Sei sulla pagina 1di 169

UNIT 3

MOTIVATION

Learning Objectives: After studying this unit, the students should be able to understand the concept and impact of motivation in organizations. Students shall also learn the various theories of motivation. They will gain knowledge on how to apply motivation concepts.

Unit Outline

Chapter-1 Introduction to Motivation

   

1.1 Motivation as a concept

   

1.2 Definitions of Motivation

   

1.3 Classification of theories of motivation

   

1.3.1

Content Theories

   

1.3.2

Process Theories

Chapter-2

Content Theories of Motivation

   

2.1 Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

   

2.2 Herzberg’s theory

   

2.3 Alderfer’s ERG needs

   

2.4 McClleand learned needs

Chapter-3

Process Theories of Motivation

   

3.1 Cognitive Evaluation theory

   

3.2 Expectancy theory

   

3.3 Equity theory

   

3.4 Goal setting theory

   

3.5 Reinforcement theory (Behaviour Modification)

Chapter-4

Application of Motivational Concepts

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION TO MOTIVATION

1.1 MOTIVATION AS A CONCEPT

The term ‘motivation’ is derived from the Latin word ‘movere’ which means “to

move”. It is an inner state that causes people to behave in certain ways. The

common frame of reference includes one or the following words in the definition

of motivation: drives, goals, incentives, desires, wants, need as almost every

body has their own definition of motivation. Motivation is the process that

accounts for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward

the attainment of a goal.

According to Ken Shah & Prof. Param J. Shah “it is a general tendency to

believe that motivation is a personal trait. Some people have it and the others

don’t. In practice, some are labeled to be lazy because they do not display an

outward sign of motivation. However, individuals differ in their basic motivational

drives. It also depends upon their areas of interest. The concept of motivation is

situational and its level varies between different individuals and at different times.

If you understand what motivates people, you have at your command the most

powerful tool for dealing with them.

Motivation is to inspire people to work, individually or in groups in the ways

such as to produce best results. It is the will to act. It is the willingness to exert

high levels of effort towards organizational goals, conditioned by the efforts and

ability to satisfy some individual need.

Motivation is getting somebody to do something because they want to do

it. It was once assumed that motivation had to be injected from outside, but it is

now understood that everyone is motivated by several differing forces.

Motivation is a general term applied to the entire class of drives, desires,

needs,

wishes

and

similar

forces.

To

say

that

managers

motivate

their

subordinates is to say that they do those things which they hope will satisfy these

drives and desires and induce the subordinates to act in a desired manner.

To motivate others is the most important of management tasks. It

comprises the abilities to communicate, to set an example, to challenge, to

encourage, to obtain feedback, to involve, to delegate, to develop and train, to

inform, to brief and to provide a just reward.”

Motivation can be referred as a catalyst as it determines the intensity of

willingness and

the

level of

organizational objectives.

The Role of Motivation

efforts a person

put for the achievement of

Why do we need motivated employees? The answer is survival (Smith,

1994). Motivated employees are needed in our rapidly changing workplaces.

Motivated employees help organizations survive. Motivated employees are more

productive. To be effective, managers need to understand what motivates

employees within the context of the roles they perform. Of all the functions a

manager performs, motivating employees is arguably the most complex. This is

due, in part, to the fact that what motivates employees changes constantly

(Bowen

&

Radhakrishna,

1991).

For

example,

research

suggests

that

as

employees' income increases, money becomes less of a motivator (Kovach,

1987). Also, as employees get older, interesting work becomes more of a

motivator.

1.2 DEFINITIONS OF MOTIVATION

Some of the definitions of motivation given by eminent scholars are:

According to Robert Dubin (1970),

“Motivation is the complex set of forces starting and keeping a person at work in an

organization. Motivation is something that moves the person to action, and continues him in

the course of action already initiated.”

Dalton E. McFarland (1974) stated that:

“Motivation refers to the way in which urges, drives, desires, aspirations, and strivings or

needs direct, control or explain the behaviour of human beings.”

In the words of C.B Mamoria (1995),

“Motivation is a willingness to expend energy to achieve a goal or reward. It is a force that

activates dormant energies and sets in motion the action of the people. It is the function

that kindles a burning passion for action among the human beings of an organization.”

According to Kreitner (1995), motivation has been defined as:

“The psychological process that gives behavior purpose and direction.”

Buford, Bedeian, and Lindner (1995) states that:

“Motivation is a predisposition to behave in a purposive manner to achieve specific, unmet

needs.”

1.3 THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

Despite the fact that motivation is a basic psychological process, much relevant

motivation theories have been identified so far. Over time, these major theoretical

streams of research in motivation were classified into two major schools:

The content theories of motivation and,

The process theories of motivation.

A classification of these theories can be depicted from the figure 1.1 as given

below.

Theories of Motivation

Content

Process

Theories

Approaches

of Motivation Content Process Theories Approaches Maslow Herzberg Alderfer McClelland Hierarchy

Maslow

Herzberg

Alderfer

McClelland

Hierarchy

Motivators and

ERG needs

Learned Needs

of needs

Hygiene factors

Cognitive Evaluation Theory Expectancy Equity Goal Setting Reinforcement Theory Theory Theory Theory
Cognitive Evaluation
Theory
Expectancy
Equity
Goal Setting
Reinforcement
Theory
Theory
Theory
Theory

.

Fig 1.1: Classification of Major Motivation Theories

1.3.1 CONTENT THEORIES

Content (or need) theories of motivation focus on factors internal to the individual

that energize and direct behavior. These theories suggest that people have

certain needs and/or desires which have been internalised. These theories look

at what it is about certain people that make them want the things that they do and

what things in their environment will make them do or not do certain things. In

general, such theories regard motivation as the product of internal drives that

compel an individual to act or move (hence, "motivate") toward the satisfaction of

individual needs. The content theories of motivation are based in large part on

early theories of motivation that traced the paths of action backward to their

perceived origin in internal drives. Major content theories of motivation are:

Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Herzberg's motivator-hygiene theory

Alderfer's ERG theory

McClelland's learned needs or three-need theory

1.3.2 PROCESS THEORIES

Process (or cognitive) theories of motivation focus on conscious human decision

processes as an explanation of motivation. The process theories are concerned

with determining how individual behavior is energized, directed, and maintained

in the specifically willed and self-directed human cognitive processes. Process

theories of motivation are based on early cognitive theories which posit that

behavior is the result of conscious decision-making processes. Process theories

of motivation look at what people are thinking about when they decide whether or

not to put effort into a particular activity.

The major process theories of motivation are:

Cognitive Evaluation theory

Expectancy theory

Equity theory

Goal setting theory

Reinforcement theory

Chapter 2

CONTENT THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

2.1 MASLOW’S NEED THEORY

One of the earliest and best-known content theories is needs hierarchy theory.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow (1954) focused on motivating forces in individuals

and established a "hierarchy of needs." According to Maslow, individuals would

move to satisfy their needs in a hierarchical manner. Once a need is satisfied, it

no longer has have the ability to motivate. At the bottom of the hierarchy are

physiological needs such as food, shelter, and sexual gratification. These were

followed by safety needs (protection from environmental dangers), social needs

(love and belonging), and esteem (self-respect and the approval of others). The

highest need is the need for self-fulfillment, which involves deriving a sense of

value and satisfaction from one's work. While people generally fill these needs in

order, Maslow recognized that the hierarchy was flexible within individuals, and

that priorities could vary. Maslow did not include money in his schema because

of the ambiguity in the meaning of money. For some people, money is a way to

achieve the basic requirements of food and shelter. Others view money as a

measure to satisfy their need for self-fulfillment.

If motivation is driven by the existence of unsatisfied needs, then it is

worthwhile for a manager to understand which needs are the more important for

individual employees. In this regard, Abraham Maslow developed a model in

which basic, low-level needs such as physiological requirements and safety must

be satisfied before higher-level needs such as self-fulfillment are pursued. In this

hierarchical model, when a need is mostly satisfied it no longer motivates and the

next higher need takes its place. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is shown in the

figure 2.1:

Self-Actualization

personal growth and fulfilment

Esteem Needs

achievement, status, reputation

Social Needs

family, affection, relationships, work group, etc

Safety Needs

protection, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc

Physiological Needs

air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.

Fig 2.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Physiological Needs: Physiological needs are those required to sustain life,

such as air, water, nourishment and sleep. According to Maslow's theory, if such

needs are not satisfied then one's motivation will arise from the quest to satisfy

them. Higher needs such as social needs and esteem are not felt until one has

met the needs basic to one's bodily functioning.

Safety Needs: Once physiological needs are met, one's attention turns to safety

and security in order to be free from the threat of physical and emotional harm.

Such needs might be fulfilled by living in a safe area, medical insurance, job

security and financial reserves. According to Maslow's hierarchy, if a person feels

that he or she is in harm's way, higher needs will not receive much attention.

