Leadership Definition : Peter Drucker : The forward to the Drucker Foundation's "The Leader of the

Future" sums up leadership : "The only definition of a leader is someone who has followers." To gain
followers requires influence (see John Maxwell's definition below) but doesn't exclude the lack of integrity
in achieving this. Indeed, it can be argued that several of the world's greatest leaders have lacked
integrity and have adopted values that would not be shared by many people today.

Leadership Styles

Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. Kurt
Lewin (1939) led a group of researchers to identify different styles of leadership. This early study has been very
influential and established three major leadership styles. The three major styles of leadership are (U.S. Army
Handbook, 1973):

o Authoritarian or autocratic

o Participative or democratic

o Delegative or Free Reign

Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one
style.

Authoritarian (autocratic)

I want both of you to. . .

This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without
getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the information
to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated.
Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats and
abusing their power. This is not the authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive, unprofessional style called “bossing
people around.” It has no place in a leader's repertoire.

The authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have the time and want to gain more
commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style.

Participative (democratic)

Let's work together to solve this. . .

This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what to
do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign
of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect.

This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a leader
is not expected to know everything — this is why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees. Using this style
is of mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions.

Delegative (free reign)

You two take care of the problem while I go. . .

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the
decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to
be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks.

This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when
you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!

NOTE: This is also known as laissez faire (or lais·ser faire), which is the noninterference in the affairs of others.
[French : laissez, second person pl. imperative of laisser, to let, allow + faire, to do.]

Forces
A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leader, and the
situation. Some examples include:

o Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is

competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new
environment for the employee.
o Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the

problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become
part of the team.
o Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do

everything and the employee needs to take ownership of her job! In addition, this allows you to be
at other places, doing other things.
o Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one

must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure
(participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative).

Forces that influence the style to be used included:

o How much time is available.

o Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect?

o Who has the information — you, your employees, or both?

o How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task.

o Internal conflicts.

o Stress levels.

o Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple?

o Laws or established procedures such as OSHA or training plans.

LEADERSHIP TRAITS

One of the most important contributions psychology has made to the field of business has been in
determining the key traits of acknowledged leaders. Psychological tests have been used to
determine what characteristics are most commonly noted among successful leaders. This list of
characteristics can be used for developmental purposes to help managers gain insight and
develop their leadership skills.

The increasing rate of change in the business environment is a major factor in this emphasis on
leadership. Whereas in the past, managers were expected to maintain the status quo in order to
move ahead, new forces in the marketplace have made it necessary to expand this narrow focus.
The new leaders of tomorrow are visionary. They are both learners and teachers. Not only do
they foresee paradigm changes in society, but they also have a strong sense of ethics and work to
build integrity in their organizations.
Raymond Cattell, a pioneer in the field of personality assessment, developed the Leadership
Potential equation in 1954. This equation, which was based on a study of military leaders, is used
today to determine the traits which characterize an effective leader. The traits of an effective
leader include the following:

• Emotional stability. Good leaders must be able to tolerate frustration and stress. Overall,
they must be well-adjusted and have the psychological maturity to deal with anything
they are required to face.
• Dominance. Leaders are often times competitive and decisive and usually enjoy
overcoming obstacles. Overall, they are assertive in their thinking style as well as their
attitude in dealing with others.
• Enthusiasm. Leaders are usually seen as active, expressive, and energetic. They are often
very optimistic and open to change. Overall, they are generally quick and alert and tend
to be uninhibited.
• Conscientiousness. Leaders are often dominated by a sense of duty and tend to be very
exacting in character. They usually have a very high standard of excellence and an
inward desire to do one's best. They also have a need for order and tend to be very self-
disciplined.
• Social boldness. Leaders tend to be spontaneous risk-takers. They are usually socially
aggressive and generally thick-skinned. Overall, they are responsive to others and tend to
be high in emotional stamina.
• Tough-mindedness. Good leaders are practical, logical, and to-the-point. They tend to be
low in sentimental attachments and comfortable with criticism. They are usually
insensitive to hardship and overall, are very poised.
• Self-assurance. Self-confidence and resiliency are common traits among leaders. They
tend to be free of guilt and have little or no need for approval. They are generally secure
and free from guilt and are usually unaffected by prior mistakes or failures.
• Compulsiveness. Leaders were found to be controlled and very precise in their social
interactions. Overall, they were very protective of their integrity and reputation and
consequently tended to be socially aware and careful, abundant in foresight, and very
careful when making decisions or determining specific actions.

