In contrast, a "selling and coaching" (S2) approach is demanded when the leader knows the follower may be uncertain about how to perform the task, but the subordinate has a high level of commitment, as in the case of an intern or a new hire. S2 is a motivational or mentoring approach. The employee craves direction, but will be motivated more by personality and praise than 'carrots and sticks' versus the S1 situation (Straker 2004).
A "participating/supporting" leadership situation (S3) is when the leader knows that the employees can complete the task but the manager wants more of an emotional investment or a higher level of excellence. An example of this approach might be a manager of a fast food establishment with a teenage, low-skilled workforce. The employees can do the job, but needs more motivation to perform at a high level rather than task-specific direction. Finally, an (S4) situation of "delegating and observing" is when a leader and a follower both have a high level of competence and commitment to the task. The leader is supportive, as in a S2 situation, but does not need to constantly watch and monitor the behavior of the follower (Straker 2004).
Situational leadership advocates believe that leadership relationships are highly dependent upon the environment, in contrast to transformational leadership where the leader is seen as having a great deal of power to charismatically transform the organization. In some instances, a transformational approach must be stressed, as in the case of S2 and S4 relationships. In other instances, some aspect of transactional or purely mercenary motivational strategies might be required. An S1 individual might only be motivated by pay and fear of being fired, while an S3 type of employee, although competent, might also need some stricter penalties to feel motivated to perform, not just inspiration.
Not even transactional leadership advocates believe that emotional qualities alone can spur employees on to high levels of performance -- however, in contrast to situational leadership advocates, they would stress that even the most purely functional relationships can benefit from the employee having a stronger sense of mission and enthusiasm....
If the employee answering the phone believes that he or she is in a transforming organization, the subordinate will project a better image for the company than an employee who has been instructed to perform his task in an S1, highly directed fashion.
While trait-based views of leadership traditionally suggested that leadership is a quality found only in a few, and even transformational and situational leadership theorists tend to place a strong stress upon the leader's control of the situation, new theories of motivation have shifted the emphasis to the needs of subordinates (Yukl, 2006). The DISC personality theory assessment emphasizes the different motivational profiles of employees. Dominant individuals wish to lead and dominate the situation and are motivated by a need for power; Influencer types are motivated by the drive to associate with one another and for approval; Steady individuals are social but are driven by the need to form associations; Conscientious types crave order and enjoy completing tasks and following the rules. Understanding the personality, not the situation, is of paramount importance in DISC leadership theory: the focus is on the motivational needs of the subordinate, in contrast to the profile of the leader. Different types of rewards should be offered to different types of people. DISC types may be determined by individual assessment or profiling the typical employee within a particular occupation.
Avolio, B.J., & Yammarino, F.J. (2002). Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead. San Diego, CA: Emerald.
DISC. (2010). Retrieved July 1, 2010 at http://www.discprofile.com/
Homrig, Mark a. (2001, December 21).Transformational leadership. Retrieved July 1, 2010 at http://leadership.au.af.mil/documents/homrig.htm
Straker, David. (2004). Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory. Changing Minds. Retrieved July 1, 2010 at http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/styles/situational_leadership_hersey_blanchard.htm
Tichy, N.M., & Devanna, M.A. (1990). The transformational leader. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Wren, J.T. (1995). The leader's companion: Insights on leadership through the ages. New York:
The Free Press.
Wren, D.A. (2004). The history of management thought (5th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
However, Avery points out an important shift in managerial leadership styles. She sees it as a shift in the balance of power within an organization, rather than a shift in the way managers perform their daily tasks. She states, leadership involves letting go of conventional notions of control, order, and hierarchy, replacing them with trust and an acceptance of continual change, chaos, and respect for diverse members of the
Leadership Models Compare servant leadership to two other leadership models. Servant, transformational, and authentic leadership have common similarities and differences. The mode of application, style they have used and implementation approach is some of the things that differentiate the three leadership models (Northouse, 2010). Organizational theorists developed the concept of servant leadership. These theorists argue that leadership must meet the primary needs of others. This leadership theory focuses on understanding the
Part 1 History of Modern Leadership Studies Since 1900 The evolution of modern leadership studies begins with the Great Man Theory, which originated in the 19th century and carried over into the 20th century. It came about as people looked at the world’s greatest leaders who stood out from the run of the mill individuals of their time and made a significant difference upon the course of human history. Individuals like George
Conclusion It is difficult to show which theory works best in practice, as every company has a unique environment and workforce (Daft, 2004). However, few would argue that Theory X is an outdated leadership style that does not promote success. According to Kopelman et al. (2008): "At the heart of McGregor's argument is the notion that managers' assumptions/attitudes represent, potentially, self-fulfilling prophecies. The manager who believes that people are inherently lazy
Leadership Theories Different Ways of Organizing in Supervision and Management Organizing constitutes a crucial management function. It is essentially concerned with task allocation, division of labor, chain of command, lines of authority and communication, delegation, span of control, as well as supervision and coordination (Shafiee, Razminia & Zeymaran, 2016). The manner in which these processes are organized significantly influences organizational effectiveness and efficiency. It determines how quick or slow decisions are made
Leadership For any company or organization to function smoothly, there must be some elaborate management system in place. This is crucial as proper leadership would focus on guiding the company or organization through teamwork projects and is needed to keep everyone in the team motivated and willing to keep working no matter what. Understanding the leadership concepts and the different leadership theories makes those in charge better leaders. Some of