Social Needs: Once a person has met the lower level physiological and safety

needs, higher level needs become important, the first of which are social needs.

Social needs are those related to interaction with other people and may include

need for friends, need for belonging, need to give and receive love.

Esteem Needs: Once a person feels a sense of "belonging", the need to feel

important arises. Esteem needs may be classified as internal or external. Internal

esteem needs are those related to self-esteem such as self respect and

achievement. External esteem needs are those such as social status and

recognition.

Some

esteem

needs

are

self-respect,

achievement,

attention,

recognition, reputation. Maslow later refined his model to include a level between

esteem needs and self-actualization: the need for knowledge and aesthetics.

Self-Actualization: Self-actualization is the summit of Maslow's hierarchy of

needs. It is the quest of reaching one's full potential as a person. Unlike lower

level needs, this need is never fully satisfied; as one grows psychologically there

are always new opportunities to continue to grow. Self-actualized people tend to

have needs such as truth, justice, wisdom, and meaning. Self-actualized persons

have frequent occurrences of peak experiences, which are energized moments

of

profound

happiness

and

harmony.

According

to

Maslow,

only

a

small

percentage of the population reaches the level of self-actualization.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

If Maslow's theory holds, there are some important implications for management.

There are opportunities to motivate employees through management style, job

design, company events, and compensation packages, some examples of which

follow:

Physiological needs: Provide lunch breaks, rest breaks, and wages that are

sufficient to purchase the essentials of life.

Safety Needs: Provide a safe working environment, retirement benefits, and job

security.

Social Needs: Create a sense of community via team-based projects and social

events.

Esteem Needs: Recognize achievements to make employees feel appreciated

and valued. Offer job titles that convey the importance of the position.

Self-Actualization: Provide employees a challenge and the opportunity to reach

their full career potential.

However, not all people are driven by the same needs - at any time

different people may be motivated by entirely different factors. It is important to

understand the needs being pursued by each employee. To motivate an

employee, the manager must be able to recognize the needs level at which the

employee is operating, and use those needs as levers of motivation.

LIMITATIONS OF MASLOW'S HIERARCHY

While Maslow's hierarchy makes sense from an intuitive standpoint, there is little

evidence to support its hierarchical aspect. In fact, there is evidence that contradicts the

order of needs specified by the model. For example, some cultures appear to place social

needs before any others. Maslow's hierarchy also has difficulty explaining cases such as

the "starving artist" in which a person neglects lower needs in pursuit of higher ones.

Finally, there is little evidence to suggest that people are motivated to satisfy only one

need level at a time, except in situations where there is a conflict between needs. Even

though Maslow's hierarchy lacks scientific support, it is quite well-known and is the first

theory of motivation to which many people they are exposed.

2.2 HERZBERG’S THEORY

The

motivation-hygiene

theory

was

proposed

by

psychologist

Frederick

Herzberg. In the belief that an individual's relation to his or her work is a basic

one and that his or her attitude toward this work can very well determine the

individual's success or failure, Herzberg investigated the question "What do

people want from their jobs?" he asked people to describe, in detail, situations

when they felt exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. Herzberg, Mausner,

and Snyderman (1959) interviewed 200 engineers and accountants to explore

what factors were motivating. They concluded that many factors that were

thought to be motivating, such as pay and managerial style, were not motivating

at all. Herzberg (1966) proposed that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not

opposite ends of a continuum, but rather represent two distinct variables. Intrinsic

motivational factors (called "satisfiers") included achievement, recognition, and

responsibility. Extrinsic factors (called "hygiene factors") consisted of things like

pay, status, job security, and management style. Herzberg theorized that lack of

satisfiers would not cause dissatisfaction. The presence of hygiene factors would

not cause satisfaction, but their absence would cause dissatisfaction.

Herzberg developed a list of factors that are based on Maslow's hierarchy of

needs,

except

that

environment.

his

version

is

more

closely

related

to

the

working

HERZBERG'S HYGIENE AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS

Hygiene or Dissatisfiers:

Working conditions

Policies and administrative practices

Salary and Benefits

Supervision

Status

Job security

Co-workers

Personal life

Motivators or Satisfiers:

Recognition

Achievement

Advancement

Growth

Responsibility

Job challenge

Hygiene factors must be present in the job before motivators can be used to

stimulate that person. That is, one cannot use motivators until all the hygiene

factors are met. Herzberg's needs are specifically job related and reflect some of

the distinct things that people want from their work as opposed to Maslow's

Hierarchy of Needs which reflect all the needs in a person’s life.

While Hertzberg's two-factor theory generated considerable research,

"repeated factor analytic studies of job attitudes have failed to demonstrate the

existence of two independent factors corresponding to motivators and hygienes"

(Campbell, 1970).

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

If the motivation-hygiene theory holds, management not only must provide

hygiene factors to avoid employee dissatisfaction, but also must provide factors

intrinsic to the work itself in order for employees to be satisfied with their jobs.

Herzberg argued that job enrichment is required for intrinsic motivation, and that

it is a continuous management process. According to Herzberg:

The job should have sufficient challenge to utilize the full ability of the

employee.

Employees who demonstrate increasing levels of ability should be given

increasing levels of responsibility.

If a job cannot be designed to use an employee's full abilities, then the firm

should consider automating the task or replacing the employee with one

who has a lower level of skill. If a person cannot be fully utilized, then

there will be a motivation problem.

LIMITATIONS OF HERZBERG’S THEORY

Critics of Herzberg's theory argue that the two-factor result is observed because

it is natural for people to take credit for satisfaction and to blame dissatisfaction

on external factors. Furthermore, job satisfaction does not necessarily imply a

high level of motivation or productivity. Herzberg's theory has been broadly read

and despite its weaknesses its enduring value is that it recognizes that true

motivation comes from within a person and not from hygiene factors.

2.3 ALDERFER'S ERG THEORY

The ERG theory is an extension of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Alderfer

identified three categories of needs. Alderfer suggested that needs could be

classified into three categories, rather than five. These three types of needs are

existence, relatedness, and growth.

Existence needs are the desires for material and physical well being. These

needs are satisfied with food, water, air, shelter, working conditions, pay, and

fringe benefits.

Relatedness needs are the desires to establish and maintain interpersonal

relationships. These needs are satisfied with relationships with family, friends,

supervisors, subordinates, and co-workers.

Growth needs are the desires to be creative, to make useful and productive

contributions, and to have opportunities for personal development.

Similarities to Maslow's Hierarchy: Studies had shown that the middle levels of

Maslow's

hierarchy

have

some

overlap;

Alderfer

addressed

this

issue

by

reducing the number of levels to three. The ERG needs can be mapped to those

of Maslow's theory as follows:

Existence

: Physiological and safety needs

Relatedness : Social and external esteem needs

Growth

: Self-actualization and internal esteem needs

Like Maslow's model, the ERG theory is hierarchical - existence needs have

priority over relatedness needs, which have priority over growth.

Differences from Maslow's Hierarchy: In addition to the reduction in the

number of levels, the ERG theory differs from Maslow's in the following three

ways:

Unlike Maslow's hierarchy, the ERG theory allows for different levels of

needs to be pursued simultaneously.

The ERG theory allows the order of the needs be different for different

people.

The ERG theory acknowledges that if a higher level need remains

unfulfilled, the person may regress to lower level needs that appear easier

to satisfy. This is known as the frustration-regression principle.

Thus, while the ERG theory presents a model of progressive needs, the

hierarchical aspect is not rigid. This flexibility allows the ERG theory to account

for a wider range of observed behaviors. For example, it can explain the "starving

artist"

who

may

place

growth

needs

above

existence

ones.

ERG

theory

demonstrates that (1) more than one need may be operative at the same time,

and (2) if the gratification of a higher-level need is stifled, the desire to satisfy a

lower-need increases.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

If the ERG theory holds, then unlike with Maslow's theory, managers must

recognize that an employee has multiple needs to satisfy simultaneously.

Furthermore, if growth opportunities are not provided to employees, they may

regress to relatedness needs. If the manager is able to recognize this situation,

then

steps

can

be

taken

to

concentrate

on

subordinate is able to pursue growth again.

relatedness

needs

until

the

2.4 MCCLELLAND'S LEARNED NEEDS THEORY

In his acquired-needs theory, David McClelland proposed that an individual's

specific needs are acquired over time and are shaped by one's life experiences.

Most of these needs can be classed as achievement, affiliation, or power. A

person's motivation and effectiveness in certain job functions are influenced by

these three needs. McClelland's theory sometimes is referred to as the three

need theory or as the learned needs theory. McClelland's theory suggests that

individuals learn needs from their culture. Three of the primary needs in this

theory are the need for affiliation (n Aff), the need for power (n Pow), and the

need for achievement (n Ach).

