass's Transactional Leadership Bass's transactional leadership is based in self-interest, and use exchanges between leaders and followers to attain desired behavior and outcomes. The transactional leadership styles shown in Figure 14.2 are associated with several kinds of behavior. Contingent rewards involve exchanging rewards for mutually agreed-upon goal accomplishment. Active management by exception involves watching for deviations from rules and standards and taking corrective action. Passive management by exception involves intervening only if standards are not met. And laissez-faire leadership involves abdicating responsibilities and avoiding decisions.25
Bass's transactional leadership refers to the exchange relationship between leaders and followers to meet their own self-interests.
Findings from Bass's Approach Bass's transactional and transformational leadership theory is one of the most prominent theories in organizational leadership research. To advance his work, Bass began by developing a measure known as the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). This measure assesses transformational and transactional leadership styles.24 Hundreds of studies have used the MLQ to investigate transformational and transactional styles of managerial leaders as perceived by their subordinates. Findings largely support Bass's premise that transformational leadership is associated with increased follower motivation and performance (more so than transactional leadership) and that effective leaders use a combination of both types of leadership.
Meta-analyses show that composite measures of transformational and transactional leadership are related to leadership effectiveness, particularly when ratings are provided by subordinates (e.g., subordinate satisfaction). One likely reason for this is that transformational leadership is highly correlated with trust. In other words, much of the relationship between transformational leaders and outcomes is likely due to the trust subordinates have in transformational leaders.26
One criticism of Bass's approach is that in focusing on organizational performance as the ultimate goal, Bass lost the moral underpinnings upon which Burns's theory is based. Burns's theory is based on the leader's allegiance to followers and to uplifting society. Bass's theory is based on allegiance to the organization and performance. Some argue that this makes the approach susceptible to problems of narcissism and exploitation when leaders interpret the transformation from self-interest to organizational interest to mean their wishes take precedence over others.27 It is also morally questionable to ask subordinates to put aside their self-interest for organizational good.
Problems of “Heroic” Leadership Views
Charismatic and transformational approaches were key to revitalizing leadership studies after the doom and gloom period, so they hold a prominent place in leadership theory and practice. One side effect of these approaches, however, is the rise of heroic leadership views. Heroic views see leadership as the acts of great leaders who inspire and motivate others to accomplish extraordinary things. Heroic views create pictures of leaders as white knights swooping in to save the day, and followers as weak and passive subordinates who are fully reliant on leaders for direction, trust and hope.28
Heroic leadership views see leadership as the result of acts of great leaders who inspire and motivate others to accomplish extraordinary things.
OB IN POPULAR CULTURE
Lincoln and Leadership
From the time we are young, we are told stories of great leaders. In American culture one of these heroes is Abraham Lincoln. Known as Honest Abe, Lincoln's story conveys a man of great integrity and conviction.
But the movie Lincoln directed by Stephen Spielberg shows a more nuanced view of the realities and complexities facing Lincoln as a leader, and the sacrifices to personal integrity he made to accomplish his goal of abolishing slavery. Contrary to views of leaders as inspiring others to follow through vision and transformation, the story of Lincoln shows how very transactional Lincoln had to be to procure the votes needed to pass the Thirteenth Amendment. Much like our politicians today, Lincoln engaged in deal making and buying votes. In the process he resorted to relying on sleazy political operatives, and at times even misrepresented the truth.
Lincoln's key strengths, as portrayed in the movie, were his understanding of the complexities he faced and the need for a keen sense of timing. Speaking to Thaddeus Stevens, Lincoln says, “When the people disagree, bringing them together requires going slow until they're ready to make up the distance. . . . [I]f I'd listened to you I'd have declared every slave freed the minute the first shell struck Fort Sumter. And the border states would have gone over to the Confederacy, the war would have been lost, and the Union along with it, and instead of abolishing slavery . . . we'd be watching helpless as infants as it spread from the American South into South America.”
