An Overview of
Organizational Leadership and Management
Power
The quest for power has dominated human history. One
of the earliest works on the management of power was
written by Niccolo Machiavelli, a political advisor to
nobles during the early sixteenth century. In The
Prince, Machiavelli laid out a set of principles that
would help the nobles maintain their leadership and
control over the populous. A few of the most important of
Machiavelli's assertions are:
· It is better to be a conservative rather than
liberal spender.
· It is better to be feared than loved. One can
be feared without being hated.
· The end justifies the means.
· Cunningness is preferable to integrity.
· Take opportunities to give dramatic rewards or
punishments so they will be talked about.
· Offer help to parties that are less powerful
than you.
· Do not take common cause with parties more
powerful than you.
· Use counselors that are truthful, but who have
a narrow focus.
· Acting impetuously is preferable to cautiously.
· Seek a reputation of severity instead of
softness.
· Use care not to offend the powerful or those
subservient to you.
Modern theories of management reject the underlying
ethics of Machiavelli's power principles. Power is
maintained through fear, which is unacceptable because it
involves the repression of the human spirit.
Yukl (1989) defines power "as an agent's
potential influence over the attitudes and behavior of
one or more designated target persons" (p. 14). Yukl
proposes a taxonomy to classify power in organizations
according to its derivation--position, personal, or
political.
Position power is frequently called "legitimate
power" (French and Raven, 1959). It is derived from
a person's position in an organization and includes
control over rewards, punishments, information,
resources, rule-making, work assignments, and decision
making. Subordinates comply with this form of power out
of obedience to authority, loyalty to the organization,
or respect for the hierarchical structure. In some way,
they recognize the legitimacy of the authority.
Membership in an organization can be viewed as a form of
a "social contract", where members agree to the
rules in return for the benefits of membership (March and
Simon, 1959).
Power derived from personal attributes comes from the
interactions of a person with other members of the
organization. One form of this power, dubbed "expert
power" (French and Raven, 1959), comes from an
individual's expertise in solving problems or performing
a particular task. Another form of personal power is
derived from loyalties and friendships developed over a
long period of time. French and Raven (1959) referred to
this as "referent power". Personal charisma is
a form of referent power. People tend to be attracted to
and identify with charismatic leaders. In a review of
eighteen studies, Podsakoff and Schriesheim (1985)
concluded that effective leadership is strongly
associated with the use of referent power.
Political power involves deliberate attempts by groups
or indiviudals to increase or maintain their existing
level of power. It encompases actions to gain control or
influence over decision making processes. Coalitions and
alliances are often formed as part of the political
process, and they often involve deliberate attempts to
undermine the opposition to the coalition. For example,
"co-optation" is a political strategy where an
influential individual from the opposition might be
allowed to participate in a decision making process,
knowing that this will increase their commitment to the
decision (Yukl, 1989).
French and Raven's (1959) power taxonomy is similar to
Yukl's (1989) except that position power is subdivided
into reward and coercive powers. In addition, French and
Raven stressed that the different types of power are
likely to be related in complex ways.
Social exchange theory (Hollander, 1958, 1979; Jacobs,
1970) attempts to explain how power is won and lost by
understanding the interaction processes between
individuals. The theory looks at how leaders emerge in
groups as a result of their interactions with other
members of the group. The weakness of the theory is that
it only attempts to understand interactions after the
fact, and it does not offer any guidelines for leaders on
the acquisition or use of power.
Motivation
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 was satisfied, it no
longer would have the ability to motivate. At the bottom
of the hierarchy, were 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 was self-fulfillment, which involved deriving a
sense of value and satisfaction from one's work. While
people generally filled 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.
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 statisfaction 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 a lack of satisfiers would not
cause dissatisfaction. The presence of hygiene factors
would not cause satisfaction, but their absence would
cause dissatisfaction. 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, p. 381).
During the early 1960's, managers began to recognize
that money, working conditions, and punishment were not
effective long-term motivators. Douglas McGregor (1960)
theorized that the emotional climate of work was an
important motivating factor. He postulated two opposing
theories. Theory X views people as lazy and unmotivated.