Achievement motivated people thrive on pursuing and attaining goals. They like

to

be able to control the situations in

which they are involved. They take

moderate risks. They like to get immediate feedback on how they have done.

They tend to be preoccupied with a task-orientation towards the job to be done.

Some people who have a compelling drive to succeed are striving for

personal achievement rather than the rewards of success. From research into

the achievement need, McClelland found that high achievers differentiate from

others by:

o

Their desire to attain personal responsibility for finding solutions;

o

Their need in immediate feedback about their performance;

o

Setting moderately challenging goals; 50% probability of

success -

optimum

opportunity to

experience

feelings

of

satisfaction from their efforts.

accomplishment

and

Power motivated individuals see almost every situation as an opportunity to

seize control or dominate others. They love to influence others. They like to

change situations whether or not it is needed. They are willing to assert

themselves when a decision needs to be made.

Affiliation motivated people are usually friendly and like to socialize with others.

This may distract them from their performance requirements. They will usually

respond to an appeal for cooperation.

The main point of the learned needs theory is that when one of these

needs is strong in a person, it has the potential to motivate behavior that leads to

its satisfaction.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

People with different needs are motivated differently.

High need for achievement - High achievers should be given challenging

projects with reachable goals. They should be provided frequent feedback. While

money is not an important motivator, it is an effective form of feedback.

High need for affiliation - Employees with a high affiliation need perform best in

a cooperative environment.

High

need

for

power

-

Management

should

opportunity to manage others.

provide

power

seekers

the

Chapter 3

PROCESS THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

3.1 COGNITIVE EVALUATION THEORY

This theory suggests that there are actually two motivation systems: intrinsic and

extrinsic that corresponds to two kinds of motivators:

Intrinsic motivators are those motivators which come from the actual

performance of the task or job -- the intrinsic interest of the work like

achievement, responsibility and competence.

Extrinsic motivators like pay, promotion, feedback, working conditions --

things that come from a person's environment, controlled by others.

One

or the

other of these may be

a

more powerful motivator for a given

individual.

Intrinsically

motivated

individuals

perform

for

their

own

achievement

and

satisfaction. If they come to believe that they are doing some job because of the

pay or the working conditions or some other extrinsic reason, they begin to lose

motivation. The belief is that the presence of powerful extrinsic motivators can

actually

reduce

a

person's

intrinsic

motivation,

particularly

if

the

extrinsic

motivators are perceived by the person to be controlled by people. In other

words, a boss who is always dangling this reward or that stick will turn off the

intrinsically motivated people.

As per this theory a shift from external rewards to internal rewards results into

motivation. It believes that even after the stoppage of external stimulus, internal

stimulus survives. It relates to the pay structure in the organization. Instead of

treating external factors like pay, incentives, promotion etc and internal factors

like interests, drives, responsibility etc, separately, they should be treated as

contemporary to each other. The cognition is to be such that even when external

motivators are not there the internal motivation continues. However, practically

extrinsic rewards are given much more weightage.

3.2 EXPECTANCY THEORY

V. H. Vroom (1964) suggested that people consciously choose particular courses

of action, based upon perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs, as a consequence of

their desires to enhance pleasure and avoid pain. This model is generally known

as expectancy theory but is sometimes referred to as VIE theory, where the

letters stand for valence, instrumentality, and expectancy, respectively (Mitchell

and Mickel, 1999). Expectancy theory is classified as a process theory of

motivation

(Fudge

and

Schlacter,

1999)

because

it

emphasizes

individual

perceptions

of

the

environment

and

subsequent

interactions

arising

as

a

consequence of personal expectations. Expectancy theory mainly relies upon

extrinsic motivators to explain causes for behaviours exhibited in the workplace

(Leonard et al., 1999).

Vroom's Expectancy theory states that an individual will act in a

certain way based on the expectation that the act will be followed by a given

outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. This

motivational model (Vroom, 1964) has been modified by several people, to

include Porter and Lawler (Porter et. al., 1968). Vroom's Expectancy Theory is

written as a formula:

Valence x Expectancy x Instrumentality = Motivation

Valence (Reward) = the amount of desire for a goal (What is the reward?)

Expectancy (Performance) = the strength of belief that work related

effort will result in the completion of the task (How hard will I have to work

to reach the goal?)

Instrumentality (Belief) = the belief that the reward will be received once

the task is completed (Will they notice the effort I put forth?)

The product of valence, expectancy, and instrumentality is motivation. It can be

thought of

as the strength of the drive towards a goal. For example, if

an

employee wants to move up through the ranks, then promotion has a high

valence for that employee. If the employee believes that high performance will

result in good reviews, then the employee has a high expectancy. However, if

the employee believes the company will not promote from within, then the

employee has low instrumentality, and the employee will not be motivated to

perform better.

3.3 EQUITY THEORY

As per the equity theory of J. Stacey Adams, people are motivated by their

beliefs about the reward structure as being fair or unfair, relative to the inputs.

People have a tendency to use subjective judgment to balance the outcomes and

inputs in the relationship for comparisons between different individuals. If people

feel that they are not equally rewarded they either reduce the quantity or quality

of work or migrate to some other organization. However, if people perceive that

they are rewarded higher, they may be motivated to work harder.

Equity theory says

that

it

is

not

the

actual reward that motivates, but the

perception, and the perception is based not on the reward in isolation, but in

comparison with the efforts that went into getting it and the rewards and efforts of

others. If everyone got a 5% raise, B is likely to feel quite pleased with her raise,

even if she worked harder than everyone else. But if A got an even higher raise,

B perceives that she worked just as hard as A, she will be unhappy.

In other words, people's motivation results from a ratio of ratios: a person

compares the ratio of reward to effort with the comparable ratio of reward to effort

that they think others are getting.

Of course, in terms of actually predicting how a person will react to a given

motivator, this will get pretty complicated:

1.

People do not have complete information about how others are rewarded.

So they are going on perceptions, rumors, and inferences.

2. Some people are more sensitive to equity issues than others.

3. Some people are willing to ignore short-term inequities as long as they

expect things to work out in the long-term.

3.4 GOAL-SETTING THEORY

This motivation theory was developed primarily by Edwin Locke and Gary

Latham (1990). The goal-setting theory posits that goals are the most important

factors affecting the motivation and behavior of employees.

Goal-setting theory emphasizes the importance of specific and challenging goals

in achieving motivated behavior. Specific goals often involve quantitative targets

for improvement in a behavior of interest. Research indicates that specific

performance goals are much more effective than those in which a person is told

to "do your best." Challenging goals are difficult but not impossible to attain.

Empirical research supports the proposition that goals that are both specific and

challenging are more motivational than vague goals or goals that are relatively

easy to achieve.

Instead of giving vague tasks to people, specific and pronounced objectives, help

in achieving them faster. As the clearity is high, a goal orientation also avoids any

misunderstandings in the work of the employees. The goal setting theory states

that when the goals to be achieved are set at a higher standard than in that case

employees are motivated to perform better and put in maximum effort. It revolves

around the concept of “Self-efficacy” i.e. individual’s belief that he or she is

capable of performing a hard task.

Several factors may moderate the relationship between specific and

challenging goals and high levels of motivation. The first of these factors is goal

commitment, which simply means that the more dedicated the individual is to

achieving the goal, the more they will be motivated to exert effort toward goal

accomplishment. Some researches suggest that having employees participate in

goal setting will increase their level of goal commitment. A second factor relevant

to goal-setting theory is self-efficacy, which is the individual's belief that he or she

can successfully complete a particular task. If individuals have a high degree of

self-efficacy, they are likely to respond more positively to specific and challenging

goals than if they have a low degree of self-efficacy.

According to Locke and Latham, goals affect individual performance through four

mechanisms. First, goals direct action and effort toward goal-related activities

and

away

from

unrelated

activities.

Second,

goals

energize

employees.

Challenging goals lead to higher employee effort than easy goals. Third, goals

affect persistence. Employees exert more effort to achieve high goals. Fourth,

goals motivate employees to use their existing knowledge to attain a goal or to

acquire the knowledge needed to do so.

The elements of goal-setting theory are shown in Figure below:

The goal-setting model indicates that individuals have needs and values that influence what they desire.

The goal-setting model indicates that individuals have needs and values that

influence what they desire. A need is defined as a lack of something desirable or

useful. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, all individuals possess the

same basic needs. Individuals do, however, differ in their values. Values are

defined as a group of attitudes about a concept that contains a moral quality of

like or dislike and acceptable or unacceptable. Values determine whether a

particular outcome is rewarding. Employees compare current conditions to

desired conditions in order to determine if they are satisfied and fulfilled. If an

employee finds that he or she is not satisfied with the current situation, goal

setting becomes a way of achieving what he or she wants.

3.5 REINFORCEMENT THEORY

The reinforcement theory of motivation (also called contingency theory) is an

outgrowth of the behaviorist school of psychology.

