(Mt) – Authentic Leadership Paper

SOLUTION AT Academic Writers Bay

1 LEADERSHIP Ninth Edition 2 3 DEDICATION To Madison, Isla, Sullivan, and Edison 4 5 LEADERSHIP Theory and Practice Ninth Edition Peter G. Northouse Western Michigan University Los Angeles London New Delhi Singapore Washington DC 6 Melbourne 7 FOR INFORMATION: SAGE Publications, Inc. 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: [email protected] SAGE Publications Ltd. 1 Oliver’s Yard 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd. B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 India SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd. 18 Cross Street #10-10/11/12 China Square Central Singapore 048423 Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Except as permitted by U.S. copyright law, no part of this work may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or 8 stored in a database or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. All third party trademarks referenced or depicted herein are included solely for the purpose of illustration and are the property of their respective owners. Reference to these trademarks in no way indicates any relationship with, or endorsement by, the trademark owner. Printed in Canada Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Northouse, Peter Guy, author. Title: Leadership : theory and practice / Peter G. Northouse, Western Michigan University. Description: Ninth Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publishing, 2021. | Revised edition of the author’s Leadership, [2019] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020045038 | ISBN 9781544397566 (paperback) | ISBN 9781071836149 | 9781071834466 (epub) | ISBN 9781071834473 (epub) | ISBN 9781071834480 (pdf) Subjects: LCSH: Leadership. | Leadership—Case studies. Classification: LCC HM1261 .N67 2021 | DDC 303.3/4—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020045038 This book is printed on acid-free paper. 21 22 23 24 25 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acquisitions Editor: Maggie Stanley Content Development Editor: Lauren Gobell Editorial Assistant: Sarah Wilson Production Editor: Tracy Buyan Copy Editor: Melinda Masson Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd. 9 Proofreader: Jennifer Grubba Indexer: Integra Cover Designer: Gail Buschman Marketing Manager: Jennifer Jones 10 11 BRIEF CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgments About the Author About the Contributors Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Trait Approach Chapter 3 Skills Approach Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach Chapter 5 Situational Approach Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership Chapter 10 Servant Leadership Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership Chapter 13 Followership Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics Chapter 16 Team Leadership References Author Index Subject Index 12 13 DETAILED CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgments About the Author About the Contributors Chapter 1 Introduction Leadership Defined Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership Definition and Components Leadership Described Trait Versus Process Leadership Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership Leadership and Power Leadership and Coercion Leadership and Morality Leadership Is a Neutral Process Leadership Is a Moral Process Leadership and Management Plan of the Book Case Study Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . . Leadership Instrument Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire Summary Chapter 2 Trait Approach Description Intelligence Self-Confidence Determination Integrity Sociability Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership Strengths and Leadership Emotional Intelligence How Does the Trait Approach Work? Strengths 14 Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research Case 2.2 Recruiting for the Bank Case 2.3 Elon Musk Leadership Instrument Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ) Summary Chapter 3 Skills Approach Description Three-Skill Approach Technical Skills Human Skills Conceptual Skills Summary of the Three-Skill Approach Skills Model Individual Attributes Competencies Influences on Skills Development Leadership Outcomes Summary of the Skills Model How Does the Skills Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team Case 3.2 Andy’s Recipe Case 3.3 2019 Global Teacher of the Year: Peter Tabichi Leadership Instrument Skills Inventory Summary Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach Description Task and Relationship Behaviors Task Orientation 15 Relationship Orientation Historical Background of the Behavioral Approach The Ohio State Studies The University of Michigan Studies Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid Paternalism/Maternalism Opportunism Recent Studies How Does the Behavioral Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First Case 4.2 We Are Family Case 4.3 Cheer Coach Monica Aldama Leadership Instrument Leadership Behavior Questionnaire Summary Chapter 5 Situational Approach Description Leadership Style Development Level How Does SLII® Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels Case 5.2 Getting the Message Across Case 5.3 Philosophies of Chinese Leadership Leadership Instrument SLII® Questionnaire: Sample Items Summary Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory Description Leader Behaviors 16 Directive Leadership Supportive Leadership Participative Leadership Achievement-Oriented Leadership Follower Characteristics Task Characteristics How Does Path–Goal Theory Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors Case 6.2 Playing in the Orchestra Case 6.3 Row the Boat Leadership Instrument Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire Summary Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory Description Early Studies Later Studies Leadership Development Emotions and LMX Development How Does LMX Theory Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair Case 7.3 Pixar: Creating Space for Success Leadership Instrument LMX-7 Questionnaire Summary Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership Description Transformational Leadership Defined 17 Transformational Leadership and Charisma A Model of Transformational Leadership Transformational Leadership Factors Transactional Leadership Factors Nonleadership Factor Transformational Leadership Measurements Other Transformational Perspectives Bennis and Nanus Kouzes and Posner How Does the Transformational Leadership Approach Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 8.1 The Vision Failed Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership Case 8.3 Grandmothers and Benches Leadership Instrument Transformational Leadership Inventory Summary Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership Description Authentic Leadership Defined Approaches to Authentic Leadership Practical Approach Theoretical Approach How Does Authentic Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader? Case 9.2 Kassie’s Story Case 9.3 The Arena of Authenticity Leadership Instrument Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire Summary 18 Chapter 10 Servant Leadership Description Servant Leadership Defined Historical Basis of Servant Leadership Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader Building a Theory About Servant Leadership Model of Servant Leadership Antecedent Conditions Servant Leader Behaviors Outcomes Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership How Does Servant Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 10.1 Global Health Care Case 10.2 Servant Leadership Takes Flight Case 10.3 Energy to Inspire the World Leadership Instrument Servant Leadership Questionnaire Summary Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership Description Adaptive Leadership Defined A Model of Adaptive Leadership Situational Challenges Technical Challenges Technical and Adaptive Challenges Adaptive Challenges Leader Behaviors Adaptive Work How Does Adaptive Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies 19 Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus Case 11.3 Agonizing Options for Marlboro College Leadership Instrument Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire Summary Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership Description Inclusion Defined A Model of Inclusive Leadership Antecedent Conditions Leader Characteristics Group Diversity Cognitions Organizational Policies and Practices Inclusive Leadership Behaviors Outcomes How Does Inclusive Leadership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Assessment Challenge Support Case Studies Case 12.1 Difficult Decision Case 12.2 The Extraversion Advantage Case 12.3 Inclusive Leadership During a Crisis Leadership Instrument Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument Summary Chapter 13 Followership Description Followership Defined Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives Typologies of Followership The Zaleznik Typology The Kelley Typology 20 The Chaleff Typology The Kellerman Typology Theoretical Approaches to Followership Reversing the Lens The Leadership Co-Created Process New Perspectives on Followership Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest of the Organization’s Mission Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders Followership and Destructive Leaders 1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures 2. Our Need for Security and Certainty 3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special 4. Our Need for Membership in the Human Community 5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social Death 6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad Leader How Does Followership Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 13.1 Bluebird Care Case 13.2 Olympic Rowers Case 13.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal Leadership Instrument Followership Questionnaire Summary Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership Description The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth Understanding the Labyrinth Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Effectiveness 21 Navigating the Labyrinth Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 14.1 The “Glass Ceiling” Case 14.2 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status Case 14.3 Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand Leadership Instrument Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire Summary Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics Description Ethics Defined Level 1. Preconventional Morality Level 2. Conventional Morality Level 3. Postconventional Morality Ethical Theories Centrality of Ethics to Leadership Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership The Dark Side of Leadership Principles of Ethical Leadership Ethical Leaders Respect Others Ethical Leaders Serve Others Ethical Leaders Are Just Ethical Leaders Are Honest Ethical Leaders Build Community Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 15.1 Choosing a Research Assistant Case 15.2 Reexamining a Proposal Case 15.3 Ship Shape Leadership Instrument Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form) 22 Summary Chapter 16 Team Leadership Description Team Leadership Model Team Effectiveness Leadership Decisions Leadership Actions How Does the Team Leadership Model Work? Strengths Criticisms Application Case Studies Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team Leadership Instrument Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire Summary References Author Index Subject Index 23 24 PREFACE As this ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice goes to press, the number of confirmed deaths worldwide from the COVID-19 pandemic is over 1 million. The horrific nature of this pandemic has challenged societies on a global scale and highlights for all of us the importance of understanding how leadership works and the value of leadership in times of crisis. To that end, this edition is written with the objective of bridging the gap between the often-simplistic popular approaches to leadership and the more abstract theoretical approaches. Like the previous editions, this edition reviews and analyzes a selected number of leadership theories, giving special attention to how each theoretical approach can be applied in realworld organizations. In essence, my purpose is to explore how leadership theory can inform and direct the way leadership is practiced. 