Term Paper, 2002
32 Pages, Grade: very good
2. Leadership styles
2.2 Laissez Faire
3. Leadership Theories
3.1 Universalist Leadership Theories
3.1.1 Trait Theories
3.1.2 Leader Behaviour Theories (Ohio State University Study)
3.1.3 Blake and Mouton´s Managerial Grid
3.1.4 McGregor´s Theory X and Theory Y
3.1.5 Likert´s Leadership Systems
3.2 Contingency Leadership Theories
3.2.1 Blanchard´s Situational Leadership
4. Motivation Theories
4.1 Content Motivation Theories
4.1.1 Force and Coercion Model
4.1.2 Economic Model
4.1.3 Hawthorne Studies (Mayo) – The Hawthorne Effect
4.1.4 Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Motivation
4.2 Process (Cognitive) Motivation Theories
4.2.1 Expectancy Theory (VIE)
4.2.2 Equity Theory
4.2.3 Goal Setting Theory
4.3 Reinforcement Motivation Theories
4.3.1 Skinner´s Operant Conditioning
5. Leadership and Communication
6. Leadership and Feedback
7. The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
I declare that to the best of my knowledge that this assignment does not contain material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference are made in the text.
Date: May 21st, 2002
Figure 1: The Managerial Grid
Figure 2: Hersey´s and Blanchard´s Situational Leadership Model
Figure 3: The Motivational Process
Figure 4: Maslow´s hierarchy of needs
Figure 5: Alderfer´s ERG-model
Figure 6: Herzberg´s two factor theory
Figure 7: Expectancy theory
Figure 8: Paths A and B
Figure 9: Equity theory
Figure 10: Goal setting theory
Figure 11: Reinforcement theory
Figure 12: The communication process
Figure 13: “Reciprocal process of human interaction”
A human being is, first of all, a social being. We define ourselves for a large part through our social contacts, whose number has highly increased in the last generations. The importance of this interaction led to a heightened interest in social sciences like psychology or sociology or economics. One huge field here is the examination of different leadership styles and motivation techniques.
The aim of this essay is to provide a person without any prior knowledge of the topic with an overview of some leadership and motivation theories, and to be a helpful resource for an exam preparation. This is why it is neither possible to cover each theory with just one sentence nor to explore it in depth. To fulfil this aim it was necessary to extend the word suggestion, while trying to be as succinct as possible.
These leadership-styles were examined during the studies of the University of Iowa, where boys were divided into hobby clubs and submitted to different styles. They “were designed primarily to examine patterns of aggressive behavior” (Luthans 2002,p. 577), but also showed the effects of leadership-styles.
The autocratic, or authoritarian leader did not allow any participation and only allowed one way communication, but gave friendly or impersonal attention while praising or criticizing the boys and did not display any hostility (Luthans 2002, p. 577).
This is an appropriate style for the armed forces, emergency situations or situations with high safety issues like climbing, but only possesses a short-term effectiveness.
This group tended to show “reactions to the frustration caused by the autocratic leader” (Luthans 2002, p. 577): they were aggressive or apathetic, and the apathetic boys turned to be aggressive, as soon as “the autocratic leader left the room” (Luthans 2002, p. 577).
Laissez-Faire is French and means roughly ´do what you want´. This leader did not provide any leadership and gave the boys complete freedom (Luthans 2002, p. 577).
There was no communication at all, the leader did neither suggest activities nor provide feedback.
Applied to education, for example, a child would learn that fire is hot by burning its hand on the first try. A useful application would be when teaching a group of self- motivated managers.
This group had the greatest number of aggressive acts.
The democratic leader “encouraged group discussion and decision making. He tried to be “objective” in giving praise or criticism” (Luthans 2002, p. 577). Policies and activities were chosen by the leader and the group and there was two-way communication as well as feedback. Therefore this style has long-term effectiveness. Most political systems of the West are based on democracy.
The result here was settled between the two other extremes.