B.F. Skinner (1974), who propounded the reinforcement theory,

holds that by designing the environment properly, individuals can be motivated.

Instead of considering internal factors like impressions, feelings, attitudes and

other cognitive behavior, individuals are directed by what happens in the

environment external to them. Skinner argued that the internal needs and drives

of individuals can be ignored because people learn to exhibit certain behaviors

based on what happens to them as a result of their behavior. Skinner states that

work

environment

should

be

made

suitable

to

the

individuals

and

that

punishments actually leads to frustration and de-motivation. Hence, the only way

to motivate is to keep on making positive changes in the external environment of

the organization.

The basic principles of the theory are:

reinforced behavior tends to be repeated,

reward is more effective than punishment,

feedback is necessary for improvement

rewards should be given without delay, and

rewards should be given for successive approximations of the desired

behavior (Schneier, 1974).

The most important principle of reinforcement theory is, of course, reinforcement.

Generally speaking, there are two types of reinforcement: positive and negative.

Positive reinforcement results when the occurrence of a valued behavioral

consequence has the effect of strengthening the probability of the behavior being

repeated.

The

specific

behavioral

consequence

is

called

a

reinforcer.

An

example of positive reinforcement might be a salesperson that exerts extra effort

to meet a sales quota (behavior) and is then rewarded with a bonus (positive

reinforcer). The administration of the positive reinforcer should make it more

likely that the salesperson will continue to exert the necessary effort in the future.

Negative reinforcement results when an undesirable behavioral consequence is

withheld, with the effect of strengthening the probability of the behavior being

repeated. Negative reinforcement is often confused with punishment, but they

are not the same. Punishment attempts to decrease the probability of specific

behaviors; negative reinforcement attempts to increase desired behavior. Thus,

both positive and negative reinforcement have the effect of increasing the

probability that a particular behavior will be learned and repeated. An example of

negative reinforcement might be a salesperson that exerts effort to increase

sales in his or her sales territory (behavior), which is followed by a decision not to

reassign the salesperson to an undesirable sales route (negative reinforcer). The

administration of the negative reinforcer should make it more likely that the

salesperson will continue to exert the necessary effort in the future.

As mentioned above, punishment attempts to decrease the probability of specific

behaviors being exhibited. Punishment is the administration of an undesirable

behavioral consequence in order to reduce the occurrence of the unwanted

behavior. Punishment is one of the more commonly used reinforcement-theory

strategies, but many learning experts suggest that it should be used only if

positive and negative reinforcement cannot be used or have previously failed,

because of the potentially negative side effects of punishment. An example of

punishment might be demoting an employee who does not meet performance

goals or suspending an employee without pay for violating work rules.

Extinction is similar to punishment in that its purpose is to reduce unwanted

behavior.

The

process

of

extinction

begins

when

a

valued

behavioral

consequence is withheld in order to decrease the probability that a learned

behavior will continue. Over time, this is likely to result in the ceasing of that

behavior. Extinction may alternately serve to reduce a wanted behavior, such as

when a positive reinforcer is no longer offered when a desirable behavior occurs.

For example, if an employee is continually praised for the promptness in which

he completes his work for several months, but receives no praise in subsequent

months for such behavior, his desirable behaviors may diminish. Thus, to avoid

unwanted extinction, managers may have to continue to offer positive behavioral

consequences.

SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT

The timing of the behavioral consequences that follow a given behavior is called

the reinforcement schedule. Basically, there are two broad types of reinforcement

schedules: continuous and intermittent. If a behavior is reinforced each time it

occurs, it is called continuous reinforcement. Research suggests that continuous

reinforcement is the fastest way to establish new behaviors or to eliminate

undesired behaviors. However, this type of reinforcement is generally not

practical in an organizational setting. Therefore, intermittent schedules are

usually employed. Intermittent reinforcement means that each instance of a

desired behavior is not reinforced. There are at least four types of intermittent

reinforcement schedules: fixed interval, fixed ratio, variable interval, and variable

ratio.

Fixed interval schedules of reinforcement occur when desired behaviors are

reinforced after set periods of time. The simplest example of a fixed interval

schedule is a weekly paycheck. A fixed interval schedule of reinforcement does

not appear to be a particularly strong way to elicit desired behavior, and behavior

learned in this way may be subject to rapid extinction. The fixed ratio schedule of

reinforcement applies the reinforcer after a set number of occurrences of the

desired behaviors. One organizational example of this schedule is a sales

commission based on number of units sold. Like the fixed interval schedule, the

fixed ratio schedule may not produce consistent, long-lasting, behavioral change.

Variable

interval

reinforcement

schedules

are

employed

when

desired

behaviors are reinforced after varying periods of time. Examples of variable

interval schedules would be special recognition for successful performance and

promotions to higher-level positions. This reinforcement schedule appears to

elicit desired behavioral change that is resistant to extinction.

Finally, the variable ratio reinforcement schedule applies the reinforcer after a

number of desired behaviors have occurred, with the number changing from

situation to situation. The most common example of this reinforcement schedule

is the slot machine in a casino, in which a different and unknown number of

desired behaviors (i.e., feeding a quarter into the machine) is required before the

reward (i.e., a jackpot) is realized. Organizational examples of variable ratio

schedules are bonuses or special awards that are applied after varying numbers

of desired behaviors occur. Variable ratio schedules appear to produce desired

behavioral change that is consistent and very resistant to extinction.

REINFORCEMENT THEORY APPLIED TO ORGANIZATIONAL SETTINGS

Probably the best-known application of the principles of reinforcement theory to

organizational

settings

is

called

behavioral

modification,

or

behavioral

contingency management. Typically, a behavioral modification program consists

of four steps:

1. Specifying the desired behavior as objectively as possible.

2. Measuring the current incidence of desired behavior.

3. Providing behavioral consequences that reinforce desired behavior.

4. Determining the effectiveness of the program by systematically assessing

behavioral change.

Reinforcement theory is an important explanation of how people learn behavior.

It is often applied to organizational settings in the context of a behavioral

modification program. Although the assumptions of reinforcement theory are

often criticized, its principles continue to offer important insights into individual

learning and motivation.

Behaviour modification focuses on the external environment by stating that a

number

of

employee

behaviours

can

be

affected

by

manipulating

their

consequences. The alternative consequences include positive and negative

reinforcement,

punishment,

and

extinction.

Reinforcement

can

be

applied

according to either continuous or partial schedules.

The major benefit of behaviour modification is that it makes managers become

conscious motivators. It encourages managers to analyze employee behaviour,

explore why it occurs and how often, and identify specific consequences that will

help change it when those consequences are applied systematically.

Chapter 4

APPLICATION OF MOTIVATIONAL CONCEPTS

It

is

very

important

to

apply

the

various

motivational

concepts

to

the

organizations so that organizational effectiveness can be achieved. Various

motivation techniques and programs have gained varying degrees of acceptance

in organizations. Some of applications of motivation and their linking with

motivational theories as depicted by Robbins have been discussed below.

Management by Objectives

Employee Recognition Programs

Employee Involvement Programs

Variable Pay Programs

Skill-Based Pay Plans

Special Issues in Motivation

MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES

Management by Objectives (MBO) was first outlined by Peter Drucker in 1954 in

his book 'The Practice of Management'. In the 90s, Peter Drucker himself

decreased the significance of this organization management method, when he

said: "It's just another tool. It is not the great cure for management inefficiency

Management by Objectives works if you know the objectives, 90% of the time

you don't."

Management by objectives (MBO) is a systematic and organized approach that

allows management to focus on achievable goals and to attain the best possible

results from available resources. It aims to increase organizational performance

by aligning goals and subordinate objectives throughout the organization. Ideally,

employees get strong input to identify their objectives, time lines for completion,

etc. MBO includes ongoing tracking and feedback in the process to reach

objectives. The principle behind Management by Objectives (MBO) is to make

sure that everybody within the organization has a clear understanding of the

aims, or objectives, of that organization, as well as awareness of their own roles

and responsibilities in achieving those aims.

MBO Principles

Principles of MBO include the following:

Cascading of organizational goals and objectives

Specific objectives for each member

Participative decision making

Explicit time period

Performance evaluation and feedback

Linking MBO and Goal-Setting Theory

Goal Setting Theory exhibits that:

o

hard goals result in a higher level of individual performance,

o

specific hard goals result in higher levels of performance than do no

goals or generalized goals, and

o

feedback on one’s performance leads to higher performance

MBO directly believes in

o

specific goals and feedback

o

MBO would be most effective when the goals are difficult enough to

require the person to do some stretching.

EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PROGRAMS

Employee Recognition Programs are the programs that use multiple sources and

recognize both individual and group accomplishments. A recognition program

does not have to be expensive. The structure of a recognition program is limited

only by your imagination. An effective program has the following components:

o

Fairness

o

High visibility and consistency

Linking Employee Recognition Programs and Reinforcement Theory

In accordance with the reinforcement theory, rewarding a behavior with

recognition immediately following that behavior is likely to encourage its

repetition.

EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS

Employee involvement is creating an environment in which people have an

impact on decisions and actions that affect their jobs. Employee involvement is

not the goal nor is it a tool, as practiced in many organizations. Rather, employee

involvement is a management and leadership philosophy about how people are

most enabled to contribute. It is a participative process that uses the entire

capacity of employees and is designed to encourage increased commitment to

the organization’s success.

Ways of Employee Involvement

Participative Management - A process where subordinates share a significant

degree of decision-making power with their immediate superiors.

Representative Participation - Workers participate in organizational decision

making through a small group of representative employees.

Work Councils - Groups of elected or nominated employees who must be

consulted when management makes decisions involving personnel.

Board Representatives - A form of representative participation; employees sit

on a company’s board of directors and represent the interests of the firm’s

employees.

Quality Circles - A work group of employees, who meet regularly to discuss their

quality problems, investigate causes, recommend solutions, and take corrective

actions.

Employee Stock Ownership Plans - Company established benefit plans in

which employees acquire stock as part of their benefits.

Linking Employee Involvement Programs and Motivation Theories

Many motivational theories can be linked with employee involvement programs.

Theory Y of motivation shows consistency with participative management while

in case of hygiene theory; employee involvement programs could provide

employees

with

intrinsic

motivation by increasing opportunities for growth,

responsibility, and involvement in the work itself. Employee involvement is

attuned with ERG theory and efforts to stimulate the achievement need.

VARIABLE-PAY PROGRAMS

Variable pay programs are an increasingly popular mode of compensation in

today's business world. These programs, which are also sometimes referred to

as "pay-for-performance" or "at-risk" pay plans, provide some or all of a work

force's compensation based on employee performance or on the performance of

a team. Variable pay proponents contend that providing tangible rewards for

superior

performance—a

true

merit

system—encourages

hard

work

and

efficiency

and

serves

as

an

effective

deterrent

to

mediocre

or

otherwise

uninspired

work

performance.

In

Variable

Pay

Programs

a

portion

of

an

employee’s pay is based on some individual and/or organizational measure of

performance. Some of the more widely used variable pay programs are:

Piece-rate pay plans - Workers are paid a fixed sum for each unit of production

completed.

Profit-sharing plans - Programs that distribute compensation based on some

established formula designed around a company’s profitability.

Gain

sharing

plans

-

An

incentive

plan

where

improvements

in

group

productivity determine the total amount of money that is allocated.

Linking Variable-Pay Plans and Expectancy Theory

Evidence supports the importance of this linkage, especially for operative

employees working under piece-rate systems.

Group

and

organization

wide

incentives

reinforce

and

encourage

employees to sublimate personal goals for the best interests of their

department or organization.

SKILL-BASED PAY PLANS

Skill-based pay refers to a pay system in which pay increases are linked to the

number or depth of skills an employee acquires and applies and it is a means of

developing broader and deeper skills among the workforce. Such increases are

in addition to, and not in lieu of, general pay increases employees may receive.

The pay increases are usually tied to three types of skills:

horizontal skills, which involve a broadening of skills in terms of the range

of tasks

vertical skills, which involve acquiring skills of a higher level

depth skills, which involve a high level of skills in specialized areas relating

to the same job.

Robbins has identified some of the following reasons which make skill based pay

system an appeal for management. He also identified the downside of skill based

pay system.

Appeal of skill-based pay

Flexibility

-

Filling

interchangeable.

staff

needs

is

easier

when

employee

skills

are

Facilitates communication - It facilitates communication in the organization

because people gain a better understanding of other’s jobs.

Lessens “protective territory” behavior - As management is less likely to hear

the phrase ‘It’s not my job’.

Downside

People can “top out”

Employee frustration can increase

Skills become obsolete

Paying people for acquired skills not used

Linking Skill Based Pay Plans and Motivational Theories

There is a link between equity theory and skill based pay. Employees whose

lower order needs are substantially satisfied, the opportunity to experience

growth can be a motivator. Paying people to expand their skill levels is also

consistent with research on the achievement need. High achievers have a

compelling drive to do things better or more efficiently.

SPECIAL ISSUES IN MOTIVATION

MOTIVATING PROFESSIONALS

How are “Professionals” different?

o

Receive a great deal of “intrinsic” satisfaction from their work.

o

Strong and long-term commitment to their field of expertise

o

Well paid/ Chief reward is work itself.

o

Value support

o

More focused on work as central life interest.

How do we motivate professionals?

o

Provide challenging projects

o

Give them autonomy in follow interests and structure work.

o

Reward with educational opportunities.

o Recognize their contributions.

MOTIVATING CONTINGENT WORKERS

No simple solutions to motivating contingent workers.

o

Contingent or temporary workers have little or no job security/stability,

therefore

they

don’t

identify

with

the

organization

or

display

the

commitment of permanent employees.

 

o

Contingent or temporary workers are typically provided with little or no

health care, pensions, or similar benefits.

Greatest

motivating

employment.

factor

is

the

opportunity

to

gain

permanent

Motivation is also increased if the employee sees that the job he or she is

doing for the firm can develop salable skills.

MOTIVATING THE DIVERSIFIED WORK FORCE

Not all employees are motivated by money.

Flexibility

is

the

key

to

maximizing

your

employees’

motivation

by

understanding and responding to the diversity of needs.

o

specially designed work schedules

o

flexible compensation plans

o

flexible benefits plans

o

physical work settings

o

child care

o

elderly care

o

flexible work hours

o

job sharing

o

flexible leave

o

work teams

MOTIVATING THE LOW-SKILLED SERVICE WORKER

One of the most challenging problems in industry today.

o

Many “plans” have been tried, almost all unsuccessfully

o

flexible work schedules

o

broader responsibility for inventory, scheduling, and hiring

o

creation of a “family” atmosphere among employees

Unless pay and benefits rise significantly, continued high turnover can be

expected.

MOTIVATING PEOPLE DOING HIGHLY REPETITIVE TASKS

Motivating individuals in these jobs can be made through careful selection:

o

People vary in their tolerance for ambiguity.

o

Many individuals prefer jobs that have a minimal amount of discretion and

variety.

High pay and careful selection can reduce:

o Recruitment problems and high turnover, however, this

o Doesn’t necessarily lead to highly motivated workers.

Creative personnel programs have exhibited some success by providing:

o Clean

and

attractive

work

surroundings,

ample

work

breaks

and

opportunity to socialize during breaks, and empathetic supervisors.

UNIT 4

LEADERSHIP

Learning Objectives: After studying this unit, the students should be able to understand the concept of leadership. Students shall also learn the various theories of leadership. They will gain knowledge on various contemporary issues in leadership in organizations. The concept of power and conflict will also be learned out of this unit.

Unit Outline

Chapter-1 Leadership

 
 

1.1 Leadership as a concept

 

1.2 Definitions of Leadership

 

1.3 Classification of theories of leadership

 

1.4 Theories of Leadership

     

1.4.1

Trait Approach

     

1.4.2

Behavioural Approach

Ohio State Studies

University of Michigan Studies

Managerial Grid

     

1.4.3

Contingency Theories

Fiedler's Contingency Model

Hersey-Blanchard Situational Theory

Path-Goal Theory

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

     

1.4.4

Contemporary Approaches

Transactional leadership

Transformational leadership

Charismatic leadership

Leadership in Decision Group

Chapter-2 Contemporary Issues in Leadership

 

2.1

Gender: do males and females lead differently?

 

2. 2 Leading through Empowerment

 

2.3 What about followership?

 

2.4 National Culture As An Added Contingency Variable

 

2.5 Providing Team Leadership

 

2.6 Moral Dimension to Leadership

Chapter-3

Power and Conflict

 

3.1

Power as a concept

3.2 Bases of Power

3.3 Power Tactics

3.4 Conflict as a Concept

3.5 Process of Conflict

3.6 Levels of Conflict

3.7 Conflict Resolution Strategies

Chapter 1

LEADERSHIP

1.1 LEADERSHIP AS A CONCEPT

Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an

objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and

coherent. Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes,

such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills. Although your

position

as

a

manager,

supervisor,

lead,

etc.

gives

you

the

authority

to

accomplish certain tasks and objectives in the organization, this power does not

make you a leader

it

simply makes you the boss. Leadership differs in that it

makes the followers want to achieve high goals, rather than simply bossing

people around.

Leadership should be distinguished from management. Management involves

planning, organizing, staffing, directing, and controlling, and a manager is

someone who performs these functions. A manager has formal authority by

virtue of his or her position or office. Leadership, by contrast, primarily deals with

influence. A manager may or may not be an effective leader. A leader's ability to

influence others may be based on a variety of factors other than his or her formal

authority or position.