25 NEW TO THIS EDITION First and foremost, this edition includes a new chapter on inclusive leadership, which examines the nature of inclusive leadership, its underpinnings, and how it functions. Authored by two scholars in the areas of diversity and inclusion, Donna Chrobot-Mason and Quinetta Roberson, the chapter presents definitions, a model, and the latest research and applications of this emerging approach to leadership. Underscored in the chapter is how inclusion is an integration of two factors: (1) an individual’s connectedness to others and (2) a person’s uniqueness. Finally, this new chapter provides case studies and leadership instruments to explore how to practice inclusive leadership in a variety of contexts. In addition to the discussion of inclusive leadership in Chapter 12, this edition includes an expanded analysis of leadership and morality—the “Hitler Question.” It discusses the perplexing question of whether the process of leadership is inherently a moral process that is concerned with the common good or whether it is a neutral process that is not dependent on promoting the common good. Another new feature in this edition is the inclusion of a real-world case study in each chapter. Because it is important to acknowledge and see real leaders exhibiting the behaviors and concepts behind the leadership approaches discussed in the text, the third case study in each chapter profiles a leader that epitomizes the chapter’s concepts. These new realworld case studies include profiles from across the globe including a mental health program utilizing grandmothers in Africa, an Italian energy company, and New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern. In addition, there are profiles of leaders responding to crisis including closing a college and battling COVID-19 on a U.S. aircraft carrier. This edition retains many special features from previous editions but has been updated to include new research findings, figures and tables, and everyday applications for many leadership topics including leader–member exchange theory, transformational and authentic leadership, team leadership, the labyrinth of women’s leadership, and historical definitions of 26 leadership. In addition, it includes an expanded look at the relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership. The format of this edition parallels the format used in earlier editions. As with previous editions, the overall goal of Leadership: Theory and Practice is to advance our understanding of the many different approaches to leadership and ways to practice it more effectively. 27 SPECIAL FEATURES Although this text presents and analyzes a wide range of leadership research, every attempt has been made to present the material in a clear, concise, and interesting manner. Reviewers of the book have consistently commented that clarity is one of its major strengths. In addition to the writing style, several other features of the book help make it user-friendly. Each chapter follows the same format: It is structured to include first theory and then practice. Every chapter contains a discussion of the strengths and criticisms of the approach under consideration, and assists readers in determining the relative merits of each approach. Each chapter includes an application section that discusses the practical aspects of the approach and how it could be used in today’s organizational settings. Three case studies are provided in each chapter to illustrate common leadership issues and dilemmas. Thought-provoking questions follow each case study, helping readers to interpret the case. A questionnaire is provided in each of the chapters to help readers apply the approach to their own leadership style or setting. Figures and tables illustrate the content of the theory and make the ideas more meaningful. Through these special features, every effort has been made to make this text substantive, understandable, and practical. 28 AUDIENCE This book provides both an in-depth presentation of leadership theory and a discussion of how it applies to real-life situations. Thus, it is intended for undergraduate and graduate classes in management, leadership studies, business, educational leadership, public administration, nursing and allied health, social work, criminal justice, industrial and organizational psychology, communication, religion, agricultural education, political and military science, and training and development. It can also be utilized outside of academia by small and large companies, as well as federal government agencies, to aid in developing the learner’s leadership skills. It is particularly well suited as a supplementary text for core organizational behavior courses or as an overview text within MBA curricula. This book would also be useful as a text in student activities, continuing education, inservice training, and other leadership-development programs. 29 TEACHING RESOURCES This text includes an array of instructor teaching materials designed to save you time and to help you keep students engaged. To learn more, visit sagepub.com or contact your SAGE representative at sagepub.com/findmyrep. In the electronic edition of the book you have purchased, there are several icons that reference links (videos, journal articles) to additional content. Though the electronic edition links are not live, all content referenced may be accessed at . This URL is referenced at several points throughout your electronic edition. 30 31 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people directly or indirectly contributed to the development of the ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice. First, I would like to acknowledge my editor, Maggie Stanley, and her talented team at SAGE Publications (Lauren Gobell and Sarah Wilson), who have contributed in so many different ways to the quality and success of this book. For their very capable work during the production phase, I would like to thank the copy editor, Melinda Masson, and the project editor, Tracy Buyan. In her own unique way, each of these people made valuable contributions to the ninth edition. I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable contributions to the development of this manuscript: Sidney R. Castle, National University Jason Headrick, Texas Tech University Michelle Jefferson, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Gary F. Kohut, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte R. Jeffery Maxfield, Utah Valley University Daniel F. Nehring, Morehead State University Michael Pace, Texas A&M University Heather I. Scott, Kennesaw State University Charlotte Silvers, Texas Tech University Elena Svetieva, University of Colorado Colorado Springs Mark Vrooman, Utica College 32 Isaac Wanasika, University of Northern Colorado Rosie Watwood, Concordia University Texas I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable contributions to the development of the eighth-edition manuscript: Sandra Arumugam-Osburn, St. Louis Community College–Forest Park Rob Elkington, University of Ontario Institute of Technology Abimbola Farinde, Columbia Southern University Belinda S. Han, Utah Valley University Deborah A. Johnson-Blake, Liberty University Benjamin Kutsyuruba, Queen’s University Chenwei Liao, Michigan State University Heather J. Mashburn, Appalachian State University Comfort Okpala, North Carolina A&T State University Ric Rohm, Southeastern University Patricia Dillon Sobczak, Virginia Commonwealth University Victor S. Sohmen, Drexel University Brigitte Steinheider, University of Oklahoma-Tulsa Robert Waris, University of Missouri–Kansas City Sandi Zeljko, Lake-Sumter State College 33 Mary Zonsius, Rush University I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable contributions to the development of the seventh-edition manuscript: Hamid Akbari, Winona State University Meera Alagaraja, University of Louisville Mel Albin, Excelsior College Thomas Batsching, Reutlingen University Cheryl Beeler, Angelo State University Julie Bjorkman, Benedictine University Mark D. Bowman, Methodist University Dianne Burns, University of Manchester Eric Buschlen, Central Michigan University Steven Bryant, Drury University Daniel Calhoun, Georgia Southern University David Conrad, Augsburg College Joyce Cousins, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Denise Danna, LSUHSC School of Nursing S. Todd Deal, Georgia Southern University Caroline S. Fulmer, University of Alabama 34 Brad Gatlin, John Brown University Greig A. Gjerdalen, Capilano University Andrew Gonzales, University of California, Irvine Decker B. Hains, Western Michigan University Amanda Hasty, University of Colorado–Denver Carl Holschen, Missouri Baptist University Kiran Ismail, St. John’s University Irma Jones, University of Texas at Brownsville Michele D. Kegley, University of Cincinnati, Blue Ash College Jeanea M. Lambeth, Pittsburg State University David Lees, University of Derby David S. McClain, University of Hawaii at Manoa Carol McMillan, New School University Richard Milter, Johns Hopkins University Christopher Neck, Arizona State University–Tempe Keeok Park, University of La Verne Richard Parkman, University of Plymouth Lori M. Pindar, Clemson University Chaminda S. Prelis, University of Dubuque Casey Rae, George Fox University 35 Noel Ronan, Waterford Institute of Technology Louis Rubino, California State University, Northridge Shadia Sachedina, Baruch College (School of Public Affairs) Harriet L. Schwartz, Carlow University Kelli K. Smith, University of Nebraska-Lincoln David Swenson, The College of St. Scholastica Danny L. Talbot, Washington State University Robert L. Taylor, University of Louisville Precious Taylor-Clifton, Cambridge College John Tummons, University of Missouri Kristi Tyran, Western Washington University Tamara Von George, Granite State College Natalie Walker, Seminole State College William Welch, Bowie State University David E. Williams, Texas Tech University Tony Wohlers, Cameron University Sharon A. Wulf, Worcester Polytechnic Institute School of Business Alec Zama, Grand View University Xia Zhao, California State University, Dominguez Hills 36 In addition, I would like to thank, for their exceptional work on the leadership profile tool and the ancillaries, Isolde Anderson (Hope College), John Baker (Western Kentucky University), and Eric Buschlen. A very special acknowledgment goes to Laurel Northouse who has been my number-one critic and supporter from the inception of the book in 1990 to the present. In addition, I am especially grateful to Marie Lee for her exceptional editing and guidance throughout this project. For her comprehensive literature reviews and chapter updates, I would like to thank Terri Scandura. For his review of and comments on the morality and leadership section, I am indebted to Joseph Curtin (Northeastern University). I would like to thank Kate McCain (University of Nebraska–Lincoln) and Jason Headrick (University of Nebraska–Lincoln) for their contributions to the adaptive leadership chapter, John Baker for his contributions to the team leadership chapter, Jenny Steiner for her case study on adaptive leadership, Jeff Brink for sharing his story about transformational leadership, and Kassandra Gutierrez for her case study on authentic leadership. In addition, I would like to acknowledge Barbara Russell (Chemeketa Community College) for her research and writing of many of the new real-world case studies. Finally, I would like to thank the many undergraduate and graduate students whom I have taught through the years. Their ongoing feedback has helped clarify my thinking about leadership and encouraged me to make plain the practical implications of leadership theories. 