Lincoln clearly motivated his followers through inspirational storytelling that diffused tension and helped maintain their support, but he also had to rely on his position power. In one scene with his cabinet secretaries, he tells them, “Two votes stand in its way. These votes must be procured . . . now get the hell out of here and get 'em!” When one member asks, “Yes, but how?” Lincoln responds in frustration, “Buzzard's guts, man. I am the president of the United States of America clothed in immense power. You will procure me these votes.”
Get to Know Yourself Better Assessment 12, “TT” Leadership Style, in the OB Skills Workbook measures your transformational and transactional leadership styles. What does it show? Would you, like Lincoln, be able to draw from both transformational and transactional leadership as needed to accomplish goals? Do you understand the importance of timing? What do you think about the ethics of Lincoln's approach? Some question the methods Lincoln used—going to war in which 600,000 people lost their lives. Do the ends justify the means, or was there another way to accomplish his goals?
In so doing, heroic views overlook the significance of everyday leaders influencing throughout the organization. They also miss the importance of process, and the key role of followers in the leadership process. They overestimate the influence of the leader and underestimate the importance of context and timing. To address these issues and others, new approaches such as complexity leadership theory are being introduced to leadership research.
Complexity Leadership Views
TODAY'S COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTS COMPLEXITY LEADERSHIP THEORY
CHALLENGES OF COMPLEXITY LEADERSHIP APPROACHES
Complexity leadership approaches draw from complexity science to bring a more dynamic and contextual view to leadership.29 Complexity science originates in fields such as biology, physics, mathematics, economics, and meteorology. It is the study of complex adaptive systems—systems that adapt and evolve in the process of interacting with dynamic environments.30
Complex adaptive systems are systems that adapt and evolve in the process of interacting with dynamic environments.
Complex adaptive systems offer a valuable lens for organizational behavior because, contrary to bureaucratic organizing approaches, complex systems have no centralized coordination and control. Coordination comes from within the system, occurring through interactive dynamics and emergence among system components.31 Many are beginning to see complex adaptive systems as powerful mechanisms for explaining phenomena in the physical and economic world, including weather (e.g., hurricanes, tornadoes), anthills, swarming fish, bee colonies, economies, and markets.
Complex adaptive systems help us think about how organizations can make themselves more adaptive rather than bureaucratic. They emphasize that a key goal of organizations and criteria for leadership effectiveness should be the extent to which they are able to adapt to survive.
Today's Complex Environments
Interest in complexity approaches is increasing because our environments today are radically different from those of the industrial era when management theories first developed.32 In the Industrial Age managers were trying to figure out how to organize semiskilled laborers in assembly lines and factories. To do this they turned to bureaucracy, which allowed managers to use hierarchy and control to achieve efficiency and results.33
Bureaucracy is an organizing form in which division of labor, specification of titles and duties, and hierarchical reporting relationships provide efficiency and control.
In today's environments these approaches are no longer working. Managers no longer have control over information, and employees are less willing to just go along or do what they are told. They expect to be engaged at work and to be treated as active partners in the leadership process. Moreover, problems are too complex to be solved by one person. They require teams of people and distributed intelligence, rather than the limited intelligence of the leader at the top.
As seen in Figure 14.2, these changes are requiring radical differences in assumptions about what leaders need to do to be effective in today's workplace. We are gradually moving away from a hierarchical world into a more connectionist one. In this highly connected world leaders need to rely more on personal power than position power, and we need both “bottom up” and “top down” influence and information flows in organizations. This requires more proactive than passive followership, and leadership responsibility needs to be distributed throughout the organization. It is no longer just the responsibility of leaders (i.e., accountability up) but instead the responsibility of all (i.e., accountability all).
FIGURE 14.3 Major Differences Between Bureaucratic and Complexity Assumptions.
The major differences in complexity and bureaucratic assumptions are shown in Figure 14.3.34 Perhaps the biggest difference lies in the nature of control. Unlike the Industrial Age when managers could control events, today's interconnected world means that things happen unexpectedly and without our ability to stop them. Managers today operate in workplaces where they are expected to think on their feet and respond quickly and creatively. And they can't respond to complex problems by themselves. All of this requires that leaders enable their organizations to cope with complexity by being more adaptive.