Beyond these basic traits, leaders of today must also possess traits which will help them motivate
others and lead them in new directions. Leaders of the future must be able to envision the future
and convince others that their vision is worth following. To do this, they must have the following
personality traits:

• High energy. Long hours and some travel are usually a prerequisite for leadership
positions, especially as your company grows. Remaining alert and staying focused are
two of the greatest obstacles you will have to face as a leader.
• Intuitiveness. Rapid changes in the world today combined with information overload
result in an inability to "know" everything. In other words, reasoning and logic will not
get you through all situations. In fact, more and more leaders are learning to the value of
using their intuition and trusting their own instincts when making decisions.
 • Maturity. To be a good leader, personal power and recognition must be secondary to the
development of your employees. In other words, maturity is based on recognizing that
more can be accomplished by empowering others than can be by ruling others.
• Team orientation. Business leaders today put a strong emphasis on team work. Instead of
promoting an adult/child relationship with their employees, leaders create an adult/adult
relationship which fosters team cohesiveness.
• Empathy. Being able to put yourself in the other person's shoes is a key trait of leaders.
Without empathy, you can't build trust. And without trust, you will never be able to get
the best effort from your employees.
• Charisma. People usually perceive leaders as larger than life. Charisma plays a large part
in this perception. Leaders who have charisma are able to arouse strong emotions in their
employees by defining a vision which unites and captivates them. Using this vision,
leaders motivate employees to reach toward a future goal by tying the goal to substantial
personal rewards and values.

tannenbaum and schmidt continuum

tannenbaum and schmidt - model of
delegation and team development

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum is a simple model which shows the relationship between the
level of freedom that a manager chooses to give to a team, and the level of authority used by the
manager. As the team's freedom is increased, so the manager's authority decreases. This is a positive
way for both teams and managers to develop. While the Tannenbaum and Schmidt model concerns
delegated freedom to a group, the principle of being able to apply different levels of delegated
freedom closely relates to the 'levels of delegation' on the delegation page. As a manager, one of your
responsibilities is to develop your team. You should delegate and ask a team to make its own decisions
to varying degrees according to their abilities. There is a rising scale of levels of delegated freedom
that you can use when working with your team. The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum is often
shown as a simple graph:
Over time, a manager should aim to take the team from one end to the other, up the scale, at which
point you should also aim to have developed one or a number of potential successors from within your
team to take over from you. This process can take a year or two, or even longer, so be patient, explain
what you're doing, and be aware constantly of how your team is responding and developing.

When examining and applying the Tannenbaum and Schmidt principles, it's extremely important to
remember: irrespective of the amount of responsibility and freedom delegated by a
manager to a team, the manager retains accountability for any catastrophic problems that
result. Delegating freedom and decision-making responsibility to a team absolutely does
not absolve the manager of accountability. That's why delegating, whether to teams or
individuals, requires a very grown-up manager. If everything goes well, the team must get
the credit; if it all goes horribly wrong, the manager must take the blame. This is entirely
fair, because the manager is ultimately responsible for judging the seriousness of any
given situation - including the risks entailed - and the level of freedom that can safely be
granted to the team to deal with it. This is not actually part of the Tannebaum and Schmidt
Continuum, but it's vital to apply this philosophy or the model will definitely be weakened,
or at worse completely back-fire.

Here are the Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum levels of delegated freedom, with some added
explanation that should make it easier to understand and apply.

1. The Manager decides and announces the decision.

The manager reviews options in light of aims, issues, priorities, timescale, etc., then decides the action
and informs the team of the decision. The manager will probably have considered how the team will
react, but the team plays no active part in making the decision. The team may well perceive that the
manager has not considered the team's welfare at all. This is seen by the team as a purely task-based
decision, which is generally a characteristic of X-Theory management style.
2. The manager decides and then 'sells' the decision to the group.

The manager makes the decision as in 1 above, and then explains reasons for the decision to the
team, particularly the positive benefits that the team will enjoy from the decision. In so doing the
manager is seen by the team to recognise the team's importance, and to have some concern for the
team.

3. The manager presents the decision with background ideas and invites questions.

The manager presents the decision along with some of the background which led to the decision. The
team is invited to ask questions and discuss with the manager the rationale behind the decision, which
enables the team to understand and accept or agree with the decision more easily than in 1 and 2
above. This more participative and involving approach enables the team to appreciate the issues and
reasons for the decision, and the implications of all the options. This will have a more motivational
approach than 1 or 2 because of the higher level of team involvement and discussion.

4. The manager suggests a provisional decision and invites discussion about it.

The manager discusses and reviews the provisional decision with the team on the basis that the
manager will take on board the views and then finally decide. This enables the team to have some real
influence over the shape of the manager's final decision. This also acknowledges that the team has
something to contribute to the decision-making process, which is more involving and therefore
motivating than the previous level.

