lecturer: dr. p. mamle tetteh, department of sociology ... as the great person or trait theory. this...

College of Education

School of Continuing and Distance Education 2014/2015 – 2016/2017

Lecturer: Dr. P. Mamle Tetteh, Department of Sociology Contact Information: [email protected]

Session Overview

• One of the most topical subjects in our contemporary society is leadership. It is believed that a family, a country and any group’s progress is dependent on the nature of its leadership.

• Hence, after considering how groups influence the individual in previous sessions, we now proceed to see how an individual, a leader of a group can influence other members of the group. We shall try to understand the concept of a leader and leadership. We shall seek to answer the question of whether leaders are born or made.

• Thus at the end of this session, you should be able to define and explain the concept of leadership. You would also be able to provide some theoretical explanation for the emergence of leaders as well as explain the effectiveness of different leadership styles.

SOCI 324: Groups, Organisations and the Individual Slide 2

Session Outline

The key topics to be covered in the session are as follows:

• Definition of a Leader/Leadership

• Functions of Leaders

• The emergence of Leaders

• The situational determinants of leadership

• Theories of Leadership

• Leadership styles and their relative effectiveness

• Gender and leadership

• Sample Question

• Session Summary

• References


Reading List

• Read chapters eight and eleven of the required text and the article(s) on this session posted on Sakai


DEFINING LEADERSHIP Topic One


Who is a Leader?

• “Individuals who exert the most influence on other members of the group” (Baron & Byrne 2012).

• “Those who influence the activities of a group, often directing these activities of a group towards a goal”. (Middlebrook, 1997).

• “The person who exerts the most influence and provides direction and energy to the group” (Jesuizo 1996 in Franzoi 2000)


What is Leadership

• The process through which one member of a group influences other group members toward the attainment of specific group goals (Hollander 1985)

• Influencing others in a group (organization) by establishing a direction for collective effort and then managing the collective activities needed to move in that direction (Baron, Branscombe and Byrne, 2009).


THE FUNCTIONS OF A LEADER Topic Two


Functions of a Leader

The functions of leaders in groups are varied and complex depending to a large extent on the type of group. The functions of leaders include:

• Initiating action in a group. They often come up with ideas and get other members of the group to buy into it and work towards it.

• A leader’s function also includes giving orders. It is important that clear and precise orders are given to guide individual activity in a group setting. When people recognize the authority of a leader, they are willing to follow his/her orders.

• A leader is also responsible for doling out rewards as well as punishments in a group. When members have conforms or made significant contributions to a group, they are rewarded. In the same vein, if members’ actions undermine the group’s workings and productivity, it is the responsibility to call the deviant member to order or give out whatever punishments are laid out by the group.


Functions of Leaders

• The leader of a group is a role model and a motivator. He is the driver of group goals, pushing and pulling group members towards the attainment of group goals.

• The leader is also responsible for settling disputes between group members. Conflict among group members can undermine a groups productivity. Should they arise, the leader must act as intermediary and impartially, without taking sides, seek to get the conflicting parties to resolve their differences amicably.


THE EMERGENCE OF LEADERS Topic Three


The Emergence of Leaders

• Size of the Group: This is a crucial determinant of leadership. In a small group, as say three friends going on a lunch break, leadership may not be required as in say in a group of students going on a precession or demonstration.

• Decision time and task Complexity: This may also determine whether a leadership structure will emerge. If decisions must be reached quickly or if a task is complex, there is greater need for a leader to coordinate the groups activities.

• The Importance of the Activity/Task: If the activity is trivial or urgent, the powers or need for a leader increases (Jones & Gerard 1967). Thus, people do not wish to be concerned with things so delegate to the leader. Also where the stakes are high and urgent, and decisions must be made (e.g. in way time ) a leader is more likely to emerge with considerable power.


THE GREAT PERSON THEORY/TRAIT THEORY OF LEADERSHIP

• Common sense seems to suggest that some people are born to lead. Thus early research into the subject formulated the view known as the Great Person or Trait Theory. This theory suggests that great leaders possess certain traits that set them apart from other humans (e.g. their followers). These traits remain stable over time and are visible across different groups or cultures.

• Thus, leaders share certain characteristics regardless of when or where they lived and what activity they were engaged in (be it politics, sports music etc.). Thus, Nkrumah could be said to be similar to Abraham Lincoln, just as Alexander the great is to Azumah Nelson or Nelson Mandela etc.

• Several initial researches on this yielded no consistent findings and thus subsequently the conclusion was arrived at that leaders simply don’t differ from followers in clear and consistent ways.