Complexity Leadership Theory
Today's leaders enable adaptability by fostering innovation, flexibility, and learning. These characteristics are the key to survival in complex (ever-changing) environments. That said, organizations are still bureaucracies: They still have hierarchical organizing systems, and they still need efficiency and control. Therefore, the key lies in effectively combining bureaucratic organizing structures with complex adaptive systems.35
Complexity leadership theory says we can do this by understanding three types of leadership systems in organizations.36 The first, administrative leadership, focuses on how we can gain efficiency and meet the financial and performance needs of the organization. The goal of administrative leadership is to drive business results through tools such as policy, efficiency, strategic planning, resource allocation, budgeting, and scheduling. It occurs in formal roles (i.e., the administrative system) and is mainly performed by managers.
Administrative leadership occurs in formal, managerial roles and focuses on alignment and control aimed at driving business results.
Entrepreneurial leadership fuels innovation, adaptability, and change.
Entrepreneurial leadership represents the bottom-up, emergent forces that drive innovation, learning, and change in organizations. This form of leadership can be subtle, such as when people develop new ways of working as part of their day-to-day functioning and these changes dissipate into the system. Or it can be more intentional, as in the case of entrepreneurial leaders acting as intrapreneurs: individuals who work to create and actively champion new ideas and innovations. These types of entrepreneurial leaders are often highly proactive, self-motivated, and action oriented in the pursuit of innovative products or services.
New Venture Start-ups Led by Women More Likely to Succeed
Could it be that having women in executive roles could be a performance asset for start-up firms receiving venture capital? Research reported by Dow Jones VentureSource that the median presence of females on boards and in executive roles of successful start-ups was 73 percent versus only 31 percent in unsuccessful ones. Even though a small minority of firms in the survey—13 percent—had female founders, the presence of females as board members, vice presidents, and senior executives was a differentiating success factor. Still, women founders aren't getting their fair share of new venture start-up capital. Especially in the tech industry, venture capitalist Cameron Lester says, money tends to flow toward men who better fit the entrepreneurial stereotype. But the research on start-up success is refocusing attention on the advantages women bring to the situation—for example, they are more in tune with different customer and market groups, and more financially conservative in managing a firm's money.
Top-down and bottom-up forces alone are not sufficient, however. They need to function together effectively to make the overall system adaptive. Therefore, complexity leadership adds a third function called adaptive leadership. Adaptive leadership operates in the interface between administrative and entrepreneurial systems.37 Its job is to foster the conditions for productive emergence by helping generate new ideas and then enabling them within the formal administrative system to produce results (i.e., innovation). It does this by sponsoring ideas from the entrepreneurial system, providing critical resources, and helping innovations to flow into the formal administrative system to increase fitness for the firm.
Adaptive leadership operates in the interface between the administrative and entrepreneurial systems and fosters conditions for emergence.
Research findings provide support for complexity leadership models. They offer evidence for emergence and the importance of adaptive leadership in organizations. One of the most significant findings, however, is the overwhelming predominance of stifling bureaucratic leadership in organizations. This is because traditional leadership theories have socialized managers and organizational members into control-oriented approaches that respond to complexity with order and stability. Findings are beginning to show that traditional top-down approaches are not only insufficient in complex environments—they may even be harmful to organizational health when they stifle the adaptive dynamics needed to respond in complex environments.
Challenges of Complexity Leadership Approaches
Because complexity leadership is a new approach, more study is needed. Early findings are supportive, but we need greater understanding of how these processes work in organizations, particularly with respect to the adaptive system. Complexity is a broad and technical field so it needs to be translated appropriately for business leaders. It also represents a paradigm shift that will be uncomfortable to many. Although research findings show that leaders who use complexity approaches are successful in driving business results and adaptability, these approaches are so different that some individuals may not be recognized as leaders because they are not as directive and controlling as described in predominant thinking about leadership. As we continue to transition from a hierarchical to a complex world, however, these styles will not only be more recognized, they will be more expected.