37 38 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Peter G. Northouse, PhD, is Professor Emeritus of Communication in the School of Communication at Western Michigan University. Leadership: Theory and Practice is the best-selling academic textbook on leadership in the world and has been translated into 16 languages. In addition to authoring publications in professional journals, he is the author of Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (now in its fifth edition) and coauthor of Leadership Case Studies in Education (now in its third edition) and Health Communication: Strategies for Health Professionals (now in its third edition). His scholarly and curricular interests include models of leadership, leadership assessment, ethical leadership, and leadership and group dynamics. For more than 30 years, he has taught undergraduate and graduate courses in leadership, interpersonal communication, and organizational communication on both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Currently, he is a consultant and lecturer on trends in leadership research, leadership development, and leadership education. He holds a doctorate in speech communication from the University of Denver, and master’s and bachelor’s degrees in communication education from Michigan State University. 39 40 ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Donna Chrobot-Mason, PhD, is an associate professor and director of the Center for Organizational Leadership at the University of Cincinnati (UC). She is director of UC Women Lead, a 10-month executive leadership program for high-potential women at UC. Her research and consulting work has spanned two decades and centers on leadership across differences and strategies for creating organizations that support diversity, equity, and inclusion and foster intergroup collaboration. She has published nearly 40 articles and scholarly works in journals such as the Journal of Management, The Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Group and Organization Management. She has served on the editorial review board for the Journal of Management, Personnel Psychology, and the Journal of Business and Psychology. Her book (co-authored with Chris Ernst), Boundary Spanning Leadership: Six Practices for Solving Problems, Driving Innovation, and Transforming Organizations, was published by McGraw-Hill Professional in 2010. Dr. Chrobot-Mason has been invited to address numerous audiences including the Brookings Institute, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service, Catholic Health Partners, and the International Leadership Association. She has consulted with numerous organizations including Briggs and Stratton, Dayton Public Schools, BoehringerIngelheim, Emory University, Milacron, and Forest City Enterprises. She holds a PhD and master’s degree in applied psychology from the University of Georgia. Crystal L. Hoyt is a professor and associate dean for academic affairs, and holds the Thorsness Endowed Chair in Ethical Leadership at the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. Her research explores the role of belief systems, such as mindsets, self-efficacy, stereotypes, and political ideologies, in a range of social issues including stigma and discrimination, ethical failures in leadership, leadership and educational achievement gaps, public health, and wealth inequality. Dr. Hoyt’s research appears in journals such as Psychological Science, Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Group 41 Processes & Intergroup Relations, and The Leadership Quarterly. She has published over 70 journal articles and book chapters and has co-edited three books. Dr. Hoyt is an associate editor at the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, is on the editorial boards at Leadership Quarterly and Sex Roles, and has served as a reviewer for over 45 journals. Susan E. Kogler Hill (PhD, University of Denver, 1974) is Professor Emeritus and former chair of the School of Communication at Cleveland State University. Her research and consulting have been in the areas of interpersonal and organizational communication. She specializes in group leadership, teamwork, empowerment, and mentoring. She is author of a text titled Improving Interpersonal Competence. In addition, she has written book chapters and published articles in many professional journals. Quinetta Roberson, PhD, is the John A. Hannah Distinguished Professor of Management and Psychology at Michigan State University. Prior to her current position, she was an Endowed Chair at Villanova University and a tenured professor at Cornell University. She has been a visiting scholar at universities on six continents and has more than 20 years of global experience in teaching courses, facilitating workshops, and advising organizations on diversity and inclusion, leadership, and talent management. Dr. Roberson has published over 40 scholarly journal articles and book chapters and edited a Handbook of Diversity in the Workplace (2013). Her research and consulting work focus on developing organizational capability and enhancing effectiveness through the strategic management of people, particularly diverse work teams, and is informed by her background in finance, having worked as a financial analyst and small business development consultant prior to obtaining her doctorate. She earned her PhD in organizational behavior from the University of Maryland and holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in finance. Stefanie Simon is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Siena College. She earned her PhD in social psychology from Tulane University and was the Robert A. Oden Jr. Postdoctoral Fellow for Innovation in the Liberal 42 Arts at Carleton College before joining the faculty at Siena. Her research centers on the psychology of diversity, with a focus on prejudice, discrimination, and leadership. In her work, she focuses on the perspective of the target of prejudice and discrimination, as well as the perspective of the perpetrator of prejudice and discrimination. She is particularly interested in how leaders of diverse groups can promote positive intergroup relations and reduce inequality in society. She has published articles in various psychology and leadership journals including The Leadership Quarterly, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Social Psychological and Personality Science, and Sex Roles. 43 44 1 INTRODUCTION Leadership is a highly sought-after and highly valued commodity. In the 25 years since the first edition of this book was published, the public has become increasingly captivated by the idea of leadership. People continue to ask themselves and others what makes good leaders. As individuals, they seek more information on how to become effective leaders. As a result, bookstore shelves are filled with popular books about leaders and how to be a leader. Many people believe that leadership is a way to improve their personal, social, and professional lives. Corporations seek those with leadership ability because they believe these individuals bring special assets to their organizations and, ultimately, improve the bottom line. Academic institutions throughout the country have responded by offering programs in leadership studies, including at the master’s and doctoral levels. In addition, leadership has gained the attention of researchers worldwide. Leadership research is increasing dramatically, and findings underscore that there is a wide variety of different theoretical approaches to explain the complexities of the leadership process (e.g., Bass, 2008; Bryman, 1992; Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson, & Uhl-Bien, 2011; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Dinh et al., 2014; J. Gardner, 1990; W. Gardner et al., 2020; Hickman, 2016; Mumford, 2006; Rost, 1991). Some researchers conceptualize leadership as a trait or as a behavior, whereas others view leadership from an information-processing perspective or relational standpoint. Leadership has been studied using both qualitative and quantitative methods in many contexts, including small groups, therapeutic groups, and large organizations. In recent years, this research has included experiments designed to explain how leadership influences follower attitudes and performance (Podsakoff & Podsakoff, 2019) in hopes of increasing the practical usefulness of leadership research. Collectively, the research findings on leadership provide a picture of a process that is far more sophisticated and complex than the often-simplistic view presented in some of the popular books on leadership. This book treats leadership as a complex process having multiple dimensions. Based on the research literature, this text provides an in-depth description and application of many different approaches to leadership. Our emphasis is on how theory can inform the practice of leadership. In this book, we describe each theory and then explain how the theory can be used in real situations. 45 LEADERSHIP DEFINED There are many ways to finish the sentence “Leadership is . . .” In fact, as Stogdill (1974, p. 7) pointed out in a review of leadership research, there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are people who have tried to define it. It is much like the words democracy, love, and peace. Although each of us intuitively knows what we mean by such words, the words can have different meanings for different people. As Box 1.1 shows, scholars and practitioners have attempted to define leadership for more than a century without universal consensus. Box 1.1 The Evolution of Leadership Definitions While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting a definition to the term has proved to be a challenging endeavor for scholars and practitioners alike. More than a century has lapsed since leadership became a topic of academic introspection, and definitions have evolved continuously during that period. These definitions have been influenced by many factors, from world affairs and politics to the perspectives of the discipline in which the topic is being studied. In a seminal work, Rost (1991) analyzed materials written from 1900 to 1990, finding more than 200 different definitions for leadership. His analysis provides a succinct history of how leadership has been defined through the last century: 46 1900–1929 Definitions of leadership appearing in the first three decades of the 20th century emphasized control and centralization of power with a common theme of domination. For example, at a conference on leadership in 1927, leadership was defined as “the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and [to] induce obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927, p. 124). 47 1930s In the 1930s, traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an emerging view of leadership as influence rather than domination. Leadership was also identified as the interaction of an individual’s specific personality traits with those of a group; it was noted that while the attitudes and activities of the many may be changed by the one, the many may also influence a leader. 48 1940s The group approach came into the forefront in the 1940s with leadership being defined as the behavior of an individual while involved in directing group activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same time, leadership by persuasion was distinguished from “drivership” or leadership by coercion (Copeland, 1942). 49 1950s Three themes dominated leadership definitions during the 1950s: continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what leaders do in groups; leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which defined leadership based on behavior of the leader; and effectiveness, in which leadership was defined by the ability to influence overall group effectiveness. 50 1960s Although a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw harmony among leadership scholars. The prevailing definition of leadership as behavior that influences people toward shared goals was underscored by Seeman (1960), who described leadership as “acts by persons which influence other persons in a shared direction” (p. 53). 51 1970s In the 1970s, the group focus gave way to the organizational behavior approach, where leadership became viewed as “initiating and maintaining groups or organizations to accomplish group or organizational goals” (Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns’s (1978) definition, however, was the most important concept of leadership to emerge: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers” (p. 425). 