The actual insight from these studies should be that different leadership styles produce different outcomes. It can be concluded that a mixture of all three is most likely to produce the biggest productivity.
“Leadership may be defined as a process of social interaction between the leader and his or her subordinates, in which the leader seeks to influence his or her subordinates to achieve the objectives of the organisation.” (Petzall, Selvarajah, Willis 1991, p. 143).
In the field of recreation there are different levels of leadership: Supervising, for example babysitting; teaching and instructing, for example a skiing instructor; programming, organizing or coordinating, for example recreation camps; educational leadership, for example as a university teacher; and finally management.
There are two types of leadership theories: Universalist theories, and contingency theories.
These theories assume that “there is one type of leader behaviour which, by nature, is superior to all others”, and that the “´correct´ style is assumed to be universally applicable” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 144).
There are various kinds of trait theories, but all are based on the assumption that there are “individuals who possess the personal qualities which enable them to encourage their followers to do their will” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 145).
The great man theory assumes that leaders are born with certain inherited traits and cannot be made (Petzall et al 1991, p. 145). There are several historical persons used as examples for this theory like Alexander the Great, Adolf Hitler, or Mahatma Gandhi.
This theory is purely descriptive and does not provide any systematic insight or a suggestion for the development of great persons. But according to Bortz (1999) a theory should attempt to describe, explain and enable to predict behaviour. The trait theories remain on the descriptive state, and therefore should not be called ´theories´.
Another theory assumes that charismatic leaders “are able to inspire collective excitement among their followers so that the latter respond en masse… and surrender themselves totally to the will of their heroic leader” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 146). One example is Adolf Hitler.
According to Conger and Kanungo the five qualities of charismatic organisational leaders are self-confidence, a vision plus an ability to inspire people, total commitment, unconventional behaviour, and ”being perceived as radical change agents” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 146).
The main problem of this theory is its ignorance of situational factors and its mere descriptiveness.
This study developed from the trait theories and examined observable behaviours (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148-149) of successful leaders.
A Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire was used and the results subjected to a factor analysis, finding two dimensions: initiating structure and consideration. They were found to be independent (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148), meaning that it is possible to get a high grade in both of them.
These studies were the basis for many other models.
Blake and Mouton put the findings of the Ohio studies into the ´managerial grid model´. The diagram is produced by two independent variables, the concern for production (initiating structure), and the concern for people (consideration). “There are eighty-one possible styles on their grid, but they argue there are five major styles which categorise most managers” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148).
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 1: The Managerial Grid
(source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlleaderbnm.html )
A 1.1 style means a ´least energy´ manager, with neither concern for people nor for production. This equals a laissez-faire style.
1.9 is called ´country club style´ as the major concern is people. This equals democratic leadership.
5.5 is the middle way, called the ´organisation man´ who unites both characteristics in equal parts.
9.1 describes a ´task manager´, with a focus on production. This equals an autocratic leader.
A 9.9 style describes a ´team manager´ who has a high concern for production and people. Blake and Mouton “conclude that a 9.9 style is the best and most effective leadership style” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 150).
One problem, besides its ignorance of situational issues, is the unclear relationship between the two variables. While this theory is based on the Ohio studies, which find them independent, the Michigan studies found the opposite (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148).
McGregor´s theories provide assumptions about employees. Theory X assumes that employees are “inherently lazy, …have no ambition… for responsibility, …have no motivation to achieve organisational objectives, …are motivated only by physiological and safety needs” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 151).
These assumptions equal “autocratic management, initiating structure and production-centred behaviour” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152). In the Managerial Grid this would lead to a 9.1 style.
One example for this would be a poorly educated line worker who only does the same job, never sees the end product and does not enjoy his or her work and therefore will hardly be motivated by anything else than money.
Theory X, however, assumes that “employees find work as natural as play, …can be motivated by higher order needs, …seek responsibility” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 151).