The Trait theory of Leadership

• However, renewed, recent researches into the subject have suggested that there are some differences between leaders and followers; that some traits set some people apart as leaders according to the original hypothesis. Several types of evidence point to this trend namely:

• That persons who possess such motives as a high need for power coupled with a high degree of self control are more successful especially as business leaders.

• Persons higher in self confidence, achievement motivation and dominance

are more successful as political leaders

• That generally, leaders possess several personal characteristics which include intelligence, dominance etc.


Situational Determinants of Leadership

• Chance Leadership by appointment or chance.

• Persons who possess characteristics more valued by the group in question more likely to emerge as leaders.

• The organizational context of the Group – In large organizations, the members of a group may prefer as a ‘formal’ leader, a person with a significant position (a position that has influence with the upper levels of the organization.

• When selecting ‘informal’ leaders the focus may be on the individual relationship and liking of other members of the group


The Characteristics of Group Members

• Research has shown that groups of authoritarian subjects preferred leaders who could help them attain their groups goals and who did so by exercising their leadership in a strongly directive manner- E.g. soldiers.

• In contrast, groups of egalitarian subjects preferred a leader who was warm and concerned about the quality of interaction with group members. Thus an agreeable person.


The Nature of Task

• The relative competence and success of the various group members in attaining the groups goals significantly influences who emerges as a leader.

• If the meeting of group goals is important to members, then the person(s) seen as most competent to help achieve this emerge and remain as leader(s).


Skills in Self Monitoring

• People high in self monitoring are more likely to emerge leaders than those who are lacking or deficient in this trait. Self monitoring includes two main issues namely; Sensitivity to others reactions and the ability to modify/adjust ones behavior to various situations.

• High self monitors are those who are able to ‘read’ others reactions to various events effectively and are able to charge their own behavior so as to generate favorable responses from others.


Characteristics of Person Likely to Emerge Leaders

• The person who has access to more information and communicates more with other members of the group is more likely to emerge leader. Thus the frequency of communication is important.

• The Contemporary Interaction Theory in contrast to the traits theory suggests that to predict who becomes a leader in a group is not to look out only for peculiar traits or characteristics in leaders alone, but to take into account several factors including but not limited to the structure of the group, the nature of the task facing the Group, the characteristic of group members, the situation and some personal characteristics of the people likely to emerge as leaders.

• Thus, this theory suggests that leadership is determined by the interaction of all the members of the group. The one individual seen as most apt to more the group towards its goals is more likely to emerge as leader.


LEADERSHIP STYLES AND THEIR RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS

Topic Four


Leadership Styles and their Relative

Effectiveness

• There are a number of different styles of leadership and their relative effectiveness depends largely on the situation. For instance, an aerobics instructor and the city Mayor work in different contexts and thus their specific roles vary. In other words behaviors vary from situation to situation so that what works in one situation may not work well in another. Hence, the need to identify leadership styles and their ‘relative’ effectiveness in different situations.

• Two main styles of leadership can be identified namely:

Democratic style of leadership versus Authoritarian style of leadership

People centered style of leadership versus task centered style of leadership

• The first question we seek to answer is; ‘Is a democratic style of leadership more effective than an authoritarian style? What do you think? Consider the following scenario as you think about your answer to the above question.


Leadership Styles and their Relative Effectiveness

• A group of ten year olds were given a task to perform in three groups. In the first group, the boys were given step-by-step direct instructions as to what to do. Each child was assigned a child to work with by the leader of the group. The leader participated less in the activity with the boys and gave subjective comments of the boys tasks afterwards.

• In the second group, the boys were given just a general idea of the procedure of the task and were allowed to choose whom they want to work with. The leader participated in the task with the boys and gave objective feedback of their performance.

• In the third, the boys received no direction whatsoever as to what they were supposed to do. They had complete freedom to do as they please. The leader was not involved in the boys’ activities and gave no information or feedback on their performance.

• The style of leadership obviously had an effect on performance. Boys in group one showed more aggression toward one another and tended to be more discontented than those in group two. Boys in group one’s productions were high but of a lesser quality than those in group two. Again boys in group one had lowered moral and satisfaction compared to those in group two.


Leadership Styles & Productivity

• Can you identify the kinds of leadership styles used in these three groups? Well the first group had an authoritarian (autocratic) leader. The second group had a democratic (participatory) leader. And the third of course is a typical example of a laissez-faire leadership, where there is no direction and each member of the group does what s/h e pleases to a large extent.