52 1980s The 1980s exploded with scholarly and popular works on the nature of leadership, bringing the topic to the apex of the academic and public consciousness. As a result, the number of definitions for leadership became a prolific stew with several persevering themes: Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still predominantly delivered the message that leadership is getting followers to do what the leader wants done. Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership definitions of the 1980s, influence was examined from every angle. To distinguish leadership from management, however, scholars insisted that leadership is noncoercive influence. Traits. Spurred by the national best seller In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982), the leadership-as-excellence movement brought leader traits back to the spotlight. As a result, many people’s understanding of leadership is based on a trait orientation. Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a movement defining leadership as a transformational process, stating that leadership occurs “when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p. 83). 53 1990s While debate continued through the 1990s as to whether leadership and management were separate processes, research emphasized the process of leadership with the focus shifting to followers. Several approaches emerged that examine how leaders influence a group of individuals to achieve a common goal, placing particular attention on the role of followers in the leadership process. Among these leadership approaches were servant leadership, which puts the leader in the role of a servant who utilizes “caring principles” focusing on followers’ needs to help followers become more autonomous, knowledgeable, and like servants themselves (Graham, 1991); followership, which puts a spotlight on followers and the role they play in the leadership process (Hollander, 1992); and adaptive leadership, in which leaders encourage followers to adapt by confronting and solving problems, challenges, and changes (Heifetz, 1994). 54 The 21st Century The turn of the 21st century brought the emergence of moral approaches to leadership, with authentic and ethical leadership gaining interest from researchers and executives. These new approaches also include leader humility and spirituality. Leadership theory and research also highlighted communication between leaders and followers, and as organizational populations became increasingly diverse, inclusive leadership was introduced. Among these approaches were authentic leadership, in which the authenticity of leaders and their leadership is emphasized (George, 2003); ethical leadership, which draws attention to the appropriate conduct of leaders in their personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers (Brown, Treviño, & Harrison, 2005); spiritual leadership, which focuses on leadership that utilizes values and sense of calling and membership to motivate followers (Fry, 2003); discursive leadership, which posits that leadership is created not so much through leader traits, skills, and behaviors, but through communication practices that are negotiated between leader and follower (Aritz, Walker, Cardon, & Zhang, 2017; Fairhurst, 2007); humble leadership, in which leaders’ humility allows them to show followers how to grow as a result of work (Owens & Hekman, 2012); and inclusive leadership, which focuses on diversity and leader behaviors that facilitate followers’ feeling of belongingness to the group while maintaining their individuality (Shore, Cleveland, & Sanchez, 2018). After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a common definition for leadership. Because of such factors as growing global influences and generational differences, leadership will continue to have different meanings for different people. The bottom line is that leadership is a complex concept for which a determined definition may long be in flux. 55 Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership In the past 60 years, as many as 65 different classification systems have been developed to define the dimensions of leadership (Fleishman et al., 1991). One such classification system, directly related to our discussion, is the scheme proposed by Bass (2008, pp. 11–20). He suggested that some definitions view leadership as the focus of group processes. From this perspective, the leader is at the center of group change and activity and embodies the will of the group. Another set of definitions conceptualizes leadership from a personality perspective, which suggests that leadership is a combination of special traits or characteristics that some individuals possess. These traits enable those individuals to induce others to accomplish tasks. Other approaches to leadership define it as an act or a behavior—the things leaders do to bring about change in a group. In addition, some define leadership in terms of the power relationship that exists between leaders and followers. From this viewpoint, leaders have power that they wield to effect change in others. Others view leadership as a transformational process that moves followers to accomplish more than is usually expected of them. Finally, some scholars address leadership from a skills perspective. This viewpoint stresses the capabilities (knowledge and skills) that make effective leadership possible. 56 Definition and Components Despite the multitude of ways in which leadership has been conceptualized, the following components can be identified as central to the phenomenon: (a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c) leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals. Based on these components, the following definition of leadership is used in this text: Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal. Defining leadership as a process means that it is not a trait or characteristic that resides in the leader, but rather a transactional event that occurs between the leader and the followers. Process implies that a leader affects and is affected by followers. It emphasizes that leadership is not a linear, one-way event, but rather an interactive event. When leadership is defined in this manner, it becomes available to everyone. It is not restricted to the formally designated leader in a group. Leadership involves influence. It is concerned with how the leader affects followers and the communication that occurs between leaders and followers (Ruben & Gigliotti, 2017). Influence is the sine qua non of leadership. Without influence, leadership does not exist. Leadership occurs in groups. Groups are the context in which leadership takes place. Leadership involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose. This can be a small task group, a community group, or a large group encompassing an entire organization. Leadership is about one individual influencing a group of others to accomplish common goals. Others (a group) are required for leadership to occur. Leadership training programs that teach people to lead themselves are not considered a part of leadership within the definition that is set forth in this discussion. Leadership includes attention to common goals. Leaders direct their energies toward individuals who are trying to achieve something together. By common, we mean that the leaders and followers have a mutual purpose. Attention to common goals gives leadership an ethical overtone because it stresses the need for leaders to work with followers to achieve selected goals. Stressing mutuality lessens the possibility that leaders might act toward followers in ways that are forced or unethical. It also increases the possibility that leaders and followers will work together toward a common good (Rost, 1991). Throughout this text, the people who engage in leadership will be called leaders, and those toward whom leadership is directed will be called followers. Both leaders and followers are involved together in the leadership process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders (Burns, 1978; Heller & Van Til, 1983; Hollander, 1992; Jago, 1982). An extended discussion of followership is provided in Chapter 12. Although leaders and followers are closely linked, it is the leader who often initiates the relationship, creates the communication linkages, and carries the burden for maintaining the relationship. In our discussion of leaders and followers, attention will be directed toward follower issues as well as leader issues. Leaders have an ethical responsibility to attend to the needs and concerns of followers. As Burns (1978) pointed out, discussions of leadership sometimes are viewed as elitist because of the implied power and importance often ascribed to leaders in the leader–follower relationship. Leaders are not above or better than followers. Leaders and followers must be understood in relation to each other (Hollander, 1992) and collectively (Burns, 1978). They are in the leadership relationship together—and are two sides of the same coin (Rost, 1991). 57 LEADERSHIP DESCRIBED In addition to definitional issues, it is important to discuss several other questions pertaining to the nature of leadership. In the following section, we will address questions such as how leadership as a trait differs from leadership as a process; how appointed leadership differs from emergent leadership; and how the concepts of power, coercion, morality, and management interact with leadership. 58 Trait Versus Process Leadership We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader” or “She is a natural leader.” These statements are commonly expressed by people who take a trait perspective toward leadership. The trait perspective suggests that certain individuals have special innate or inborn characteristics or qualities that make them leaders, and that it is these qualities that differentiate them from nonleaders. Some of the personal qualities used to identify leaders include unique physical factors (e.g., height), personality features (e.g., extraversion), and other characteristics (e.g., intelligence and fluency; Bryman, 1992). In Chapter 2, we will discuss a large body of research that has examined these personal qualities. To describe leadership as a trait is quite different from describing it as a process (Figure 1.1). The trait viewpoint conceptualizes leadership as a property or set of properties possessed in varying degrees by different people (Jago, 1982). This suggests that it resides in select people and restricts leadership to those who are believed to have special, usually inborn, talents. Description Figure 1.1 The Different Views of Leadership Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press. The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon that resides in the context of the interactions between leaders and followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a process, leadership can be observed in leader behaviors (Jago, 1982) and can be learned. The process definition of leadership is consistent with the definition of leadership that we have set forth in this chapter. 