psychology school of university of east london, school of psychology, romford road, london e15 4lz,...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Leadership
BSc Psychology
Occupational Psychology module
Jonathan Passmore
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Learning outcomes
• At the end of this session and with additional reading you will be able to– describe a selection of popular theories of
leadership– critically evaluate their conceptual
approaches– critically evaluate their utility in the
organisational setting– understand one model in detail.
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
What have these five got in common?
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Definition
• Leadership is the process whereby one person influences others to work towards a goal
(Yulk and Vanfleet,1992)
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
A brief history of leadership theory
• Types: ‘Great men’• Traits: Behavioural Psychology• Contingency models: Situational factors• Transactional models• Transformational models• Distributed leadership models• Complexity models
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Trait Approaches to leadership
• Lord et al (1986)– intelligent– extrovert– dominant– masculine– conservative– better adjusted
• Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991)– intelligent– desire to lead– energy and ambition– self confidence– honesty and integrity– knowledge
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Style approaches to leadership -Lowin (1968)
• Autocratic– direction/obedience– close supervision– control and
accountability– absence of
participation and feedback
• Democratic– open
communication/positive attitudes
– self direction/self control– conflict is confronted– group based problem
solving – consensus rather than
coercion
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Contingency leadership models
• Fiedler, (1967), Trait contingency model
• Vroom & Yetton, (1973): Normative contingency model
• House & Mitchell, (1974) Path-Goal model
• Hersey & Blanchard, (1969) Situational leadership model
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Kotter’s comparison of transactional and transformational leadership
Transactional leadership (management)
Transformational (leadership)
Creating agenda Planning & budgeting: developing a plan – a detailed map of how to achieve the results
Establishing direction:developing direction – a vision which describes a future state along with a strategy
Developing HR Organising & staffing:which individual best fits each job and what part of the plan fits each individual
Aligning people:a major communication challenge getting people to understand and believe the vision
Execution Controlling & problem solving: monitoring results; identifying deviations from the plan and solving the ‘problems’
Motivating & inspiring: satisfying basic human needs for achievement, belonging, recognition, self esteem, a sense of control
Outcomes Produces degree of predictability & order
Produces changes – often to dramatic degree
Source: Kotter, J. A. (1990)
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Emotional Intelligence – Leadership Styles
VISIONARY COACHING AFFILIATIVE DEMOCRATIC PACE-SETTING
COMMANDING
ImpactMoves towards shared dreams
Connects people with organisational
goals
Develops harmony between people
Values input. Gains commitment
Meets challenging goals
Soothes fears + uncertainty
CircumstancesWhen changes need a new vision or clear direction
To improve individuals’ performance – building long term capacity
To heal rifts in teams. Motivate + strengthen connections
To build consensus. Get input from employees
To urge top results from a competent team
To kick start during a crisis or with stuck problem
Goleman, D. et al (2002)
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Leaders
Results
Members
Commitment(External and internal)
More good things happen; fewer bad things happen.
