Lecture notes on business communication. Учебное пособие

131

leader” born with a combination of talents and traits that enable him to lead others has been a subject of debate across time.

During the whole history there have been over 66 theories of leadership, and there are as many different views of leadership as there are characteristics that distinguish leaders from non-leaders. Further we shall have a closer look at some of these theories.

1. Great Man Theory.

The Great Man theory offered by Thomas Caryle around 1840, is considered as the beginning of the modern study of leadership. His lecture series and the publication of his book On Heroes, Hero-worship, and the Heroic History, led to the birth of leaders were born, not made, and the “great man” theory of leadership. The theory marked the starting point for the contemporary study of leadership. The theory assumes that the capacity for leadership is inherent, that great leaders are born and not made. The main point of the theory is the notion that there are only few and very rare individuals in any society at any time with the rare characteristics to rewrite human history. Alexander the Great, Joan of Arc, Julius Cesar, Napoleon, and Mahatma Gandhi are usually referred to as great leaders. The theory was given a masculine connotation with the use of the term “great man”, because the concept was thought of mostly as military leadership.

2. Trait Theory.

The trait theory came out of the work of Francis Galton extending the work of Thomas Caryle. The trait theory says that effective leaders possess a similar set of traits, and assumes that specific physical, social, and personal characteristics are inherent in leaders. A leader, according to this theory, differs from other group member based on eight traits, which include intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability. However, the traits must be relevant to the situation a leader finds himself in order for him to be effective.

3. Behavioural Theory.

The explanations for effective leadership provided by the trait theory neglected the interactions between the leaders and their group

132

members, as well as situational factors. Having the appropriate traits is just likely to predict if one will be an effective leader, therefore, studies were shifted to whether there is something unique about leaders’ behaviour. According to the behavioural theory, individuals can learn to become effective leaders through training and observation. The theory focuses on the actions of leaders rather than on their personal qualities.

Here three leadership styles are singled out. The autocratic style describes a leader who dictates work methods, solely made decisions and allows employees limited participation in the decision making process. The democratic leader in contrast describes a leader who takes the view of employees into consideration in making decisions, delegated authority to subordinates and uses feedback as a means of coaching the group members. The laissez-faire style leader allows the group to make decision as the member deems fit. First it was found that the democratic leadership style was most effective, however, later studies showed mixed results, creating a dilemma for leaders on whether to focus on achieving higher performance or to focus on achieving higher member satisfaction.

While the trait theory failed in proving a definitive set of traits a leader must have, similarly, the behavioural theory failed to provide a universally agreed behaviour of leaders, and failed to take into consideration the environment in which behaviour are demonstrated.

4. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership.

The theory assumes that no single leadership style is appropriate for all situations, and that the best style is contingent on the context faced by the leader. The theory posits that effective leadership is dependent on the extent of fit between leadership qualities, leadership style and specific situation faced by the leader. The contingency theory focuses on variables related to the environment that might dictate the right leadership style suited for a particular work situation.

According to Fiedler, organization must evaluate a leader according to underlying traits, evaluate the situation faced by the leader and thereafter construct a match between the two factors in order to achieve group

133

effectiveness through leadership. He proposed that individual’s basic leadership style, either task-oriented or relationship-oriented is the key to leadership success.

5. Situational Leadership Theory.

The core of the theory is that different situations require different leadership styles. The situational theory proposes that leaders choose the best course of action based upon situational factors, and that different leadership styles are more suited to different circumstances. Different leadership styles are employed based on the situation at hand, as defined by both the orientation of the leader (either task or relationship-oriented) and the maturity or experience of the followers. Leaders who want to be effective must use the right style of behaviour at the right time in each stage of employee’s development. Leaders are expected to be highly directive and supportive when dealing with employees who are at the earliest level of developing, since they have low competence. When the employee grows and becomes more competent, the leader is expected to engage in more coaching behaviour, and the leader should exhibit more supportive behaviour when the employee has achieved moderate to high levels of competence. Finally, the leader should delegate more when dealing with highly committed and highly competent workers.

6. Transformational Leadership Theory.

The transformational theory was developed by James MacGregor Burns. According to transformational theory, leadership is a process by which an individual engages with others and creates an emotional connection that results in increased motivation and morality in both the leader and the followers. The focus is the connections formed between the leader and the subordinates.

Burns described two leadership styles namely transactional and transformational. While transactional leaders focus on gaining compliance by giving and withholding rewards and benefits, transformational leaders focus on “transforming” others to support each other and the organization as a whole. Followers of a transformational leader respond by feeling trust,

134

admiration, loyalty, and respect for the leader and are more willing to work harder than originally expected. The core principle of transformational leadership is transforming or changing the lives of individual or organizations, by redesigning their value system, and changing the aspirations and expectations towards a desired outcome. Such leaders are believed to help achieve the goals of individuals, team and organizations. Transformational leaders demonstrate four factors: individual consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation (charismatic leadership), and idealized influence. A leader who has these features presents a vision and acts as a powerful role model for followers.

8.3. Types and styles of leadership

To start with, speaking about leaders and leadership styles, it seems quite useful to set the difference between those people who are called managers and those called leader. Not each leader can be an effective manager the same as not all managers are leaders. Table 3 summarizes this difference on the basis of research made by Abraham Zalesnik, a leading scholar and teacher in the field of organizational psychodynamics and the psychodynamics of leadership. The difference between managers and leaders, according to him, is the way they see chaos and order. Managers embrace process, seek stability and control, and instinctively try to resolve problems quickly, sometimes before they fully understand the importance of a problem. Leaders, in contrast, tolerate chaos and lack of structure and are ready to delay closure in order to understand the issues more fully. Therefore, Zalesnik added, business leaders have much more in common with artists, scientists, and other creative thinkers than they do with managers. However, in order to succeed organizations need both managers and leaders.