59 Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership Some people are leaders because of their formal position in an organization, whereas others are leaders because of the way other group members respond to them. These two common forms of leadership are called assigned leadership and emergent leadership. Leadership that is based on occupying a position in an organization is assigned leadership. Team leaders, plant managers, department heads, directors, and administrators are all examples of assigned leaders. Yet the person assigned to a leadership position does not always become the real leader in a particular setting. When others perceive an individual as the most influential member of a group or an organization, regardless of the individual’s title, the person is exhibiting emergent leadership. The individual acquires emergent leadership through other people in the organization who support and accept that individual’s behavior. This type of leadership is not assigned by position; rather, it emerges over a period through communication. Some of the positive communication behaviors that account for successful leader emergence include being verbally involved, being informed, seeking others’ opinions, initiating new ideas, and being firm but not rigid (Ellis & Fisher, 1994). Researchers have found that, in addition to communication behaviors, personality plays a role in leadership emergence. For example, Smith and Foti (1998) found that certain personality traits were related to leadership emergence in a sample of 160 male college students. The individuals who were more dominant, more intelligent, and more confident about their own performance (general self-efficacy) were more likely to be identified as leaders by other members of their task group. Although it is uncertain whether these findings apply to women as well, Smith and Foti suggested that these three traits could be used to identify individuals perceived to be emergent leaders. Leadership emergence may also be affected by gender-biased perceptions. In a study of 40 mixed-sex college groups, Watson and Hoffman (2004) found that women who were urged to persuade their task groups to adopt high-quality decisions succeeded with the same frequency as men with identical instructions. Although women were equally influential leaders in their groups, they were rated significantly lower than comparable men were on leadership. Furthermore, these influential women were also rated as significantly less likable than comparably influential men were. Another study found that men who spoke up to promote new ideas in teams were granted higher status compared to women who did so (McClean, Martin, Emich, & Woodruff, 2018). These results suggest that there continue to be barriers to women’s emergence as leaders in some settings. A unique perspective on leadership emergence is provided by social identity theory (Hogg, 2001). From this perspective, leadership emergence is the degree to which a person fits with the identity of the group as a whole. As groups develop over time, a group prototype also develops. Individuals emerge as leaders in the group when they become most like the group prototype. Being similar to the prototype makes leaders attractive to the group and gives them influence with the group. The leadership approaches we discuss in the subsequent chapters of this book apply equally to assigned leadership and emergent leadership. When a person is engaged in leadership, that person is a leader, whether leadership was assigned or emerged. This book focuses on the leadership process that occurs when any individual is engaged in influencing other group members in their efforts to reach a common goal. 60 Leadership and Power The concept of power is related to leadership because it is part of the influence process. Power is the capacity or potential to influence. People have power when they have the ability to affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses of action. Judges, doctors, coaches, and teachers are all examples of people who have the potential to influence us. When they do, they are using their power, the resource they draw on to effect change in us. Although there are no explicit theories in the research literature about power and leadership, power is a concept that people often associate with leadership. It is common for people to view leaders (both good and bad) and people in positions of leadership as individuals who wield power over others, and as a result, power is often thought of as synonymous with leadership. In addition, people are often intrigued by how leaders use their power. Understanding how power is used in leadership is instrumental as well in understanding the dark side of leadership, where leaders use their leadership to achieve their own personal ends and lead in toxic and destructive ways (Krasikova, Green, & LeBreton, 2013). Studying how famous leaders, such as Adolf Hitler or Alexander the Great, use power to effect change in others is titillating to many people because it underscores that power can indeed effectuate change and maybe if they had power they too could effectuate change. In her 2012 book The End of Leadership, Kellerman argues there has been a shift in leadership power during the last 40 years. Power used to be the domain of leaders, but that is diminishing and shifting to followers. Changes in culture have meant followers demand more from leaders, and leaders have responded. Access to technology has empowered followers, given them access to huge amounts of information, and made leaders more transparent. The result is a decline in respect for leaders and leaders’ legitimate power. In effect, followers have used information power to level the playing field. Power is no longer synonymous with leadership, and in the social contract between leaders and followers, leaders wield less power, according to Kellerman. For example, Posner (2015) examined volunteer leaders, such as those who sit on boards for nonprofit organizations, and found that while these individuals did not have positional authority in the organization, they were able to influence leadership. Volunteer leaders engaged more frequently in leadership behaviors than did paid leaders. In college courses today, the most widely cited research on power is French and Raven’s (1959) work on the bases of social power. In their work, they conceptualized power from the framework of a dyadic relationship that included both the person influencing and the person being influenced. French and Raven identified five common and important bases of power—referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and coercive—and Raven (1965) identified a sixth, information power (Table 1.1). Each of these bases of power increases a leader’s capacity to influence the attitudes, values, or behaviors of others. Table 1.1 Six Bases of Power 61 Referent Power Based on followers’ identification and liking for the leader. A teacher who is adored by students has referent power. Expert Power Based on followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. A tour guide who is knowledgeable about a foreign country has expert power. Legitimate Power Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge who administers sentences in the courtroom exhibits legitimate power. Reward Power Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. A supervisor who compliments employees who work hard is using reward power. Coercive Power Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coach who sits players on the bench for being late to practice is using coercive power. Information Derived from possessing knowledge that others want or need. A boss who has information Power regarding new criteria to decide employee promotion eligibility has information power. Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper & Row; and “Social Influence and Power,” by B. H. Raven, 1965, in I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current Studies in Social Psychology (pp. 371–382), New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. In organizations, there are two major kinds of power: position power and personal power. Position power, which includes legitimate, reward, coercive, and information power (Table 1.2), is the power a person derives from a particular office or rank in a formal organizational system. It is the influence capacity a leader derives from having higher status than the followers have. Position power allows leaders to attain central roles in organizations; for example, vice presidents and department heads have more power than staff personnel do because of the positions 62 they hold in the organization. In addition, leaders’ informal networks bring them greater social power, which separates leaders from nonleaders (Chiu, Balkundi, & Weinberg, 2017). Table 1.2 Types and Bases of Power Position Power Personal Power Legitimate Referent Reward Expert Coercive Information Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press. Personal power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable. When leaders act in ways that are important to followers, it gives leaders power. For example, some managers have power because their followers consider them to be good role models. Others have power because their followers view them as highly competent or considerate. In both cases, these managers’ power is ascribed to them by others, based on how they are seen in their relationships with others. Personal power includes referent and expert power (Table 1.2). In discussions of leadership, it is not unusual for leaders to be described as wielders of power, as individuals who dominate others. In these instances, power is conceptualized as a tool that leaders use to achieve their own ends. Contrary to this view of power, Burns (1978) emphasized power from a relationship standpoint. For Burns, power is not an entity that leaders use over others to achieve their own ends; instead, power occurs in relationships. It should be used by leaders and followers to promote their collective goals. In this text, our discussions of leadership treat power as a relational concern for both leaders and followers. We pay attention to how leaders work with followers to reach common goals. 63 Leadership and Coercion Coercive power is one of the specific kinds of power available to leaders. Coercion involves the use of force to effect change. To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may include manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment. Coercion often involves the use of threats, punishment, and negative reward schedules and is most often seen as a characteristic of the dark side of leadership. Classic examples of coercive leaders are Adolf Hitler in Germany, the Taliban leaders in Afghanistan, Jim Jones in Guyana, and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, each of whom used power and restraint to force followers to engage in extreme behaviors. At an extreme, coercion combines with other bullying and tyrannical behaviors known as abusive supervision (Tepper, 2007). It is important to distinguish between coercion and leadership because it allows us to separate out from our examples of leadership the behaviors of individuals such as Hitler, the Taliban, and Jones. In our discussions of leadership, coercive people are not used as models of ideal leadership. Our definition suggests that leadership is reserved for those who influence a group of individuals toward a common goal. Leaders who use coercion are interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in the wants and needs of followers. Using coercion runs counter to working with followers to achieve a common goal. 64 Leadership and Morality In considering the relationship of leadership and morality, let’s start with a simple question: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: Hitler’s rule in Germany could be considered a good example of leadership. Throughout the United States and around the world, in classroom discussions of leadership, the question about whether or not Adolf Hitler was a “great” leader inevitably comes up. Your response to this statement is intended to bring out whether your conceptualization of leadership includes a moral dimension or if you think that leadership is a neutral concept that treats leadership as amoral. If you answered agree to the statement, you probably come down on the side of thinking the phenomenon of leadership is neutral, or amoral. You might think it is obvious that Hitler was a leader because he was very charismatic and persuasive and his actions had a huge impact on Germany and the world. On the other hand, if you answered disagree, you most likely do not think of Hitler’s leadership as being in any way positive and that the notion of Hitler as a model of leadership is repugnant because you reserve the concept of leadership for nondestructive leaders who create change for the common good. That is, you believe leadership cannot be divorced from values; it is a moral phenomenon and has a moral component. For as long as leadership has been studied, the debate of whether or not leadership has a moral dimension has been a focus of leadership scholars. It is an important debate because it gets at the core of what we think the phenomenon of leadership actually entails. How we define leadership is central to how we talk about leadership, how we develop the components of leadership, how we research it, and how we teach it. There are two consistent trains of thought regarding the relationship of leadership and morality: Either leadership is a neutral process that is not guided