Both theories mention higher and lower order needs. This refers to Maslow´s hierarchy of needs (see 4.1.5.).
“Theory Y assumptions seem to underlie democratic management, consideration, and employee-centred behaviour” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152), and is therefore seen as the better approach by McGregor (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152). In the Managerial Grid this would lead to a 9.9 leadership.
In modern life this attitude can be found among managers or better-earning employees, because they have satisfied their lower order needs (see 4.1.5) and are motivated by higher order needs.
Likert´s approach is close to McGregor´s theories. He identified four leadership styles, which are called systems.
System one is identified by the management´s low confidence in employees and the fact that “employees are forced to work by threats and punishment” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152), which equals Theory X, and autocratic or 9.1 leadership.
In System two the management has “condescending confidence”, and there are “a few rewards” to motivate workers (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152).
In s ystem three management has “substantial confidence in subordinates” and “subordinates (are) permitted to make specific decisions at lower levels” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152).
In s ystem four finally “management has complete confidence” and “decision making is decentralised” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153), which equals Theory Y.
Likert concludes that system four is the best approach.
The problems of this approach are the ignorance of situational variables and the lack of independent evidence.
In contrast to the universalist theories, the contingency theories do not assume that there is one “ideal style of leadership for all situations, rather, some styles suit some situations” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153) better than others.
This theory is a development of Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid, which also uses the findings of the Ohio State Studies (Luthans 2002, p. 614).
The main concept is the assumption that “the key for leadership effectiveness … is to match up the situation with the appropriate style” (Luthans 2002, p. 616), and that “the main situational determinant of leader behaviour is the task-relevant readiness (previously called maturity) of the subordinate” (Petzall 1991, p. 153).
Leader behaviour can be divided into two styles: directive and supportive behaviour. Directive behaviour means that “the leader organises and defines roles for member” (Luthans 2002, p. 614) Supportive behaviour, on the other hand, means that ”the leader has close, personal relationships with the members of the group” (Luthans 2002, p. 614).
Figure 2 shows both behaviours, producing a diagram with four quadrants. They are named S1 to S4, with the numbers rising anti-clockwise. S1 is the starting point of the movement through the diagram indicating low supportive and high directive behaviour. S2 implies high directive and supportive behaviour, and so on.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2: Hersey´s and Blanchard´s Situational Leadership Model
(source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlblanchard.html )
The subordinate’s readiness also consists of two factors: competence, meaning one’s knowledge and skills, and commitment, describing one’s motivation and confidence (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153). These factors determine the developmental level of employees, shown at the bottom of figure 2. D1 is here the lowest level of development, indicating low competence and high commitment. D2 means some competence with low commitment, D3 high competence and variable commitment, and D4 high competence and commitment. Hersey and Blanchard assume that a person will move though this line from right to left while further developing his or her skills. This movement can also be seen along the curve through the four quadrants.
For the management style this means that “the manager should adjust his or her style to adapt to the employee’s increasing level of readiness by moving from a more directive style… to a more participative style” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153).
In figure 2 this means that a manager first has to identify the subordinate’s level of development between D1 and D4. After this a line is drawn up to the leader behaviour diagram. This line will hit the curve, indicating the leadership style best fitted for this subordinate. There are four styles:
Scientific Study, 67 Pages
Diploma Thesis, 142 Pages
Term Paper, 19 Pages
Master's Thesis, 162 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 11 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 63 Pages
Master's Thesis, 115 Pages
Term Paper, 17 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 43 Pages
Master's Thesis, 114 Pages
GRIN Publishing, located in Munich, Germany, has specialized since its foundation in 1998 in the publication of academic ebooks and books. The publishing website GRIN.com offer students, graduates and university professors the ideal platform for the presentation of scientific papers, such as research projects, theses, dissertations, and academic essays to a wide audience.
Free Publication of your term paper, essay, interpretation, bachelor's thesis, master's thesis, dissertation or textbook - upload now!