135

136

Table 3. Differences between managers and leaders according to Abraham Zalesnik.

A managerial culture emphasizes rationality and control. Whether the energy is directed toward goals, resources, organization structures, or people, a manager is a problem solver. The manager asks: “What problems must be solved, and what are the best ways to achieve results so that people will continue to contribute to this organization?” From this point, leadership is simply a practical effort to direct affairs; and to fulfill the task, a manager requires many people to operate efficiently at all levels of status and responsibility. It takes neither genius nor heroism to be a manager, but rather persistence, tough-mindedness, hard work, intelligence, analytical ability, and perhaps most important, tolerance and goodwill. Leaders, however, work in the opposite direction. Where managers have to limit choices, leaders develop fresh approaches to long-standing problems and open issues to new options. To be effective, leaders must project their ideas

137

onto images that excite people and only then develop choices that give those images the essence.

In a modern business context very often groups and teams have leaders that may not always be the person who holds the title, status, or role. Leaders can take on this role because they are appointed, elected, or emerge into the role. Group members play an important role in this process.

An appointed leader is designated by an authority to serve in that capacity, irrespective of the thoughts or wishes of the group. They may serve as the leader and accomplish all the designated tasks, but if the group does not accept their role as leader, it can be quite problematic and challenging.

A democratic leader is elected or chosen by the group, but may also face serious challenges. If group members feel neglected or ignored, they may assert that this democratic leader does not represent their interests. The democratic leader involves the group in the decision-making process, and takes responsibility for the resulting decisions and actions. Open and free discussions are representative of this process, and the democratic leader acknowledges the diversity of opinions.

An emergent leader contrasts the first two types by growing into the role, often out of necessity. Emergent leadership usually occurs when a group member becomes the leader through interactions with colleagues rather than being named or voted. The model relies on self-identified individuals. In this business style, leaders develop over time through their ability to make decisions and achieve objectives. The appointed leader may know little about the topic or content, and group members will naturally look to the senior member (in our case, an emergent leader) with the most experience for leadership. If the democratic leader fails to bring the group

138

together, or does not represent the whole group, subgroups may also form, each with an informal leader serving a kind of a spokesperson.

Thomas Harris and John Sherblom in their work “Small group and team communication” note three leadership styles that characterize modern business or organization, and reflect our modern economy. We are not born leaders but may become them if the context or environment requires that.

A leader-as-technician role often occurs when we have skills that others do not. If you can fix the printer at the office, your leadership and ability to get it running again are prized and sought-after skills. You may instruct others on how to load the paper or how to change the toner, and in this respect, you are looked to by the group as a leader within that context. Technical skills, from Internet technology to facilities maintenance, may experience moments where their particular area of knowledge is required to solve a problem. Their leadership will be in demand.

The leader-as-conductor involves a central role of bringing people together for a common goal. By analogy, a conductor leads an orchestra and integrates specialized skills and sounds of various components the musical group comprises. In the same way, a leader who conducts may set a vision, and collaborate with a group as they interpret a set script. Whether it is a beautiful movement in music or a group of teams that comes together to address a common challenge, the leader-as-conductor keeps the time and tempo of the group.

Coaches are often discussed in business-related books as models of leadership for good reason. A leader-as-coach combines many of the talents and skills we’ve discussed here, serving as a teacher, motivator, and keeper of the goals of the group. A coach may be autocratic at times, give pointed direction without input from the group, and stand on the sidelines while the

139

players do what they’ve been trained to do and make the points. The coach may look out for the group and defend it against bad calls, and may motivate players with words of encouragement. We can recognize some of the behaviors of coaches, but what specific traits have a positive influence on the group? Five important traits that produce results can be identified:

•Orientation and education

•Nurturing and encouragement

•Assessment and correction

•Listening and counseling

•Establishing group emphasis

Coaches are teachers, motivators, and keepers of the goals of the

group. Coaches are by definition not perfect. They can and do prefer some players over others and can display less than professional sideline behavior when they don’t agree with the referee, but the style of leadership is worthy being considered in its multidisciplinary approach. Coaches use more than one style of leadership and adapt to the context and environment.

In conclusion, leadership is the key to handling the challenges of current world. The world is changing; thus better understanding of leadership will be beneficial to all. Leadership is required to foster purpose, give direction and motivate people to achieve shared goals, especially in the time of crisis, like we are currently witnessing

EXERCISES

1. Your image is a combination of your competence, values, behavior, and appearance. Think about the core values and competences that can contribute to your professional image.

140

2.Think about a difficult situation and consider how you would remain a professional. Give a scenario such as:

Replying to an emotional email

Having a difficult conversation with a colleague

Interviewing for a new position

3.Ask other group mates to act out or talk about how they would respond. Discuss the traits that help maintain a professional image during difficult times.

4.Think of a leader you admire and respect. How did this individual become a leader—for example, by appointment, democratic selection, or

emergence? How would you characterize this leader’s style—is the leader

autocratic or laissez-faire, a technician, or a coach?

5.Think of a time when you, or another leader, used the authoritarian (autocratic), participative (democratic) or delegative (free reign) style of leadership. Describe this experience and make a few comments, such as: was it effective? Would a different leadership style have worked better? What were your team experiences? Did they learn from your leadership style? What was it they learned? Which style is easiest to use (and why)?

6.Identify three defining moments in your life or study that either challenged or reinforced certain fundamental values you held, or something that invoked a strong sense of self-awareness. What did you learn from those moments and how have you applied those lessons later.

7.Speculate and write out what success means to you in the short-term and long-term and reflect on how you would measure the success. Ask yourself why you made the choices you did. Is the definition of success you choose a journey or destination?