It argues that people naturally avoid responsibility, and
therefore, need to be controlled and directed. Threats of
punishment and deprivation are compelling motivators.
Theory Y, on the other hand, states that work itself is a
gratifying motivator. People will use self-control to
achieve a goal, and they will accept (and even welcome)
responsibility. Evidence exists to support both theories,
although most modern managers favor theory Y (Drucker,
1974).
McGregor was dissatisfied with the either/or
interpretation of his theories, and in 1967 proposed
Theory Z as a way for management to embrace the paradox
by simultaneously accepting both points of view.
McGregor's Theory Z was never accepted or popularized. As
Pascale (1990) points out, when Ouchi's book Theory Z
was published in 1981, very few people even remembered
that McGregor had previously used the term.
Expectancy theory attempts to understand motivation as
a process where workers rationally decide how much effort
to devote to a job at any given time (Georgopolous,
Mahoney, and Jones, 1957; Porter and Lawler, 1968; Vroom,
1964). According to the theory, workers weigh the
desireable outcomes (e.g., higher pay, promotion,
recognition, etc.) against the undesireable outcomes
(e.g., reprimand, layofff, stress, etc.). The probability
of a perceived outcome is referred to as an expectancy,
and the desirability of the outcome is its valence. A
workers motivation is affected by the combination of
expectancies and valences for each of the outcomes.
The reinforcement theory of motivation (also called
contingency theory) is an outgrowth of the behaviorist
school of psychology. Skinner is the most well-know
proponent of the theory. The basic principles of the
theory are: 1) reinforced behavior tends to be repeated,
2) reward is more effective than punishment, 3) feedback
is necessary for improvement 4) rewards should be given
without delay, and 5) rewards should be given for
successive approximations of the desired behavior
(Schneier, 1974).
Collins and Porras (1989) believe that motivation is
the result of people doing a job that they think is
worthwhile. They assert that motivation is not something
that needs to be cultivated directly. Instead, it is a
natural outcome of workers' who believe in the mission,
vision, and purpose of an organization. The
"purpose" of an organization is a set of broad,
enduring, inspirational, and fundamental reasons for the
existence of the organization. The purpose provides a
clear sense of direction by stating what members of the
organization want to contribute to the world. The
"mission" is a clearly defined and achievable
goal. It provides a focal point of motivation. The
"vision" is usually defined as being able to
foresee the future, and developing a plan to meet the
future needs. Collins and Porras (1989) define vision as
"the ability to see the potential in or necessity of
opportunities right in front of you. . . vision isn't
forecasting the future, it is creating the future by
taking action in the present." (p. 87)
Approaches to the Study of Leadership
Yukl (1989) identified four approaches for studying
leadership. The "power influence approach"
attempts to understand leadership effectiveness in terms
of the amount and type of power possessed by the leader.
This approach would examine how power is acquired, lost,
and maintained. The "behavior approach" looks
at the actual tasks performed by leaders. This involves
evaluating daily activities and behavioral
characteristics of leaders. The "trait
approach" looks at the personal attributes of
leaders, such as energy, intuition, creativity,
persuasiveness, and foresight. The "situational
approach" examines leadership in terms of its
relationships with environmental factors, such as
superiors, subordinants, and peers. This approach is
often referred to as contingency theory because the role
of the leader is contingent on the situation.
Another consideration in the study of leadership is
that most theorists believe that managerial and
leadership skills are different. "Leaders create and
articulate vision, managers insure it is put into
practice" (Syrett and Hogg, 1992, p.5).
Kotter (1990) elaborates on the differences.
Management focuses on dealing with complexity, while
leadership involves dealing with change. Management is
committed to planning and budgeting, while leaders
formulate and vision and set an organizational direction.
Management is concerned with organizing and staffing, and
leadership involves aligning people to a shared vision.
Management is controlling and problem solving; leadership
is motivating and inspiring.
Bennis (1990) also makes a strong distinction between
leading and managing. A leader is a conceptualist with an
entrepreneurial vision. A leader needs to be concerned
with the big picture and the long-range future of an
organization. Managers, on the other hand, are concerned
with day-to-day routine operations, and part of their
objective is to isolate leaders from these operations.