CHECKING ETHICS IN OB
Tackling Unethical Leadership in the Workplace
A 2013 report released by the Institute of Leadership and Management reveals that unethical practices are common in U.K. workplaces. Over three-fifths (63 percent) of managers in the United Kingdom indicate that they have been expected to engage in unethical behavior at work. Among managers, 9 percent say they have been asked to break the law at some point in their career, and 1 in 10 say they left a job because they were asked to do something that made them feel uncomfortable.
It seems that efforts by organizations to curtail unethical leadership may not be working. Over 90 percent of the respondents said their organizations have a values statement, but 43 percent of respondents said they were pressured to act in direct violation of it. Worse, 12 percent of the managers said the association between employee behavior and company-stated values was “not close at all” in their workplace. Over a quarter of the respondents were concerned that their career would suffer if they reported an ethical violation, with whistle-blowing fears higher among more junior managers than directors.
The researchers recommend that businesses have a clear policy to encourage staff to report concerns over breaches and ethical violations. They also call for the need for ethical leadership from the top. Given the seeming severity of the problem, do you think this will work? It seems value statements are not enough to stem the problems of unethical leadership in the workplace.
What Do You Think? We know that ethical problems exist in organizations and that much of this comes from managers asking employees to engage in unethical behavior. What can be done to stem this problem? Ethical statements and reporting programs do not seem to be working. What would you do to design a more ethical workplace, and what structural factors would you identify to help promote more ethical leadership? How would you deal with cases of ethical violations in your workplace?
Leadership Ethics
SHARED VALUE VIEW SERVANT LEADERSHIP
EMPOWERING LEADERSHIP ETHICAL LEADERSHIP THEORY
At the core of leadership is the issue of the moral and ethical dilemmas that arise in leadership contexts. And leadership contexts are ripe for moral challenges. Leaders can be seduced by power, and pressure for results can tempt achievement-oriented leaders to cheat to avoid failure. The hierarchical nature of manager–subordinate relationships can make followers afraid to speak up, and the lack of checks and balances on leaders can lead to devastating outcomes.38
To address these challenges, scholars are focusing more seriously on leadership ethics. Leadership ethics is the study of ethical problems and challenges distinctive to and inherent in the processes, practices, and outcomes of leading and following.39 It is concerned with the ethical use of power and the morality of leadership outcomes (e.g., fairness, equality, liberty). Paralleling the study of ethics more generally, leadership ethics examines right, wrong, good, evil, virtue, duty, obligation, rights, justice, and fairness as they apply to leadership relationships and leader and follower behaviors.
Leadership ethics is the study of ethical problems and challenges distinctive to and inherent in the processes, practices, and outcomes of leading and following.
Shared Value View
In organizational contexts, a challenge to leadership ethics comes from the way we socialize individuals into the purpose of business. Nearly all businesspeople have been indoctrinated in to Milton Friedman's dictum that the “social responsibility of business is to increase its profits.”40 This is known as the profit motive, and it drives the belief that the sole purpose of business is to make money.
The profit motive is based on Milton Friedman's view that the sole purpose of business is to make money.
The profit motive is being seriously questioned in today's environment. Leaders such as John Mackey, the CEO of Whole Foods, and Michael Porter of Harvard University are offering alternative views based on conscious capitalism and creating shared value. These views, developed from purpose-driven mind-sets, argue that the problem is not profit but profit at what cost? To address this issue, recent discussions of the role of profit in business are arguing for a shared value view, stating that organizations should create economic value in a way that also creates value for society by addressing societal needs and challenges.41 In a shared value view, the focus is on both profit and societal gain.
The shared value view states that organizations should create economic value in a way that also creates value for society.
This more modern take advocates the need for business to reconnect company success with social progress. In the process, it addresses the issue at the very core of the debate in leadership ethics: Whose interests matter more . . . those of the individual (or company) or the collective (i.e., the “greater good”)? Shared value argues that the answer is both.
Servant Leadership
Servant leadership, developed by Robert K. Greenleaf, is based on the notion that the primary purpose of business should be to create a positive impact on the organization's employees as well as the community. In an essay that Greenleaf wrote about servant leadership in 1970, he stated, “The servant-leader is servant first. . . . It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead.”42
Servant leadership is a view in which servant leaders selflessly serve others first.