or dependent on a value system that advances the common good, or leadership is a moral process that is guided and dependent on values promotive of the common good. Leadership Is a Neutral Process It is common for people to think of leadership as a neutral concept—one that is not tied to morality. From this perspective, leadership can be used for good ends or bad, and can be employed both by individuals who have worthy intentions and by those who do not. For example, moral leaders like Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, and Martin Luther King Jr. used leadership for good. On the other hand, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, and Idi Amin used leadership destructively. Common to all of these examples is that these leaders used leadership to influence followers to move toward and accomplish certain goals. The only difference is that some leaders used leadership in laudatory ways while others used leadership in highly destructive ways. A classic historical example of treating leadership as an amoral concept can be found in Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince (c. 1505; Nederman, 2019). In this book, Machiavelli philosophizes that moral values need not play a role in decision making; instead, leaders should concentrate on using power to achieve their goals. Their focus should be on the ends, or consequences, of their leadership and need not be about the means. Machiavelli endorsed leaders’ use of fear and deception, if necessary, to accomplish tasks; he was concerned with the pragmatics of what leaders do and not the rightness or wrongness of a leader’s actions (Nederman, 2019). There are an abundance of definitions of leadership, and most of these treat the concept of morality in a neutral fashion (e.g., Rost’s 1991 analysis of 221 definitions of leadership). These definitions do not require that leadership result in only positive outcomes. To use a specific example, Padilla (2013) defines leadership as “an organized group process with associated goals resulting in a set of outcomes” (p. 12), which involves a leader, followers, and contexts. From his perspective, leadership is value-neutral and can be used for constructive or 65 destructive ends. Padilla argues that Hitler should be considered a leader even though the outcome of his leadership was horrendously destructive. Leadership Is a Moral Process In contrast to describing leadership as a neutral process, some in the field of leadership argue (as we do in this chapter) that leadership has a value dimension—it is about influencing others to make changes to achieve a common good. From this perspective, Hitler, who thwarted the common good, cannot be considered a “great” leader. One of the first scholars to conceptualize leadership as a moral process was James MacGregor Burns in his book Leadership (1978). For Burns, leadership is about raising the motivations and moral levels of followers. He argued it is the responsibility of a leader to help followers assess their own values and needs in order to raise them to a higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress values such as liberty, justice, and equality (Ciulla, 2014). Burns (2003) argued that values are central to what leaders do. Expanding on Burns, Bass (1985) developed a model of leadership (see Chapter 8, “Transformational Leadership”) that delineated transforming leadership, a kind of leadership that affects the level of values of followers. Because it is difficult to use the term transformational leadership when describing a leader such as Adolf Hitler, the term pseudotransformational leadership was coined by Bass to refer to leaders who focus on their own personal goals over the common good and are self-consumed, exploitive, and power-oriented, with warped moral values (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). In contrast to pseudotransformational leadership, “real” or “ideal” transformational leadership is described as socialized leadership—leadership that is concerned with the collective good. Socialized leaders transcend their own interests for the sake of others (Howell & Avolio, 1993). Additionally, morals have a central role in two established leadership theories, authentic leadership and servant leadership. Authentic leadership (see Chapter 9) is an extension of transformational leadership, stressing that leaders do what is “right” and “good” for their followers and society. They understand their own values, place followers’ needs above their own, and work with followers to align their interests in order to create a greater common good. Similarly, servant leadership has a strong moral dimension. It makes altruism the central component of the leadership process and frames leadership around the principle of caring for others. Within this paradigm, leaders are urged to not dominate, direct, or control others; they are urged to give up control rather than seek control. Referring back to the question about whether you agree or disagree that Hitler is an example of leadership, your answer has to be predicated on what you think leadership is. If you think leadership is a neutral process that does not have a moral requirement, then Hitler is an example of leadership. On the other hand, if you think leadership includes ethical considerations such as elevating the morals, values, and goals of followers to make more principled judgments (Burns, 1978), then Hitler is not an example of leadership. In this view, he was nothing more than a despotic, Machiavellian autocrat and an evil dictator responsible for the imprisonment, abuse, and execution of millions of innocent people and the unprovoked origin of World War II—the deadliest armed conflict in history. 66 Leadership and Management Leadership is a process that is similar to management in many ways. Leadership involves influence, as does management. Leadership entails working with people, which management entails as well. Leadership is concerned with effective goal accomplishment, and so is management. In general, many of the functions of management are activities that are consistent with the definition of leadership we set forth at the beginning of this chapter. But leadership is also different from management. Whereas the study of leadership can be traced back to Aristotle, management emerged around the turn of the 20th century with the advent of our industrialized society. Management was created as a way to reduce chaos in organizations, to make them run more effectively and efficiently. The primary functions of management, as first identified by Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling. These functions are still representative of the field of management today. In a book that compared the functions of management with the functions of leadership, Kotter (1990) argued that they are quite dissimilar (Figure 1.2). The overriding function of management is to provide order and consistency to organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement. Management is about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and constructive change. As illustrated in Figure 1.2, the major activities of management are played out differently than the activities of leadership. Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7–8) contended that both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper. For example, if an organization has strong management without leadership, the outcome can be stifling and bureaucratic. Conversely, if an organization has strong leadership without management, the outcome can be meaningless or misdirected change for change’s sake. To be effective, organizations need to nourish both competent management and skilled leadership. Figure 1.2 Functions of Management and Leadership Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press. Many scholars, in addition to Kotter (1990), argue that leadership and management are distinct constructs. For example, Bennis and Nanus (2007) maintained that there is a significant difference between the two. To manage means to accomplish activities and master routines, whereas to lead means to influence others and create visions for change. Bennis and Nanus made the distinction very clear in their frequently quoted sentence, “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (p. 221). Rost (1991) has also been a proponent of distinguishing between leadership and management. He contended that leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a unidirectional authority relationship. 67 Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of developing mutual purposes, management is directed toward coordinating activities to get a job done. Leaders and followers work together to create real change, whereas managers and subordinates join forces to sell goods and services (Rost, 1991, pp. 149–152). In a recent study, Simonet and Tett (2012) explored how best to conceptualize leadership and management by having 43 experts identify the overlap and differences between leadership and management in regard to 63 different competencies. They found a large number of competencies (22) descriptive of both leadership and management (e.g., productivity, customer focus, professionalism, and goal setting), but they also found several unique descriptors for each. Specifically, they found leadership was distinguished by motivating intrinsically, creative thinking, strategic planning, tolerance of ambiguity, and being able to read people, and management was distinguished by rule orientation, short-term planning, motivating extrinsically, orderliness, safety concerns, and timeliness. Approaching the issue from a narrower viewpoint, Zaleznik (1977) went so far as to argue that leaders and managers themselves are distinct, and that they are basically different types of people. He contended that managers are reactive and prefer to work with people to solve problems but do so with low emotional involvement. They act to limit choices. Zaleznik suggested that leaders, on the other hand, are emotionally active and involved. They seek to shape ideas instead of responding to them and act to expand the available options to solve long-standing problems. Leaders change the way people think about what is possible. Although there are clear differences between management and leadership, the two constructs overlap. When managers are involved in influencing a group to meet its goals, they are involved in leadership. When leaders are involved in planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, they are involved in management. Both processes involve influencing a group of individuals toward goal attainment. For purposes of our discussion in this book, we focus on the leadership process. In our examples and case studies, we treat the roles of managers and leaders similarly and do not emphasize the differences between them. 68 PLAN OF THE BOOK This book is user-friendly. It is based on substantive theories but is written to emphasize practice and application. Each chapter in the book follows the same format. The first section of each chapter briefly describes the leadership approach and discusses various research studies applicable to the approach. The second section of each chapter evaluates the approach and how it works, highlighting its strengths and criticisms. Special attention is given to how the approach contributes or fails to contribute to an overall understanding of the leadership process. Finally, beginning with Chapter 2, each chapter has an application section with case studies and a leadership questionnaire that measures the reader’s leadership style to prompt discussion of how the approach can be applied in ongoing organizations. Each chapter ends with a summary and references. 69 Case Study Case 1.1 is provided to illustrate different dimensions of leadership as well as allow you to examine your own perspective on what defines a leader and leadership. At the end of the case, you will find questions that will help in analyzing the case. Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . . When asked by a sports editor for the Lanthorn, Grand Valley State University’s student publication, what three historical figures he would most like to have dinner with, Morris Berger, the newly announced offensive coordinator for the GVSU Lakers football team, responded Adolf Hitler, John F. Kennedy, and Christopher Columbus. “This is probably not going to get a good review,” he said, “but I’m going to say Adolf Hitler. It was obviously very sad and he had bad motives, but the way he was able to lead was second-to-none. How he rallied a group and a following, I want to know how he did that. Bad intentions of course, but you can’t deny he wasn’t a great leader” (Voss, 2020). When the article ran, it caused a stir. Shortly after, the writer, Kellen Voss, was asked by someone in the university’s athletics department to alter the online story to remove those comments. The Lanthorn initially complied, but then changed course and added the full interview back in. Once the Lanthorn republished the quote, the story went viral. It was covered in the Washington Post, on ESPN, and in Sports Illustrated and even ended up in the monologue of The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon (Boatner, 2020). In addition to public dismay, GVSU’s Hillel chapter, a Jewish campus organization, spoke out strongly against Coach Berger after his comments were made public. “It is unfortunate to see a member of our Grand Valley community glorify the Holocaust, a period that brought such destruction and travesty to the world,” the group posted to its Facebook page. “We appreciate the university’s swift response and we will continue to partner with them to educate our campus community and provide a safe and inclusive environment for all students” (Colf, 2020). Seven days after the article appeared, GVSU announced that Coach Berger, who had been suspended by the university, had resigned. Matt Mitchell, the team’s head coach, gave a statement: “Nothing in our background and reference checks revealed anything that would have suggested the unfortunate controversy that has unfolded,” Coach Mitchell said. “This has been a difficult time for everyone. I accepted Coach Berger’s resignation in an effort for him to move on and for us to focus on the team and our 2020 season” (Wallner, 2020). In another statement, Coach Berger said he was disappointed to leave, but added, “I do not want to be a distraction to these kids, this great university, or Coach Mitchell as they begin preparations for the upcoming season” (Wallner, 2020). Coach Berger also issued a more personal apology in a Twitter post: I failed myself, my parents, and this university—the answer I attempted to give does not align with the values instilled in me by my parents, nor [does it] represent what I stand for or believe in—I mishandled the answer, and fell way short of the mark. For the last 11-years, I worked tirelessly for each and every opportunity and was excited to be a Laker. Throughout my life, I have taken great pride in that responsibility—as a teacher, mentor, coach, rolemodel, and member of the community. It is my hope that you will consider accepting my apology. 70 I recognize that I cannot undo the hurt and the embarrassment I have caused. But I can control the way I choose to positively learn from my mistake moving forward—as I work to regain the trust and respect of everyone that I have let down. (Berger, 2020) A few weeks later, GVSU announced that it would increase its curriculum around the Holocaust and Native American history. “We will use this moment to work diligently toward institutional systemic change that creates a healthier campus climate for all,” the university’s president, Philomena Mantella, said (Colf, 2020). 71 Questions 1. Who are the leaders in this situation? How would you describe their actions as leaders based on the definition of leadership in this chapter? 2. Do you think it was wrong for Coach Berger to cite Hitler as a “great leader”? 3. What is your reaction to Coach Berger resigning one week after signing a contract to coach at GVSU? 4. Based on our discussion of morality and leadership in this chapter, would you say Coach Berger’s comments are based on leadership as a neutral process or on leadership as a process that has a moral dimension? Why? 5. What does the university’s response suggest regarding how the university views leadership? 6. If you were the president of the university and you were asked to define leadership, how would you define it? 7. Bobby Knight was a coach who was known to use questionable leadership tactics. Do you think Coach Berger would have been safe to ask Coach Knight to dinner? Why? 72 Leadership Instrument The meaning of leadership is complex and includes many dimensions. For some people, leadership is a trait or an ability, for others it is a skill or a behavior, and for still others it is a relationship or a process. In reality, leadership probably includes components of all of these dimensions. Each dimension explains a facet of leadership. Which dimension seems closest to how you think of leadership? How would you define leadership? Answers to these questions are important because how you think about leadership will strongly influence how you practice leadership. In this section, the Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire is provided as an example of a measure that can be used to assess how you define and view leadership. Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire Purpose: To identify how you view leadership and to explore your perceptions of different aspects of leadership Instructions: Using the scale below, indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about leadership. Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 73 5 = Strongly agree 1. When I think of leadership, I think of a person with special personality traits. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Much like playing the piano or tennis, leadership is a learned ability. 1 2 3 4 5 3. Leadership requires knowledge and know-how. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Leadership is about what people do rather than who they are. 1 2 3 4 5 5. Followers can influence the leadership process as much as leaders. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Leadership is about the process of influencing others. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Some people are born to be leaders. 1 2 3 4 5 8. Some people have the natural ability to be leaders. 1 2 3 4 5 9. The key to successful leadership is having the right skills. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Leadership is best described by what leaders do. 1 2 3 4 5 11. Leaders and followers share in the leadership process. 1 2 3 4 5 12. Leadership is a series of actions directed toward positive ends. 1 2 3 4 5 13. A person needs to have certain traits to be an effective leader. 1 2 3 4 5 14. Everyone has the capacity to be a leader. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Effective leaders are competent in their roles. 1 2 3 4 5 16. The essence of leadership is performing tasks and dealing with people. 1 2 3 4 5 17. Leadership is about the common purposes of leaders and followers. 1 2 3 4 5 18. Leadership does not rely on the leader alone but is a process involving the leader, followers, and the situation. 1 2 3 4 5 19. People become great leaders because of their traits. 1 2 3 4 5 74 20. People can develop the ability to lead. 1 2 3 4 5 21. Effective leaders have competence and knowledge. 1 2 3 4 5 22. Leadership is about how leaders work with people to accomplish goals. 1 2 3 4 5 23. Effective leadership is best explained by the leader–follower relationship. 1 2 3 4 5 24. Leaders influence and are influenced by followers. 1 2 3 4 5 75 Scoring 1. Sum scores on items 1, 7, 13, and 19 (trait emphasis) 2. Sum scores on items 2, 8, 14, and 20 (ability emphasis) 3. Sum scores on items 3, 9, 15, and 21 (skill emphasis) 4. Sum scores on items 4, 10, 16, and 22 (behavior emphasis) 5. Sum scores on items 5, 11, 17, and 23 (relationship emphasis) 6. Sum scores on items 6, 12, 18, and 24 (process emphasis) 76 Total Scores 1. Trait emphasis: ____________________ 2. Ability emphasis: __________________ 3. Skill emphasis: ____________________ 4. Behavior emphasis: _______________ 5. Relationship emphasis: ____________ 6. Process emphasis: _________________ 77 Scoring Interpretation The scores you received on this questionnaire provide information about how you define and view leadership. The emphasis you give to the various dimensions of leadership has implications for how you approach the leadership process. For example, if your highest score is for trait emphasis, it suggests that you emphasize the role of the leader and the leader’s special gifts in the leadership process. However, if your highest score is for relationship emphasis, it indicates that you think leadership is centered on the communication between leaders and followers, rather than on the unique qualities of the leader. By comparing your scores, you can gain an understanding of the aspects of leadership that you find most important and least important. The way you think about leadership will influence how you practice leadership. 78 Summary Leadership is a topic with universal appeal; in the popular press and academic research literature, much has been written about leadership. Despite the abundance of writing on the topic, leadership has presented a major challenge to practitioners and researchers interested in understanding the nature of leadership. It is a highly valued phenomenon that is very complex. Through the years, leadership has been defined and conceptualized in many ways. The component common to nearly all classifications is that leadership is an influence process that assists groups of individuals toward goal attainment. Specifically, in this book leadership is defined as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal. Because both leaders and followers are part of the leadership process, it is important to address issues that confront followers as well as issues that confront leaders. Leaders and followers should be understood in relation to each other. In prior research, many studies have focused on leadership as a trait. The trait perspective suggests that certain people in our society have special inborn qualities that make them leaders. This view restricts leadership to those who are believed to have special characteristics. In contrast, the approach in this text suggests that leadership is a process that can be learned, and that it is available to everyone. Two common forms of leadership are assigned and emergent. Assigned leadership is based on a formal title or position in an organization. Emergent leadership results from what one does and how one acquires support from followers. Leadership, as a process, applies to individuals in both assigned roles and emergent roles. Related to leadership is the concept of power, the potential to influence. There are two major kinds of power: position and personal. Position power, which is much like assigned leadership, is the power an individual derives from having a title in a formal organizational system. It includes legitimate, reward, information, and coercive power. Personal power comes from followers and includes referent and expert power. Followers give it to leaders because followers believe leaders have something of value. Treating power as a shared resource is important because it de-emphasizes the idea that leaders are power wielders. While coercion has been a common power brought to bear by many individuals in charge, it should not be viewed as ideal leadership. Our definition of leadership stresses using influence to bring individuals toward a common goal, while coercion involves the use of threats and punishment to induce change in followers for the sake of the leaders. Coercion runs counter to leadership because it does not treat leadership as a process that emphasizes working with followers to achieve shared objectives. There are two trains of thought regarding leadership and morality. Some argue that leadership is a neutral process that can be used by leaders for good and bad ends and treats Hitler as an example of strong leadership. Others contend that leadership is a moral process that involves influencing others to achieve a common good. From this perspective Hitler would not be an example of leadership. Leadership and management are different concepts that overlap. They are different in that management traditionally focuses on the activities of planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, whereas leadership emphasizes the general influence process. According to some researchers, management is concerned with creating order and stability, whereas leadership is about adaptation and constructive change. Other researchers go so far as to argue that managers and leaders are different types of people, with managers being more reactive and less emotionally involved and leaders being more proactive and more emotionally involved. The overlap between leadership and management is centered on how both involve influencing a group of individuals in goal attainment. In this book, we discuss leadership as a complex process. Based on the research literature, we describe selected approaches to leadership and assess how they can be used to improve leadership in real situations. 