Are the qualities of managers and leaders mutually
exclusive? Can a single person possess both leadership
and management skills? Kotter (1990) believes that
"smart companies value both kinds of people and work
hard to make them part of the team." Even more
importantly, "they can begin to groom their top
people to provide both." (p. 16-17)
Vision
Vision "periodically provides an organization
with a feeling of unity in its sense of direction"
(Dilenschneider, 1992, p. 24). Dilenschneider argues that
even in the best organizations, unity of purpose only
occurs for brief periods of time. "It's
self-interest that drives moment-by-moment behavior in
almost all organizations, unless you're talking about a
band of saints." (p. 25)
According to Dilenschneider (1992), there are three
ways for a leader to develop a vision. The first is for
the leader to develop a personal vision and to then
communicate it to the organization. This relies heavily
on the leader's ability to communicate the vision to the
organization, and to persuade the members of the
organization to accept it. The second is to buy a vision
by hiring a consultant. According to Dilenschneider, the
disadvantage of this method is that it often results in a
"canned solution" that has been watered down so
that it is adaptable to many organizations. In contrast,
Kotter (1990) states that "what's crucial about a
vision is not its originality but how well it serves the
interests of important constituencies -- customers,
stockholders, employees -- and how easily it can be
translated into a realistic competitive strategy."
(p. 19) The third way to develop a vision is to assemble
the top managers to create a consensus vision.
Dilenschneider argues that the collaborative creation of
vision "probably leads to the most durable and
effective results." (p. 17) In effect,
Dilenschneider is proposing a variation of the Delphi
forecasting method as a way of creating a vision.
Communicating a vision is obviously as important as
its creation. This involves more than simply articulating
its message. A vision must be communicated through
clearity of action. Dilenschneider (1992) emphasizes that
need to know "inside-out" communications, where
managers examine the communication process itself. (p.
20)
Sustaining a vision may be more difficult than its
creation. Conviction is the glue that gives a vision
staying-power. Dilenschneider (1992) points out that
sucessful leaders "have recognized how important it
is to sell rightness emotionally, not just
intellectually." (p. 24) This provides the fuel for
sustained focus (i.e., conviction).
Vision and organizational culture are linked, each
having an effect on the other. Dilenschneider (1992)
writes that the vision of a leader in a new organization
shapes the culture, while in mature organization, the
leader must choose a vision that accomodates the exisitng
organizaitonal culture. Unlike many theorists,
Dilenschneider believes that corporate culture is
"shaped by lore" (p. 26), and thus requires
generations to make significant changes. Ritualized
behavior, established over long periods of time, are
especially immutable to change. Dilenschneider recommends
that leaders find ways to support positive rituals, and
to keep the vision in harmony with the organizational
culture.
Leadership Style
Psychologist Kurt Lewin (1951) studied leadership
methods by designing an experiment to compare autocratic
and democratic leadership styles. As the experiment
progressed, one of the democratic leaders was
recategorized as laissez-faire. The autocratic leaders
groups tended to be quarrelsome and work progressed at a
modest rate. When the leader was not present, work came
to a halt. The laissez-faire group ran haphazardly and
work progressed at a slow rate. The democratic groups ran
smoothly even when the leader was absent, and the
relationships of group members were more friendly.
Democratic leaders openly discussed issues with group
members and encouraged them to join in making decisions.
Uris (1964) argues that effective managers use all three
methods of leadership depending on the particular
circumstance.
During the 1950s, leadership studies were conducted at
Ohio State University and the University of Michigan. The
Ohio State leadership studies (Fleishman, 1953; Halpin
and Winer, 1957; Hemphill and Coons, 1957) resulted in
the creation of the Leader Behavior Description
Questionnaire (LBDQ), a commonly used instrument to
assess leadership behavior.