The core characteristic of servant leadership as described by Greenleaf is “going beyond one's self-interest.” Compared to other leadership styles, such as transformational leadership where the primary allegiance is to the organization, the servant leader emphasizes how the organization can create opportunities for followers to grow. It is a person-oriented approach focused on building safe and strong relationships in organizations. Leaders use power not for self-interest but for the growth of employees, survival of the organization, and responsibility to the community.43
The servant leader is attuned to basic spiritual values and in serving these assists others, including colleagues, the organization, and society. Servant leaders see their responsibility as increasing the autonomy of followers and encouraging them to think for themselves. They complement their focus on followers with a leadership style that places primary emphasis on humility and remaining true to themselves and their moral convictions in the face of power. Servant leaders accomplish this by empowering and developing people, having high integrity, accepting people for who they are, and being stewards who work for the good of the whole.44
Empowering Leadership
Empowering leadership is similar to servant leadership in its focus on valuing and developing people. Although it was not developed as an ethical leadership theory, it is consistent with leadership ethics in its core premise that employees should be treated with dignity and respect.
Empowering leadership is in direct contrast to authoritarian (or autocratic) leadership styles that involve leaders dictating policies and procedures, making all decisions about what goals are to be achieved, and directing and controlling all activities without any meaningful participation by subordinates. Empowering leadership focuses instead on conveying the significance of the work, allowing participation in decision making, removing bureaucratic constraints, and instilling confidence that performance will be high.45 Empowering leadership emphasizes the importance of leaders delegating authority and employees assuming responsibility. It argues that by sharing knowledge and information, and allowing employees responsibility and self-control, organizations will be rewarded with a more dedicated and intrinsically motivated workforce.
Authoritarian (or autocratic) leadership involves making decisions independently with little or no input from others.
Empowering leadership enables power sharing with employees by clarifying the significance of the work, providing autonomy, expressing confidence in the employee's capabilities, and removing hindrances to performance.
Research findings show that empowering leadership is related to increased employee creativity and, to some extent, performance.46 Most views assume that empowering leadership is most appropriate for those with high follower readiness (e.g., high ability and experience). Interestingly, however, research findings have shown the opposite. A study of sales representatives showed that, contrary to expectations, empowering leadership was most beneficial for those with low levels of product and industry knowledge and low experience rather than those with high readiness. For those with high knowledge and experience, empowering leadership appeared to reap no benefits. Perhaps experienced individuals have little to gain from leader efforts toward empowerment.
Corruption Raises Leadership Questions in International Business
Avon and Walmart share a common problem. They are spending lots of money for attorney fees and internal audits relating to the 1977 U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The act makes it illegal for a U.S. firm to pay bribes to get international business opportunities. And it's become increasingly important as corruption in international business comes under great scrutiny around the world. If a corporate leader loses control or makes the wrong ethics decisions and runs afoul of this law, the financial costs and damage to his or her reputation can be huge. When claims emerged that Walmart was paying bribes in Mexico, a situation subject to the FCPA, internal investigations cost the firm $51 million. When Avon faced the same problem in China, the cost of its compliance review was $280 million. And those figures don't include any FCPA prosecution or fines.
Ethical Leadership Theory
Ethical leadership theory is a normative theory focused on understanding how ethical leaders behave. A normative theory implies or prescribes a norm or standard. Ethical leadership theory prescribes that leaders should be role models of appropriate behavior—such as openness, honesty, and trustworthiness—who are motivated by altruism, meaning they are unselfish and concerned for others (e.g., treating employees fairly and considerately). Ethical leaders should (1) communicate to followers what is ethical and allow followers to ask questions and provide feedback regarding ethical issues; (2) set clear ethical standards, and ensure followers comply with those standards by rewarding ethical conduct and disciplining those who don't follow standards; and (3) take into account ethical principles in making decisions and ensure that followers observe and follow this process.47
A normative theory implies or prescribes a norm or standard.