5. The manager presents the situation or problem, gets suggestions, then decides.

The manager presents the situation, and maybe some options, to the team. The team is encouraged
and expected to offer ideas and additional options, and discuss implications of each possible course of
action. The manager then decides which option to take. This level is one of high and specific
involvement for the team, and is appropriate particularly when the team has more detailed knowledge
or experience of the issues than the manager. Being high-involvement and high-influence for the team
this level provides more motivation and freedom than any previous level.

6. The manager explains the situation, defines the parameters and asks the team to
decide.

At this level the manager has effectively delegated responsibility for the decision to the team, albeit
within the manager's stated limits. The manager may or may not choose to be a part of the team
which decides. While this level appears to gives a huge responsibility to the team, the manager can
control the risk and outcomes to an extent, according to the constraints that he stipulates. This level is
more motivational than any previous, and requires a mature team for any serious situation or problem.
(Remember that the team must get the credit for all the positive outcomes from the decision, while the
manager remains accountable for any resulting problems or disasters. This isn't strictly included in the
original Tannenbaum and Schmidt definitions, so it needs pointing out because it's such an important
aspect of delegating and motivating, and leadership.)
7. The manager allows the team to identify the problem, develop the options, and decide
on the action, within the manager's received limits.

This is obviously an extreme level of freedom, whereby the team is effectively doing what the manager
did in level 1. The team is given responsibility for identifying and analysing the situation or problem;
the process for resolving it; developing and assessing options; evaluating implications, and then
deciding on and implementing a course of action. The manager also states in advance that he/she will
support the decision and help the team implement it. The manager may or may not be part of the
team, and if so then he/she has no more authority than anyone else in the team. The only constraints
and parameters for the team are the ones that the manager had imposed on him from above. (Again,
the manager retains accountability for any resulting disasters, while the team must get the credit for
all successes.) This level is potentially the most motivational of all, but also potentially the most
disastrous. Not surprisingly the team must be mature and competent, and capable of acting at what is
a genuinely strategic decision-making level.

LEADERSHIP THEORIES - 8 MAJOR LEADERSHIP THEORIES

Interest in leadership increased during the early part of the twentieth century. Early leadership
theories focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders and followers, while subsequent
theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill levels. While many different
leadership theories have emerged, most can be classified as one of eight major types:

1. "Great Man" Theories:

Great Man theories assume that the capacity for leadership is inherent – that great leaders are born,
not made. These theories often portray great leaders as heroic, mythic and destined to rise to
leadership when needed. The term "Great Man" was used because, at the time, leadership was
thought of primarily as a male quality, especially in terms of military leadership.

2. Trait Theories:

Similar in some ways to "Great Man" theories, trait theories assume that people inherit certain
qualities and traits that make them better suited to leadership. Trait theories often identify particular
personality or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders. If particular traits are key features of
leadership, then how do we explain people who possess those qualities but are not leaders? This
question is one of the difficulties in using trait theories to explain leadership.

3. Contingency Theories:

Contingency theories of leadership focus on particular variables related to the environment that might
determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation. According to this theory,
no leadership style is best in all situations. Success depends upon a number of variables, including the
leadership style, qualities of the followers and aspects of the situation.

4. Situational Theories:
Situational theories propose that leaders choose the best course of action based upon situational
variables. Different styles of leadership may be more appropriate for certain types of decision-making.

5. Behavioral Theories:

Behavioral theories of leadership are based upon the belief that great leaders are made, not born.
Rooted in behaviorism, this leadership theory focuses on the actions of leaders not on mental qualities
or internal states. According to this theory, people can learn to become leaders through teaching and
observation.

6. Participative Theories:

Participative leadership theories suggest that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the input of
others into account. These leaders encourage participation and contributions from group members and
help group members feel more relevant and committed to the decision-making process. In
participative theories, however, the leader retains the right to allow the input of others.

7. Management Theories:

Management theories (also known as "Transactional theories") focus on the role of supervision,
organization and group performance. These theories base leadership on a system of rewards and
punishments. Managerial theories are often used in business; when employees are successful, they
are rewarded; when they fail, they are reprimanded or punished.

8. Relationship Theories:

Relationship theories (also known as "Transformational theories") focus upon the connections formed
between leaders and followers. Transformational leaders motivate and inspire people by helping group
members see the importance and higher good of the task. These leaders are focused on the
performance of group members, but also want each person to fulfill his or her potential. Leaders with
this style often have high ethical and moral standards.