The Ohio State studies used a 150 item questionnaire
to examine how subordinants perceived their supervisor's
behavior. Factor analyses of the questionnaire revealed
two behavior constructs, which were later labeled
"consideration" and "initiating
structure". Consideration included those items that
indicated a leader's friendliness, supportiveness, and
compasion. Initiating structures were items that
indicated the degree of structure that a leader imposed
on subordinants (e.g., deadlines, assigning tasks, and
following standard procedures). In a large correlational
study, Fleishman and Harris (1962) reported that turnover
rate was negatively correlated with consideration, and
positively associated with initiating structure, although
they emphasized the nonlinearity of the relationships.
"There appear to be certain critical levels beyond
which increased Consideration or decreased Initiating
Structure have no effect on turnover or grievance
rate." (p. 53) In a summary of literature, Yukl
(1989) reports that the effect of consideration has been
confirmed, but the results of studies on initiating
structure have not been clear or consistent.
The University of Michigan leadership studies (Katz
and Kahn, 1952; Katz, Maccoby, and Morse, 1950; Katz, et
al., 1951) were a series of correlational studies to
examine the relationships between leadership behavior,
group processes, and group productivity. Manager
effectiveness was equated with group productivity. In a
summary of these studies, Likert (1961) writes that three
types of leadership behavior were found to be good
predictors of management effectiveness: task-oriented
behavior, relationship-orientated behavior, and
participative leadership. Task-orientated behaviors are
the same as the initiating structures in the Ohio
studies, and relationship-orientated behaviors are
similar to the consideration construct in the Ohio
studies. The difference between the two studies was that
the Michigan study viewed participative leadership as
separate from the other relationship-orientated
behaviors.
Participative Leadership
Participative leadership refers to the degree that to
which other people can influence the leader's decisions.
It is interesting to note that this is nearly the
opposite of the definition of power. Yukl (1989) presents
a taxonomy of four decision making procedure categories.
1) The autocratic decision is where the manager
seeks no input from other people. 2) The consultation
decision is where the manager seeks opinions from
others, but makes the decision alone. 3) The joint
decision is where the manager and others discuss the
problem and make a joint decision. 4) The delegation
decision is one where the manager gives others the
authority to make the decision. Yukl is careful to point
out that decision making is actually a continuum instead
of discrete categories.
The first studies on participative leadership were
conducted by Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1939. Hundreds
of studies have been conducted since that time with mixed
results. Claims have been made that participative
management results in improved decisions, facilitation of
change, identificaiton with leadership, and a high level
of achievement (Williams and Huber, 1986).
Recent literature reviews and meta analyses have been
inconclusive (Miller and Monge, 1986; Schweiger and
Leana, 1986; Wagner and Gooding, 1987). Sometimes
participative leadership works, and other times it
doesn't. Generally, studies that used questionnaires to
assess employee satisfaction found positive results,
while those that used objective measures of productivity
were weaker and inconsistent. Most research in
participative leadership has consisted of short-term
field studies. Yukl (1989) argues that many of these
studies may have been actually measuring the
"Hawthorne effect", a temporary positive effect
from being the focus of attention.
Situtational Leadership Theory
Situtational leadership theory refers to belief that
the relative importance of leadership behaviors depends
on the situation. Aspects of the situation that modify
the importance of behavior are called situational
moderator variables.
Fiedler (1964, 1967) proposed the LPC contingency
model to predict leadership effectiveness from a measure
called the least preferred coworker score. The
leader is asked to grade their least favorite worker on a
series of bipolar adjectives (e.g. pleasant versus
unpleasant, friendly versus unfriendly, gloomy versus
cheerful). The scales are arranged so that the most
lenient learder would recieve the highest LPC score.
Fiedler's rationale was that leaders who received high
LPC scores were primarily motivated to have positive
relationships, and that the achievement of task
objectives was secondary. The degree to which LPC scores
correlated with effectiveness was modified by a
"situational favorability variable". The
situational favorability variable consisted of three
aspects of the situation: leader-manager relations,
position power, and task structure. Leadership
effectiveness was associated with good leader-manager
relations, high postion power (authority), and high task
structure. Fiedler's LPC theory was originally well
received, however, empirical support for the model has
been weak (Yukl, 1981).
Another contingency model was proposed by Fiedler in
1986. Cognitive resource theory attempts to examine the
conditions whereby intelligence, experience, and
expertise become predictive of leadership effectiveness.