Ethical leaders create ethical climates by allowing followers voice and ensuring that processes are fair. Ethical climates are the ethical values, norms, attitudes, feelings, and behaviors of employees in an organization.48 Ethical leaders foster such climates by creating moral awareness and concern, enhancing moral reasoning, clarifying moral values, and encouraging moral responsibility. They consider the consequences of their decisions and make principled and fair choices that can be observed and emulated by others.49
Ethical climates are the ethical values, norms, attitudes, feelings, and behaviors of employees in an organization.
Research shows that ethical leadership is linked to higher levels of follower performance and innovative behavior. Evidence also suggests a mitigating effect of ethical leadership on followers' misconduct, unethical behaviors, and workplace bullying.50 Despite this, ethical leadership theory is limited in that it focuses primarily on leaders' responsibilities for ethics. For ethical leadership to truly take hold in organizations, it needs to be the responsibility of both leaders and followers.
14 Study Guide
Key Questions and Answers
What do we know about leader traits and behaviors?
- Trait approaches investigate the personal qualities and characteristics associated with leader emergence and effectiveness.
- Trait approaches find significant but small relationships between leadership and four of the Big Five traits, including extraversion, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience.
- Behavioral approaches identify categories of managerial leadership behavior to examine their relationships with outcomes.
- The majority of leader behaviors represent two meta-categories: relations-oriented and task-oriented behavior.
What do contingency approaches tell us about leadership?
- Contingency approaches say that whether a leader style or behavior is positively associated with leadership effectiveness depends on (i.e., is contingent upon) the situation.
- In situations that require more direction and structure, task-oriented behavior will be more effective and desired; in situations requiring more support and consideration, relations-oriented behavior will be more effective.
- Fiedler's LPC model differs from other contingency approaches in that it argues that leaders cannot change their style, and therefore must match the situation to their style.
What are charismatic and transformational theories of leadership?
- Charismatic leaders are seen as exceptional people endowed with extraordinary characteristic and abilities that set them apart from ordinary people.
- Research on charismatic leadership in organizations suggests that charisma is not a beneficial attribute for most chief executives, and it is particularly dangerous in cases of personalized charismatics who use their skills primarily for personal benefit.
- Burns's transforming leadership theory says that leadership is a transforming process that ultimately becomes a moral achievement when it raises human conduct and the aspirations of both leaders and followers, having a “transforming” effect on both.
- Bass adapted Burns's theory to focus on organizational performance; in his theory, the transformation is getting people to set aside self-interest for organizational interest.
What are complexity leadership views?
- Complexity leadership views are grounded in complexity science and describe leadership in the context of complex adaptive systems.
- Complexity leadership views offer an alternative to traditional leadership approaches, grounded in bureaucratic organizing principles; instead of hierarchy and control, they focus on emergence and adaptability.
- A key contribution of complexity is emergence; emergence describes processes in which higher-level order emanates out of interactions of agents operating within the system.
- Complexity leadership theory describes three types of leadership in organizations: administrative leadership, entrepreneurial leadership, and adaptive leadership. These forms of leadership need to function together effectively to create productive emergence and adaptability in organizations.
How do we address leadership ethics?
- Leadership ethics is the study of ethical problems and challenges that are distinctive to and inherent in the processes, practices, and outcomes of leading and following.
- In organizations, the greatest challenge to ethics comes from pressures for results (e.g., profits) at all cost (e.g., individual or societal harm) and the tension between self-interest and the “greater good.”
- Servant leaders use power not for self-interest but for the growth of employees, survival of the organization, and responsibility to the community.
- Empowering leadership focuses on valuing and developing people by allowing autonomy and removing bureaucratic constraints.
- Ethical leadership theory is a normative theory that says leaders should be role models for ethics and create ethical climates that enforce high ethical standards.