Michael Fullan
Leading in a Culture of Change
Understanding Change
Relationship Building
Moral Purpose
Coherence Making
Knowledge Creation & Sharing
HO
PEE
NE
RG
Y
ENTHUSIASM
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Enabling Performance
•Saying yes to the mess
•Encouraging connectivity
•Fostering diversity
•Challenging habits and assumptions
•Supporting initiative
•Reducing power differentials
•Keeping people motivated
Far from certainty
Far from agreement
Close toagreement
Near to certainty
Managing Performance
•Technical/rational decision making
•Simple structures
•Effective procedures
•Monitoring/co-ordinating
•Providing directionAfter Ralph Stacey
The Context of Leadership
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Top 10 de-railing behaviours
• Arrogance: they are right everyone else is wrong
• Melodrama: they want to be the centre of attention
• Volatility: their mood swings creates performance swings
• Excessive caution: they cant make key decisions
• Habitual distrust: they focus on the negative all the time
Furnham 2005
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Top 10 de-railing behaviours II
• Aloofness: they disengage and disconnect staff
• Eccentricity: they think its fun to be different
• Passive resistance: their silence is misinterpreted as agreement
• Perfectionism: they get little things right, even if big things go wrong
• Eagerness to please: they stress being popular matters most
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Hogan scale
Enthusiastic - Volatile
Careful - Cautious
Charming - Manipulative
Confident- Arrogant
Shrewd - Mistrusted
Independent - detached
Diligent - Perfectionist
Dutiful - dependent
For Hogan Development Survey, see Fico, et al 2008
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Complexity leadership
Complex
Complicated
Simple
Chaotic Disorder
Snowden & Boone, 2007
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Understanding complex systems
• Complex systems have the following characteristics:– Large number of interacting elements– Interactions are non-linear: small things can have
big impacts– Solutions cant be imposed: they emerge– System has a history which influences present– System appears simple & ordered, but is complex &
at times disordered– Constant change– Stakeholders have multiple identifies
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Complexity leadership
Complex
Complicated
Simple
Chaotic Disorder
Probe, sense, respond
Sense, analyse, respond
Sense, categorise, respond
Act, sense, respond
Snowden & Boone, 2007
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Implications for leadership theory
• In Simple domains: – most people can manage
• In Complicated domains leaders need :– competencies (learned skills) to succeed– to be able to identify the key people to solve problems– to provide opportunities for diverse voices to communicate &
share knowledge– to make decisions when demanded
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Implications for leadership theory II
• In Complex domains leaders need to :– rely on natural abilities– Understand the context– Live with paradox and ambiguity– Watch for emerging patterns– Allow solutions to emerge based on multiple actions/pilot
schemes• In Chaotic domains:
– Leaders need to act to establish order– Work to transfer situation from chaotic to complex
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
Further reading
• Millward, L (2003). Understanding Occupational & Organisational Psychology. P233-242.
• Snowden, D., & Boone, M. (2007) A Leadership Framework: Wise leaders tailor their approach to fit the complexity of the circumstances they face. Harvard Business Review, November 69-76.
• Babiak,. P & Hare, R. (2007). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York: Harper Collins
• See also Donald Ridley’s website for more information on leadership
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
References, J. A. Force for Change (1990), Free Press
• Avolio, B. (2007). Promoting more integration strategies for leadership building theory. American Psychologist, 62(1),25-33.
• Fico, J., Brady, J., & Hogan, R. (2008). Identifying potential derailing behaviours. In J. Passmore, (Ed). Psychometrics in coaching. London: Kogan Page.
• Fiedler, F. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Fullan, M. ( 2001 ). Leadership in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Furnham, A. (2005). Icarus effect in leadership. Conference Paper to Human Resources & Development Conference, London: CIPD
• Goleman, D., et al (2002) The New Leaders. Little Brown Books.• Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1969). Life Cycle theory of leadership, Training &
Development, 23, 26-34. • House, R., & Mitchell, T. (1974). Path Goal theory of leadership, Journal of
Contemporary Business, 3, 81-97.
PSYCHOLOGYSCHOOL OF
University of East London, School of Psychology,Romford Road, London E15 4LZ, UK
www.uel.ac.uk/psychology
References II• Goleman, D., et al (2002) The New Leaders. Little Brown Books.
• Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? Academy of Management Executive, 5, 48-60.
• Kotter, J. A. (1990). Force for Change. New York: Free Press.• Lowin, A. (1968). Participative decision making: A model, literature
critique, and prescriptions for research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 36: 683-704.
• Stacey, R. (2005). Experiencing emergence in organizations local interactions and the emergence of global pattern (Complexity as the experience of the organization). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Vroom & Yetton, (1973). Leadership & decision making. New York: Wiley.
• Yulk, G., & Van Fleet, D. (1982). Cross situational, multi method research on military leaders. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 30, 87-108.
top related