Leadership is a subject that has gained increasing interest among scholars. The

term connotes images of powerful, dynamic individuals who command victorious

armies, direct corporate empires from atop or shape the course of nations.

Questions about leadership have long been a subject of speculation, but

specific research on leadership did not begin until the twentieth century. The

focus

of

much

of

the

research

has

been

on

determinants

of

leadership

effectiveness. Behavioural scientists have attempted to discover what traits,

abilities, behaviours, sources of power, or aspects of the situation determine how

well a leader is able to influence followers and accomplish group objectives. The

reason why some people emerge as leaders and the determinants of the way a

leader acts are other important questions that have been investigated but the

predominated concern has been leadership effectiveness.

1.2 DEFINITIONS OF LEADERSHIP

Leadership

has

been

studied

in

different

ways

depending

on

the

researcher’s methodological preferences and conception of leadership.

Some of the definitions of Leadership given by eminent researchers are:

Stogdill (1974) says that:

"Leadership is the initiation and maintenance of structure in expectation and interaction.”

James MacGregor Burns (1978) concedes that:

“Leadership is leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values

and the motivations – ‘the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations’ - of both

leaders and followers. And the genius of leadership lies in the manner in which leaders see

and act on their own and their followers’ values and motivations.”

According to Katz and Kahn (1978):

"Leadership is the influential increment over and above mechanical compliance with the

routine directives of the organization.”

According to John Gardner (1990):

"Leadership is the process of persuasion and example by which an individual (or leadership

team) induces a group to take action that is in accord with the leader’s purpose or the

shared purposes of all."

Buchannan and Huczynski (1997) explain leadership as:

“A social process in which one individual influences the behaviour of others without the

use of threat or violence.”

1.3 THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP

Most researchers deal with only one narrow aspect of leadership and

most of the studies fall into distinct lines of research. As shown in Figure 1.1,

most leadership research can be classified into one of the following approaches:

1. Trait Approach

2. Behavioural Approach

3. Contingency Theories

4. Contemporary Approaches

Leadership Theories

Leadership Theories Trait Approach Behavioural Approach Contingency Approach Contemporary Approach Ohio State
Trait Approach Behavioural Approach Contingency Approach Contemporary Approach Ohio State Managerial Grid Studies
Trait Approach
Behavioural Approach
Contingency Approach
Contemporary Approach
Ohio State
Managerial Grid
Studies
University of Michigan
Studies
Fiedler Model
Hersey & Blanchard’s
Situational Theory
Leader-member
Path-Goal
Exchange Theory
Theory
Transactional
Charismatic
Transformational
Leadership
Leadership
Leadership
Leadership
Decision Group

Fig 1.1: Classification of Major Leadership Theories

1.3.1 TRAIT APPROACH

Trait theory assumes that people inherit certain qualities and traits that make

them better suited to leadership. Trait theories often identify particular personality

or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders. But if particular traits are key

features of leadership, how do we explain people who possess those qualities

but are not leaders? This question is one of the difficulties in using trait theories

to explain leadership.

One of the earliest approaches for studying leadership was the trait approach.

These theories sought personality, social, physical, or intellectual traits that

differentiated leaders from non leaders. Underlying this approach was the

assumption that some people are natural leaders who are endowed with certain

traits

not

possessed by other people.

Early

leadership

theories

attributed

managerial success to possession of extraordinary abilities such as tireless

energy,

penetrating

intuition,

uncanny

foresight,

and

irresistible

persuasive

powers. Hundreds of trait studies were conducted during the 1930s and 1940s to

discover these elusive qualities, but this massive research effort failed to find any

traits that would guarantee leadership success. Some of the traits identified were

as following:

Personality traits:

self-confident, adaptable, assertive, emotionally stable etc.

Task-related characteristics: driven to excel, accepting of responsibility, having

initiative, results-oriented etc.

Physical traits: young to middle-aged, energetic, tall, handsome etc.

Social characteristics: charismatic, charming, tactful, popular, cooperative,

diplomatic etc.

But the trait approach failed to predict universal set of traits that predict

leadership in all situations. Rather, traits appear to predict leadership in selective

situations.

1.3.2 BEHAVIOURAL APPROACH

In the 1950s when researchers became discouraged with the trait approach, they

began to pay closer attention

to

what managers actually do on the job.

Researchers started to look at the behaviors that specific leaders exhibited. They

developed training programs to change managers' leadership behaviors and

assumed that the best styles of leadership could be learned. Behavioral theories

of leadership are based upon the belief that great leaders are made, not born.

Rooted in behaviorism, this leadership theory focuses on the actions of leaders,

not on mental qualities or internal states. According to this theory, people can

learn to become leaders through teaching and observation. Some of these

theories are:

Ohio State Studies

University of Michigan Studies

Managerial Grid

Ohio State Studies

The most comprehensive and replicated behavioral theories result from research

that began at Ohio State University in the late 1940s. These researchers sought

to identify independent dimensions of leader behavior.

The Ohio State studies utilized the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire

(LBDQ), administering it to samples of individuals in the military, manufacturing

companies,

college

administrators,

and

student

leaders.

Answers

to

the

questionnaire were factor-analyzed to determine if common leader behaviors

emerged across samples.

Two factors, termed consideration and initiating structure, consistently appeared.

Initiating structure, sometimes called task-oriented behavior, involves planning,

organizing, and coordinating the work of subordinates. Consideration involves

showing concern for subordinates, being supportive, recognizing subordinates'

accomplishments, and providing for subordinates' welfare.

The conclusion was that there were two distinct aspects of leadership that

describe how leaders carry out their role. The Ohio State study identified two

leadership styles: initiating and considerate structure.

Initiating structure refers to the extent to which a leader is likely to define and

structure his

or

her role

and

those of

employees in the search for goal

attainment.

Consideration is described as the extent to which a person is likely to have job

relationships that are characterized by mutual trust, respect for employees’ ideas,

and regard for their feelings. He or she shows concern for followers’ comfort, well

being, status, and satisfaction. It was found that leaders high in initiating structure

and

consideration

(a “high-high

leader) tended

to

achieve

high

employee

performance and satisfaction more frequently than those who rated low on

consideration, initiating structure, or both. However, the “high-high” style did not

always result in positive consequences.

University of Michigan Studies

The Michigan leadership studies took place at about the same time as those at

Ohio State. Under the general direction of Rensis Likert, the focus of the

Michigan studies was to determine the principles and methods of leadership that

led to productivity and job satisfaction.

The

University

of

Michigan

study

classified

leaders'

behaviors

as

being

production oriented and employee-centered. The primary concern of leaders

with employee-centered style is the employee's welfare. The primary concern of

leaders with production-centered style is achieving goals. However, employee

oriented leaders appear to be associated with high group productivity and job

satisfaction. Production oriented leaders tended to be associated with low group

productivity and lower job satisfaction.

Managerial Grid

The Managerial Grid

is a behavioral leadership model developed by Robert

Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964. This model identifies five different leadership

style based on the concern for people and the concern for production.

As shown in the Figure 2.1, the model is represented as a grid with concern for

production on the X-axis and concern for people on the Y-axis; each axis ranging

from 1 (Low) to 9 (High). The five resulting leadership styles are as follows:

9 1,9 9,9 High 8 7 6 Concern 5 5,5 for People 4 3 2
9
1,9
9,9
High
8
7
6
Concern
5
5,5
for
People
4
3
2
1
1,1
9,1
Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Low
Concern for production
High

Figure: 1.2 Managerial Grid

The impoverished style (1, 1)

In this style, managers have low concern for both people and production.

Managers use this style to avoid getting into trouble. The main concern for the

manager is not to be held responsible for any mistakes, which results in less

innovative decisions.

Leader uses a "delegate and disappear" management style. Since they are not

committed to either task accomplishment or maintenance; they essentially allow

their team to do whatever it wishes and prefer to detach themselves from the

team process by allowing the team to suffer from a series of power struggles.

The country club style (1, 9)

This style has a high concern for people and a low concern for production.

Managers using this style pay much attention to the security and comfort of the

employees, in the hope that this would increase performance. The resulting

atmosphere is usually friendly, but not necessarily productive.

The produce or perish style (9, 1)

With a high concern for production and a low concern for people, this style find

employee needs unimportant. The managers provide their employees with

money and expect performance back. Managers using this style also pressurize

their employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals.

This dictatorial style

is based

on

Theory X and

is commonly applied by

companies on the edge of real or perceived failure.

The middle-of-the-road style (5, 5)

Managers using this style try to balance between company goals and workers'

needs. By giving some concern to both people and production, managers who

use this style hope to achieve acceptable performance.

The team style (9, 9)

In this style, high concern is paid both to people and production. As suggested by

the propositions of Theory Y, managers choosing this style encourage teamwork

and commitment among employees. This method relies heavily on making

employees feel as a constructive part of the company.