• Now which of these kinds of leadership styles is effective in achieving group outcomes or productivity? Obviously the laissez-faire kind is less productive. Again, with the benefits of democracy touted so much, you are likely to think that a democratic style of leader is superior to an autocratic one. But whether a democratic style is better than an autocratic one, depends largely on the situation.

• Research indicates that despite these, supposed negatives of authoritarian

leadership, under some circumstances (and with some individuals and subjects) authoritarian leadership styles might be preferred. For instance, in times of an emergency as during war, the autocratic leadership style has proved superior to the democratic style. Thus in such critical moments, there is little time for debate and the group is better off taking direct instructions from the leader.


Fieldler’s Contingency Theory

• Fieldler’s contingency theory answers our second question of whether a people centred leadership style is more effective than a task centred style or vice versa. According to Fieldler’s contingency theory a leaders effectiveness or contribution to successful performance by his/her group is determined both by (a) the leaders traits and (b) various features of the situation

• With respect to (1) – the leader’s traits, Fieldler identified Esteem (Liking) for the least preferred co-worker as the most crucial element in determining a leader’s effectiveness. Least preferred co-workers (L.P.Cs) refer to people found most difficult to work with in terms of (pleasantness/helpfulness/cooperativeness).

• Thus, a leaders’ tendency to evaluate favourably or unfavourably the person whom they found most difficult to work with portrayed their effectiveness. Leaders who gave negative evaluations (Low LPC leaders) were obviously more concerned with task performance, while those who evaluated their (LPC) in a positive light high LPC Leaders) seemed mainly concerned about maintaining good social relationships.

• Now, is a task centred leadership style more effective than a people centred one? Or can both types be effective given the appropriate circumstances. Fieldler (1967) suggests that whichever style turns out as effective depends on the situation.


Definition of the Situation

The situation is defined by three (3) factors namely;

• The nature of the leader’s relationship with group members (i.e. the extent to which he enjoys their support, or is liked by them).

• The degree of structure of task being performed (i.e. the extent to which tasks/goals and followers roles are defined).

• The leaders position power (i.e. the leaders ability to enforce compliance by followers)

A leader can be high in all three (have group support/ able to enforce compliance/be in a group with clearly defined roles of members) or /low in all three (lack group support/ unable to enforce compliance/ lead a group where roles are not clearly defined).


Conclusion of the Contigency Theory

• To determine when a leader is most effective then, Fieldler suggests:

– That when there is either very high/low situational control low LPC (task centered) leaders are more effective that high LPC (people centred) leaders. Thus, if a leader has full support, his followers will not resent his focus on the task. Also when the situation is bad (bad relationship, less power etc.) the leaders focus stays on the task rather than people (whose favour he’d lost anyway) so results are achieved.

– In a moderate situation however, a high LPC (people centred ) leader

tends to be more effective. For instance in a moderate situation like (poor relationships/strong power positions/structured tasks), the people centred leader will be concerned about restoring relationships, a thing a low LPC leader will not be concerned about, making the people centred leader more effective.


Conclusions of the Contingency Theory

• Thus, though Fieldler’s theory has not received total support, it is generally accepted that task oriented leaders are more effective in either highly favorable/highly unfavourable leadership situations, and person oriented leaders have been more effective in moderately favourable circumstances. Thus, task or people oriented leaders can both be effective provided they are in the right situation. Fieldler suggests thus that, for organizations to yield results, they must match leader’s style to the demands of the situation.

• Critics of this theory have said that leaders, though may be oriented toward the task or people, are not strictly task or people centred. In reality, many leaders combine and indeed should combine both traits if they can achieve results and be effective.


Gender and Leadership Style and Effectiveness

• There are no differences between males and females leadership styles even though females tend to adopt a more democratic leadership style than males. The principles relating to effectiveness apply to both males and females. Thus, the leaders effectiveness depends on the favourable nature of the situation to him- i.e. a situation which provides him with control over his followers.

• The situation is defined by three (3) factors. The nature of the leaders relationship with group members (i.e. the extent

to which he enjoys the support – liked/supported).

The degree of structure of task being performed (i.e. the extent to which tasks/goals and followers roles are defined).

The leaders position power (i.e. the leaders ability to enforce compliance by followers)


Sample Question


References

• Robert, B. and Branscombe, N. (2012). Social Psychology. 13th Edition. Pearson Education, Inc.

• Aronson, E., Wilson, T. & Akert, R. (2007) Social Psychology. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc.

• Aronson, E., Wilson, T. & Akert, R. (2010) Social Psychology. 7th Edition. Pearson Education Inc.


lecturer: dr. p. mamle tetteh, department of sociology ... as the great person or trait theory. this...

Documents