79 Descriptions of Images and Figures Back to Figure Trait definition of leadership: Leadership is defined by the traits such as height, intelligence, extraversion, fluency, and other traits that a leader with followers possesses. Process definition of leadership: Leadership is defined as the interaction between leader and followers. 80 81 2 TRAIT APPROACH 82 DESCRIPTION Of interest to scholars throughout the 20th century, the trait approach was one of the first systematic attempts to study leadership. In the early 20th century, leadership traits were studied to determine what made certain people great leaders. The theories that were developed were called “great man” theories because they focused on identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social, political, and military leaders (e.g., Catherine the Great, Mohandas Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc, and Napoleon Bonaparte). It was believed that people were born with these traits, and that only the “great” people possessed them. During this time, research concentrated on determining the specific traits that clearly differentiated leaders from followers (Bass, 2008; Jago, 1982). In the mid-20th century, the trait approach was challenged by research that questioned the universality of leadership traits. In a major review, Stogdill (1948) suggested that no consistent set of traits differentiated leaders from nonleaders across a variety of situations. An individual with leadership traits who was a leader in one situation might not be a leader in another situation. Rather than being a quality that individuals possess, leadership was reconceptualized as a relationship between people in a social situation. Personal factors related to leadership continued to be important, but researchers contended that these factors were to be considered as relative to the requirements of the situation. The trait approach has generated much interest among researchers for its explanation of how traits influence leadership (Bryman, 1992). For example, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) went so far as to claim that effective leaders are actually distinct types of people. Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986) found that traits were strongly associated with individuals’ perceptions of leadership. More recently, Dinh and Lord (2012) examined the relationship between leadership effectiveness and followers’ perception of leadership traits. The trait approach has earned new interest through the current emphasis given by many researchers to visionary and charismatic leadership (see Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Jacquart & Antonakis, 2015; Nadler & Tushman, 2012; Zaccaro, 2007; Zaleznik, 1977). Charismatic leadership catapulted to the forefront of public attention with the 2008 election of the United States’ first African American president, Barack Obama, who is perceived by many to be charismatic, among many other attributes. In a study to determine what distinguishes charismatic leaders from others, Jung and Sosik (2006) found that charismatic leaders consistently possess traits of self-monitoring, engagement in impression management, motivation to attain social power, and motivation to attain self-actualization. In short, the trait approach is alive and well. It began with an emphasis on identifying the qualities of great persons, shifted to include the impact of situations on leadership, and, currently, has shifted back to reemphasize the critical role of traits in effective leadership. When discussing the trait approach, it is important to define what is meant by traits. Traits refer to a set of distinctive characteristics, qualities, or attributes that describe a person. They are inherent and relatively unchanging over time. Taken together, traits are the internal factors that comprise our personality and make us unique. Because traits are derived from our personality and are fundamentally fixed, this chapter will not emphasize how people can use this approach to develop or change their leadership. Instead, the focus of the chapter will be on identifying leaders’ traits and overall role of traits in leadership. While research on traits spanned the entire 20th century, a good overview of the approach is found in two surveys completed by Stogdill (1948, 1974). In his first survey, Stogdill analyzed and synthesized more than 124 trait studies conducted between 1904 and 1947. In his second study, he analyzed another 163 studies completed between 1948 and 1970. By taking a closer look at each of these reviews, we can obtain a clearer picture of how individuals’ traits contribute to the leadership process. Stogdill’s first survey identified a group of important leadership traits that were related to how individuals in various groups became leaders. His results showed that an average individual in a leadership role is different from an average group member with regard to the following eight traits: intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability. 83 The findings of Stogdill’s first survey also indicated that an individual does not become a leader solely because that individual possesses certain traits. Rather, the traits that leaders possess must be relevant to situations in which the leader is functioning. As stated earlier, leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in another situation. Findings showed that leadership was not a passive state but resulted from a working relationship between the leader and other group members. This research marked the beginning of a new approach to leadership research that focused on leadership behaviors and leadership situations. Stogdill’s second survey, published in 1974, analyzed 163 new studies and compared the findings of these studies to the findings he had reported in his first survey. The second survey was more balanced in its description of the role of traits and leadership. Whereas the first survey implied that leadership is determined principally by situational factors and not traits, the second survey argued more moderately that both traits and situational factors were determinants of leadership. In essence, the second survey validated the original trait idea that a leader’s characteristics are indeed a part of leadership. Similar to the first survey, Stogdill’s second survey identified traits that were positively associated with leadership. The list included the following 10 characteristics: 1. Drive for responsibility and task completion 2. Vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals 3. Risk-taking and originality in problem solving 4. Drive to exercise initiative in social situations 5. Self-confidence and sense of personal identity 6. Willingness to accept consequences of decision and action 7. Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress 8. Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay 9. Ability to influence other people’s behavior 10. Capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand Mann (1959) conducted a similar study that examined more than 1,400 findings regarding traits and leadership in small groups, but he placed less emphasis on how situational factors influenced leadership. Although tentative in his conclusions, Mann suggested that certain traits could be used to distinguish leaders from nonleaders. His results identified leaders as strong in the following six traits: intelligence, masculinity, adjustment, dominance, extraversion, and conservatism. Lord et al. (1986) reassessed Mann’s (1959) findings using a more sophisticated procedure called meta-analysis and found that intelligence, masculinity, and dominance were significantly related to how individuals perceived leaders. From their findings, the authors argued strongly that traits could be used to make discriminations consistently across situations between leaders and nonleaders. Both of these studies were conducted during periods in American history where male leadership was prevalent in most aspects of business and society. In Chapter 15, we explore more contemporary research regarding the role of gender in leadership, and we look at whether traits such as masculinity and dominance still bear out as important factors in distinguishing between leaders and nonleaders. Yet another review argued for the importance of leadership traits: Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991, p. 59) contended that “it is unequivocally clear that leaders are not like other people.” From a qualitative synthesis of earlier research, Kirkpatrick and Locke postulated that leaders differ from nonleaders on six traits: drive, motivation, integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge. According to these writers, individuals can be born with these traits, they can learn them, or both. It is these six traits that make up the “right stuff” for leaders. Kirkpatrick and Locke asserted that leadership traits make some people different from others, and this difference should be recognized as an important part of the leadership process. In the 1990s, researchers began to investigate the leadership traits associated with “social intelligence,” which is characterized as the ability to understand one’s own and others’ feelings, behaviors, and thoughts and act appropriately (Marlowe, 1986). Zaccaro (2002) defined social intelligence as having such capacities as social awareness, social acumen, self-monitoring, and the ability to select and enact the best response given the contingencies of the situation and social environment. A number of empirical studies showed these capacities to be 84 a key trait for effective leaders. Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (2017) included such social abilities in the categories of leadership traits they outlined as important leadership attributes (Table 2.1). Table 2.1 Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics Stogdill (1948) Mann (1959) Stogdill (1974) Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986) Kirkpatrick and Zaccaro, Kemp, Locke (1991) and Bader (2017) intelligence intelligence achievement intelligence drive cognitive ability alertness masculinity persistence masculinity motivation extraversion insight adjustment insight dominance integrity conscientiousness responsibility dominance initiative confidence emotional stability initiative extraversion self-confidence cognitive ability openness persistence conservatism responsibility task knowledge agreeableness selfconfidence sociability cooperativeness motivation tolerance social intelligence influence self-monitoring sociability emotional intelligence problem solving Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. P. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper and Row; Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader (2004). Table 2.1 provides a summary of the traits and characteristics that were identified by researchers from the trait approach. It illustrates clearly the breadth of traits related to leadership. Table 2.1 also shows how difficult it is to select certain traits as definitive leadership traits; some of the traits appear in several of the survey studies, whereas others appear in only one or two studies. Regardless of the lack of precision in Table 2.1, however, it represents a general convergence of research regarding which traits are leadership traits. Over the past 10 years, i…

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS

CLICK THE BUTTON TO MAKE YOUR ORDER

error: Content is protected !!