Fiedler proposed that the effect of cognitive resources
becomes significant only when the leader is directive,
when there is little stress, and when the leader has some
expertise that cannot be performed by subordinants. The
theory predicts that in low-stress situations, the
leader's intelligence has an strong impact on
effectiveness, and in high-stress conditions, the
leader's expertise is more important.
Managerial Traits and Skills
Early studies on managerial traits were limited to
standardized intelligence and apptitude tests. Stogdill
(1948) reviewed 124 early studies on managerial traits.
The review concludes that "a person does not become
a leader by virtue of the possession of some combination
of traits. . ." (p. 64). More recents studies have
also tested for job-relevant technical knowledge and
administrative skills. In a 1974 review of 163 more
recent studies, Stogdill reversed his earlier position,
and concluded that:
The leader is charaterized by a strong drive for
responsibility and task completion, vigor and
persistence in pursuit of goals, venturesomeness and
originality in problem solving, drive to exercise
initiative in social situations, self-confidence and
sense of personal identity, willingness to accept
consquences of decision and action, readiness to
absorb interpersonal stress, willingness to tolerate
frustration and delay, ability to influence other
persons' behavior, and capacity to structure social
interaction systems to the purpose at hand. (p. 81)
Bass (1981) has pointed out that certain leadership
traits increase the likelihood of a leader's
effectiveness, however, they do not guarantee it. He
advocates a contingency model, where to a large degree,
the importance of a particular trait depends upon the
nature of the leadership situation.
Most theorists have a unique list of competencies
which they believe are important to leadership success.
While there is some overlap, the diversity of opinions is
surprising. As revealed by the following examples, there
seems to be little agreement on the most important
leadership attributes.
Bennis (1990) identifies four leadership competencies.
1) Management of attention through a compelling vision;
2) Communication skills necessary to transfer a vision to
others; 3) Being able to establish trust through
reliability and constancy; and 4) Knowing one's skills
and employing them effectively.
Giblin (1990) defines a four-attribute framework for
assessing leadership qualities: 1) resourcefulness, 2)
astuteness, 3) compatibility, and 4) knowledge. An
individual posessing these qualities is likely to be
perceived as a leader by others.
Dilenschneider (1992) cites five ingredients for
leadership: 1) vision and focus, 2) practical values, 3)
awareness and use of time, 4) empowerment and motivation,
and 5) objectivity and judgement. According to
Dilenschneider's theory, there are five core
organizational values (integrity, accountability,
diligence, perseverance, and discipline). Leaders derive
power by adopting a set of values consistent with those
deemed worthwhile by the organization.
Rolf Osterberg (1987) identifies five "components
of awareness" essential for business leadership. 1)
Hierarchies based on power are detrimental to personal
development, and must be eliminated. 2) The managers role
becomes one of "coordinating a self-organizing,
self-renewing and self-transcending system." (p. 69)
3) Problems are not deferred to higher levels (since
there are none), but instead are solved by the workers
who have the problems. 4) Goal setting is eliminated
because it does not encourage exploration and personal
development. 5) Profits are reinvested in the company and
not used to support other processes. Osterberg admits
that these premises will be a threat to established
organizations. He also acknowledges that attempts to
persuade them will be futile. Instead, he recommends that
documented examples "will speak much more loudly
than any statistics. Every such example will be a stone
thrown into the water spreading its ripples. Let us trust
the ripple effect which has its own life and its own
power." (p. 71)
Conflict and Stress
A common misperception is that the long hours and
demands of higher levels of authority are associated with
higher levels of stress. However, research has shown that
nonexecutives experience more stress than executives, and
that blue-collar workers have the most stress of all
(Williams and Huber, 1986).
Conflict within organizations is a source of stress.
Classical theorists believed that conflict could be dealt
with by exercising a strong dose of authority.
Neoclassical theorists attempted to eliminate conflict
through improved communications and understanding.
Neither approach is entirely acceptable to modern
theorists.