This type of person leads by positive example and endeavors to foster a team

environment in which all team members can reach their highest potential, both as

team members and as people. They encourage the team to reach team goals as

effectively as possible, while also working tirelessly to strengthen the bonds

among the various members. They normally form and lead some of the most

productive teams.

1.3.3 CONTINGENCY THEORIES

Contingency or situational theories of leadership propose that the organizational

or work group context affects the extent to which given leader traits and

behaviors will be effective. Contingency theories gained prominence in the late

1960s and 1970s. In this theory, the success of the leader is a function of various

factors in the form of subordinate, task, and/or group variables. The effectiveness

of a given pattern of leader behaviour is contingent upon the demands imposed

by the situation. These theories stress using different styles of leadership

appropriate to the needs created by different organizational situations.

In this theory, the success of the leader is a function of various factors in the form

of subordinate, task, and/or group variables. The effectiveness of a given pattern

of leader behaviour is contingent upon the demands imposed by the situation.

These theories stress using different styles of leadership appropriate to the

needs created by different organizational situations. Contingency theories of

leadership focus on particular variables related to the environment that might

determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation.

According to this theory, no leadership style is best in all situations. Success

depends upon a number of variables, including the leadership style, qualities of

the followers, and aspects of the situation. Some of these theories are:

Fiedler's Contingency Model

Hersey-Blanchard Situational Theory

Path-Goal Theory

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Fiedler's Contingency Model

Introduced in 1967, Fiedler's contingency theory was the first to specify how

situational factors interact with leader traits and behavior to influence leadership

effectiveness.

The

theory

suggests

that

the

"favorability"

of

the

situation

determines the effectiveness of task- and person-oriented leader behavior.

Fiedler’s approach departs from trait and behavioural models by asserting that

group performance is contingent on the leader’s psychological orientation and on

three contextual variables: group atmosphere, task structure, and leader’s power

position.

Fiedler's model assumes that group performance depends on

Leadership style

Situational favourableness, determined by three factors viz.,

Leader-member relations i.e. the degree to which a leader is

accepted and supported by the group members.

Task structure i.e. the extent to which the task is structured and

defined, with clear goals and procedures.

Position power i.e. the ability of a leader to control subordinates

through reward and punishment.

While the high levels of these three factors give the most favourable situation,

low levels generate the least favourable situation. Relationship-motivated leaders

are most effective in moderately favourable situations. Task-motivated leaders

are most effective at either end of the scale.

Fiedler suggests that it may be easier for leaders to change their situation to

achieve effectiveness rather than change their leadership style.

The theory did not necessarily propose that leaders could adapt their leadership

styles to different situations, but that leaders with different leadership styles

would be more effective when placed in situations that matched their preferred

style.

Hersey-Blanchard Situational Theory

This situational leadership theory was initially introduced in 1969 and revised in

1977 by Hersey and Blanchard. The theory suggests that the key contingency

factor affecting leaders' choice of leadership style is the task-related maturity of

the subordinates. Subordinate maturity is defined in terms of the ability of

subordinates to accept responsibility for their own task-related behavior. The

theory classifies leader behaviors into the two broad classes of task-oriented and

relationship-oriented behaviors. The major proposition of situational leadership

theory is that the effectiveness of task and relationship-oriented leadership

depends upon the maturity of a leader's subordinates.

The theory suggests that leadership style should be matched to the maturity of

the subordinates. Maturity is assessed in relation to a specific task and has two

parts:

Psychological maturity, which reflects their self-confidence, ability and

readiness to accept responsibility.

Job maturity, which reflects their relevant skills and technical knowledge.

As the subordinate maturity increases, leadership should be more relationship-

motivated than task-motivated. For four degrees of subordinate maturity, from

highly mature to highly immature, leadership can consist of:

Delegating to subordinates.

Participating with subordinates.

Selling ideas to subordinates.

Telling subordinates what to do

Path-Goal Theory

Path-goal theory was first presented in a 1971Administrative Science Quarterly

article

by

Robert

House.

Path-goal

theory

proposes

that

subordinates'

characteristics and characteristics of the work environment determine which

leader behaviors will be more effective. Key characteristics of subordinates

identified by the theory are locus of control, work experience, ability, and the

need for affiliation. Important environmental characteristics named by the theory

are the nature of the task, the formal authority system, and the nature of the work

group.

Evans and House suggest that the performance, satisfaction and motivation of a

group can be affected by the leader in a number of ways:

Offering rewards for the achievement of performance goals.

Clarifying paths towards these goals.

Removing performance obstacles.

A person may do these by adopting a certain leadership style according to the

situation:

Directive leadership - Specific advice is given to the group and ground

rules are established.

 

Supportive

leadership

-

Good

relations

exist

with

the

group

and

sensitivity to subordinates' needs is shown.

 

Participative

leadership

-

Decision

making

is

based

on

group

consultation and information is shared with the group.

Achievement-oriented leadership - Challenging goals are set and high

performance is encouraged while showing confidence in the groups'

ability.

Supportive

behaviour

increases

group

satisfaction,

particularly

in

stressful

situations, while directive behaviour is suited to ambiguous situations. It is also

suggested that leaders who have influence upon their superiors can increase

group satisfaction and performance.

According to the theory, leader behavior should reduce barriers to subordinates'

goal

attainment,

strengthen

subordinates'

expectancies

that

improved

performance will lead to valued rewards, and provide coaching to make the path

to payoffs easier for subordinates. Path-goal theory suggests that the leader

behavior that will accomplish these tasks depends upon the subordinate and

environmental contingency factors.

In contrast to the Fiedler contingency model, the path-goal model states that the

four leadership styles are fluid, and that leaders can adopt any of the four

depending on what the situation demands.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

The Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory argues that because of time

pressures, leaders establish a special relationship with a small group of their

followers. These individuals make up the in-group. They are trusted, get a

disproportionate amount of the leader’s attention, and are more likely to receive

special privileges. Other followers fall into the out-group. They get less of the

leader’s time, fewer of the preferred rewards that the leader controls, and have

leader-follower relations based on formal authority interactions.

Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory was initially called the vertical dyad

linkage theory. The theory was introduced by George Graen and various

colleagues in the 1970s and has been revised and refined in the years since.

LMX theory emphasizes the dyadic (i.e., one-on-one) relationships between

leaders and individual subordinates, instead of the traits or behaviors of leaders

or situational characteristics.

The theory's focus is determining the type of leader-subordinate relationships

that promote effective outcomes and the factors that determine whether leaders

and subordinates will be able to develop high-quality relationships.

According to LMX theory, leaders do not treat all subordinates in the same

manner,

but

establish

close

relationships

with

some

(the

in-group)

while

remaining aloof from others (the out-group). Those in the in-group enjoy

relationships with the leader that is marked by trust and mutual respect. They

tend to be involved in important activities and decisions. Conversely, those in the

out-group are excluded from important activities and decisions.

LMX

theory

suggests

that

high-quality

relationships

between

a

leader-

subordinate dyad will lead to positive outcomes such as better performance,

lower

turnover,

job

satisfaction,

and

organizational

commitment.

Empirical

research supports many of the proposed relationships (Steers et al., 1996).

1.3.4 CONTEMPORARY APPROACHES

Another line of influence research attempts to explain why the followers of some

leaders are willing to exert exceptional effort and make personal sacrifices to

accomplish the group objective and mission. The effectiveness of a leader is

explained in terms of his/her influence on the way followers view themselves and

interprets events. Effective leaders influence followers to have more optimism,

self-confidence and commitment to the objectives or mission of the organization.

Most theories of charismatic and transformations leadership identify the types of

behaviour used by the leader and traits that facilitate the leader’s effectiveness.

In contrast to other approaches in leadership research, follower perceptions and

attributions are also considered to be important for understanding leadership

effectiveness. The same behaviour by a leader may have a different effect on

followers depending on the current situation, the prior history of interaction

between the leaders and the followers and the way the behaviour is interpreted

by followers.

Contemporary approaches focus upon the connections formed between leaders

and followers. These leaders motivate and inspire people by helping group

members

see

the

importance

and

higher

good

of

the

task.

contemporary theories of leadership are:

Transactional leadership

Transformational leadership

Charismatic leadership

Leadership in Decision Group

Some

of

Transactional Leadership

Transactional

leadership

is

based

on

an

exchange

between

leaders

and

followers. It is effective because it is in the best interest of followers to do what

the leader wants.18 There are four types of behaviours that are associated with

transactional leadership: contingent reward, active management by exception,

passive management by exception, and laissez-faire leadership.