Terms to Know
Achievement-oriented leadership (p. 306)
Adaptive leadership (p. 317)
Administrative leadership (p. 316)
Authoritarian (or autocratic) leadership (p. 320)
Behavioral approach (p. 304)
Bass's transactional leadership (p. 313)
Bass's transformational leadership (p. 312)
Bureaucracy (p. 315)
Charisma (p. 309)
Complex adaptive systems (p. 315)
Contingency approaches (p. 306)
Directive leadership (p. 306)
Empowering leadership (p. 320)
Entrepreneurial leadership (p. 317)
Ethical climates (p. 321)
Follower readiness (p. 307)
Heroic leadership views (p. 314)
Leader-match (p. 307)
Leader position power (p. 307)
Leadership ethics (p. 319)
Normative theory (p. 321)
Participative leadership (p. 306)
Personalized charismatic (p. 310)
Power distance (p. 310)
Power wielders (p. 310)
Profit motive (p. 319)
Relations-oriented behavior (p. 305)
Servant leadership (p. 319)
Shared value view (p. 319)
Socialized charismatic (p. 309)
Supportive leadership (p. 306)
Task structure (p. 307)
Task-oriented behavior (p. 305)
Trait approaches (p. 302)
Transactional leadership (p. 311)
Transformational leadership (p. 311)
Self-Test 14
Multiple Choice
- ________ study the personal qualities and characteristics of leaders to identify their association with leader emergence and effectiveness.
- (a) Implicit leadership approaches
- (b) Managerial approaches
- (c) Behavior approaches
- (d) Trait approaches
- The two meta-categories of leader behaviors found in the behavioral approaches are _________.
- (a) transformational and transactional leader behaviors
- (b) achievement-oriented and participative leadership
- (c) relations-oriented and task-oriented behaviors
- (d) directive and authoritarian behavioral styles
- The “born” argument in leadership implies that leaders should be ________.
- (a) developed
- (b) selected
- (c) trained
- (d) transformed
- According to ________, whether leader behaviors will be effective depends on the situation.
- (a) trait approaches
- (b) behavior approaches
- (c) contingency theories
- (d) transactional theories
- The best leadership style to use when tasks are highly repetitive is ________.
- (a) supportive
- (b) directive
- (c) charismatic
- (d) entrepreneurial
- Charisma is most aptly described as a ________ process.
- (a) leader
- (b) relational
- (c) follower
- (d) situational
- Research has shown that charisma is ________ for most chief executives.
- (a) a neutralizer
- (b) a substitute
- (c) beneficial
- (d) not beneficial
- To help avoid the dangers of charisma, leaders should reduce ________.
- (a) transactions
- (b) task-oriented behaviors
- (c) power distance
- (d) networks
- According to Burns's theory, ________ are not leaders.
- (a) bureaucrats
- (b) power wielders
- (c) managers
- (d) socialized charismatics
- Bass modified Burns's theory to focus on ________ rather than moral interests.
- (a) organizational
- (b) societal
- (c) follower
- (d) collective
- Complexity leadership approaches offer an alternative to ________organizing principles.
- (a) systems
- (b) political
- (c) transformational
- (d) bureaucratic
- The key contribution complexity offers to leadership is the understanding of ________.
- (a) emergence
- (b) administrative leadership
- (c) entrepreneurial leadership
- (d) empowerment
- Ethical leadership theory is a ________ theory of leadership.
- (a) transformational
- (b) transactional
- (c) normative
- (d) complexity
- When leaders create moral awareness and concern, enhance moral reasoning, and encourage moral responsibility, they are creating more ________.
- (a) transformational leadership
- (b) ethical climates
- (c) empowering climates
- (d) authenticity
- ________ are attuned to spiritual values and see their responsibility as being stewards for the good of the whole.
- (a) Servant leaders
- (b) Transformational leaders
- (c) Authoritarian leaders
- (d) Empowering leaders
Short Response
16. Why did the early trait approaches fall out of favor?
17. What are the problems with contingency approaches?
18. Why are complexity approaches being developed?
19. What are the challenges associated with leadership ethics?
Applications Essay
20. Jonathan knows he has a charismatic style of leadership. When he speaks, others listen, and when he leads, others are passionate in their desire to follow him. Although he has benefited from this style and enjoys the effects it has on others, he also knows there are risks associated with charismatic leadership. What are these risks, and how can he avoid them?
Steps to Further Learning 14
Top Choices from The OB Skills Workbook
These learning activities from The OB Skills Workbook found at the back of the book are suggested for Chapter 14.