Contingent reward behaviour includes the clarification of what is expected of

followers in order to receive rewards.19 Rewards, such as money and time-off,

are used as incentives to motivate followers to perform. Management by

exception refers to leadership that utilizes corrective criticism, negative feedback,

and negative reinforcement.20 It can either be active or passive. A leader

employing the active form of management by exception is always on the lookout

for problems and takes corrective actions immediately following a minor mistake

or rule violation by a follower. Such a leader is always acutely aware of what

his/her followers are doing. A leader using the passive form does not monitor

followers as closely, and only reacts to problems once they have occurred.21

Mistakes are only noticed and addressed once they become obvious obstacles to

goal attainment. Laissez-faire leadership is descriptive of a leader who acts

indifferently to followers and who is not concerned with the mission. This type of

leader abdicates all leadership roles and responsibilities. Laissez-faire is often

considered a non-leadership factor.22

Although transactional leadership is effective in certain situations, there is

increasing evidence that it is not an effective leadership model for achieving long-

term objectives. Followers are motivated to perform certain tasks, contingent on

rewards, but transactional leadership fails to motivate followers to perform

beyond their basic job requirements. It is essential to understand that human

behaviour is often based on a series of exchanges, yet the transactional

leadership

model

is

too

simplistic

and

offers

no

explanation

for

intrinsic

motivation.

Furthermore,

although

transactional

leadership

focuses

on

the

exchange between leaders and followers, it is the leader who has the power and

who controls the terms of the relationship.

Transformational leadership

According to Bernard Bass,

Transformational leadership occurs when a leader transforms, or changes, his or

her followers in three important ways that together result in followers trusting the

leader, performing behaviors that contribute to the achievement of organizational

goals and being motivated to perform at a high level. Transformational leaders:

Increase subordinates’ awareness of the importance of their tasks and the

importance of performing well.

Make

subordinates

aware

of

their

development, and accomplishment.

needs

for

personal

growth,

Motivate their subordinates to work for the good of the organization rather

than exclusively for their own personal gain or benefit.

Transformational leaders provide individualized consideration, intellectual

stimulation, and possess charisma.

Transformational leadership builds on top of transactional leadership.

Building on Bass’s contributions, Tichy and Devanna identified the characteristics

of transformational leaders as follows:

They identify themselves as change agents.

They are courageous individuals.

They believe in people.

They are value-driven.

They are lifelong learners.

They have the ability to deal with complexity.

They are visionaries.

Transformational

leadership

is

a

process

that

changes

and

transforms

individuals. It is often associated with ethics and involves long term goals. It is

not thought to involve an exchange between leader and follower such as exists

for transactional leadership. Instead, transformational leadership focuses on the

process by which the leader engages with followers, and together create a

connection that raises each of them to higher levels of motivation and morality. A

transformational leader must be attentive to follower needs and motivation, and

tries to help followers reach their full potential.

According to B.M. Bass, the leader transforms and motivates followers by making

them more aware of the importance of task outcomes, inducing them to

transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the organization or team, and

activating their higher order needs. It is hypothesized that follower motivation and

performance

are

enhanced

transactional leadership.

more

by

transformational

leadership

than

by

Transformational leadership is concerned both with the performance of followers

as well as developing them to their full potential. There are four main factors that

have

been

associated

with

transformational

leaders:

idealized

influence,

inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.

Charismatic Leadership

It

is

widely believed

that

charismatic

leaders

are

the product of

follower

perceptions and attributions that are influenced by actual leader traits and

behaviour, the context of the situation, and the individual and collective needs of

the followers. There are many different theories of charismatic leadership.

Although they differ in their reasons for why charisma has been attributed to the

leader they all share the basic assumption of what a charismatic leader is.

Charisma is a Greek word that means “divinely inspired gift”. The term has since

been used to describe a leader whose followers think that he/she is endowed

with exceptional qualities. Such a leader is thought to yield influence over his/her

followers because of these special powers instead of needing to use traditional or

formal forms of authority.

Charisma is believed to be attributed to leaders who advocate a unique vision,

yet one that lies within the range of acceptability by followers. It is thought more

likely to be attributed to leaders who act in unconventional ways to achieve their

vision. Furthermore, leaders who make self-sacrifice, take personal risk, and

incur high costs to achieve

charismatic.

their vision are

more

likely to

be viewed as

Often the followers of a charismatic leader think that the leader’s beliefs are

correct. They, therefore, obey the leader willingly and without question, feel

affection towards the leader, and are emotionally involved in the mission. As well,

followers of a charismatic leader often believe that they can contribute to the

success of the mission and consequently set high performance goals for

themselves.

On their own part, charismatic leaders usually have high self-confidence and a

strong need for power. They often hold a strong conviction in their own beliefs

and ideals, and use these to articulate ideological goals relating the mission, with

the hope that followers will imitate their behaviour. Charismatic leaders are likely

to engage in behaviours designed to impress their competence upon their

followers and they hold high expectations about follower’s performance while

simultaneously expressing confidence them.

Charismatic leadership is similar to the trait approach yet important differences

distinguish the two. Whereas the trait approach focuses exclusively on the

leader,

charismatic

leadership

theories

appreciate

the

connection

between

leaders, followers, and the situation. Indeed, a charismatic leader is thought to be

the product of his/her followers. Charismatic leaders are also thought of as

having strong beliefs and their emergence is very dependent upon the situation.

Trait theories, however, neglect to address these issues. It is important to note,

however,

that

there

has

been

a

‘dark

side’

associated

with

charismatic

leadership. The personal power awarded to a charismatic leader can make them

insensitive, manipulative, domineering, impulsive and/or defensive, creating a

negative impact on the organization as a whole.

Leadership in Decision Group

Much of a manager’s time is spent in formal and informal meetings with

subordinates,

peers,

superiors

and

outsiders.

Meetings

are

held

to

solve

problems, make decisions and coordinate related activities. Many management

meetings run too long and fail to result in an agreement because essential

leadership functions are not carried out by anyone. What leaders should do to

make meetings more effective has been the subject of research by behavioural

scientists over the last three decades. Consultants and practitioners have also

contributed to our knowledge about leadership in decision groups.

Chapter 2

CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN LEADERSHIP

In this chapter following contemporary issues in leadership will be discussed:

Gender: do males and females lead differently?

Leading through Empowerment

What about followership?

National Culture As An Added Contingency Variable

Providing Team Leadership

Moral Dimension To Leadership

2.1 GENDER: DO MALES AND FEMALES LEAD DIFFERENTLY?

Does the fact that the leader is a woman rather than a man matter? Does it make

a difference in the workplace? Do women lead differently than men? Are styles of

leadership, leadership characteristics, types of interactions with followers and

peers different than for men in similar positions? Does gender change the face of

leadership?

Recognizing the large number of women currently in leadership positions,

questions of gender difference assume greater importance than in previous

years. What do we need to know about women and leadership to advance our

work successfully?

Though females' early socialization and other obstacles may impede them from

becoming leaders, those who do ascend do not behave significantly differently

from men in the same kinds of positions. Some studies have been able to discern

differences in leadership style and managerial behavior, but most have not.

Studies

have

examined

male/female

differences

in

three

main

types

of

managerial behavior. The first is task accomplishment style, which is how much

the leader initiates, organizes, and defines work activities and processes. The

second is interpersonal style, which is how much the leader builds morale,

relationships, satisfaction, and commitment in the organization. The third is

decision-making style, which is how much the leader encourages a participative,

democratic approach as opposed to an autocratic approach.

Some studies find differences between males' and females' task accomplishment

styles and interpersonal styles. Males tended to be more task-oriented; females

tended to be more relationship-oriented. These differences, however, have been

observed only in men and women subjects of laboratory experiments, that is,

people asked to speculate how they would behave if they were leaders.

Differences disappear in studies where actual managers are compared: most

conclude that women do not behave differently from men in the same or similar

kind of leadership position. Moreover, experienced women managers show no

differences in leadership abilities from experienced male managers. These

women, in fact, are likely to more closely resemble their male counterparts in

drive, skills, temperament, and competitiveness, than the average woman in the

population.

Some difference has been found in males' and females' decision making styles.

According to Gary N. Powell's comprehensive study, Women and Men in

Management, women tend to employ a more democratic, participative style while

men tend to take a more autocratic, directive approach. This difference has

appeared in both laboratory studies and observations of real leaders. Some

scholars thus argue that women's tendency to negotiate, mediate, facilitate, and

communicate is the more effective leadership style than men's emphasis on

power and control; and because this "feminine" style reduces hierarchy, satisfies

subordinates, and achieves results, it should be the norm to which men are

compared. There is some evidence that this is occurring: most mainstream

writers

now

urge

managers

to

adopt

a

caring,

cooperative,

collaborative,

nurturing, connective, servant leadership style.

During the late 1990s medical science found a physical basis for some of these

basic differences in leadership qualities. As asserted by Dorion Sagan in "Gender

Specifics: Why Women Aren't Men," the structure of the female brain affords

women several biological and cognitive advantages. This was thought to be in

large part due to the connector between the two sides of the brain being larger in

women than in men, resulting in a better ability on the female's part to integrate

left brain/right brain activities. Women were thought better able to follow several