Today, organizational researchers recognize both the
positive and negative contributions of conflict. It is
simplistic to think that conflict in organizations can be
eliminated. Power struggles, disagreements over goals,
competition among workers, overlapping and abiguous
responsibilities, personality clashes, and
labor-management polarizations are all potential sources
of conflict. The negative aspects of conflict are readily
apparent, resulting in violence, stress, insomnia, and a
host of other delaterious effects. In contrast, Schmidt
(1974, p. 5) reported several positive outcomes from
conflict:
· Better ideas were produced.
· People were forced to search for new
approaches.
· Long-standing problems surfaced and were dealt
with.
· People were forced to clairfy their views.
· The tension stimulated interest and creativity.
· People had a chance to test their capacities.
Confilict can serve as an catalyst for change. It can
inspire people to search for new solutions to problems.
Conflict creates stress, which can be destructive and
painful (distress), or invigorating and motivating
(eustress).
During the early 1950's, Daniel Funkenstein (1957)
conducted a series of experiments at Harvard to study how
people deal with stress. He looked at peoples' emotions
after they had been scolded and chided. Funkenstein found
that people reacted differently to stress. Some directed
their anger inward, while others directed their anger at
others. Stress manifested itself in negative ways (e.g.,
fright, panic, and apprehesiveness), and positive ways
(e.g., performance anxiety). People also differed in the
degree of emotion evoked by the stressful situation.
Funkenstein reported that the most successful way of
dealing with stress was either with no emotion, or with
performance anxiety.
Karl Albrecht (1979) argues that stress is basically a
negative emotion that manifests itself through body
signals, such as a nervous stomach, clammy hands,
perspiration, and headaches. Albrecht maintains that body
signals provide access to our inner feelings that are not
available through intellectual analysis. Deep relaxation
techniques are recommended as a way of eliminating
stress.
Peter Serge (1990) views some forms of tension as a
positive factor, and states that "people with high
levels of personal mastery have a great tolerance for
living with creative tension." (p. 132) He also
recognizes that "emotional tension" can occur
when we are honest with ourselves about the gap between
where we are and where we want to be. These manifest as
sadness, disappointment, hopelessness, and anger.
Obsolescence
Obsolescence is an important issue in today's working
environment. Prior to the industrial revolution, the
training that one received as an apprentice would last
for their lifetime. Increasingly rapid technological
changes have made it necessary for many people to update
their training every ten or fifteen years. (Uris, 1986)
For example, until recently graphic designers' produced
layouts by "keylining" (i.e., cutting and
pasting). Many years of training were needed to acquire
the requisite precision. In the last five years, desktop
publishing has replaced keylining to such a degree that
nearly all graphic design is now done on the computer.
Those designers who have not updated their training find
less work available, and those who have updated their
training find themselves being replaced by newly-trained
younger workers who are willing to work for less wages.
In addition, younger workers cost less in medical and
pension expenses.
Quality of Work Life
The quality of work life (QWL) is an outgrowth of the
human relations movement. Its goals are to increase
productivity, while at the same time improve employee
satisfaction by addressing the emotional needs of
workers. The purpose of QWL management is to create an
atmosphere of freedom, participation, and autonomy in
which the worker is a partner in sharing a common
objective.
Richard Walton (1985), one of the founders of the QWL
approach, identified eight factors to improve the working
life of employees. These are:
1. Fair compensation - Workers should receive
sufficient pay and benefits to reach an acceptable
standard of living, and the pay should be similar to
others performing equivalent work.
2. Safety and health - The work environment should
not pose any physical or environmental dangers to
workers.
3. Self-development - Management must find ways
that enable workers to develop themselves.
4. Growth and security - Training should be
provided to avoid obsolescence, and workers should be
encouraged to make use of their advanced skills.
5. Social integration - Management needs to
provide an atmosphere of encouragement and openness
that is free from prejudice.
6. Constitutionalism - Management must recognize
that workers have rights, and workers need to be
assured that they have a way to protect those rights.
7. Life space - Management must recognize that
employees have life outside of work, and they should
look for ways to minimize the impact of working life
on the workers' families.
8. Social relevance - The company maintains high
ethics, and acts responsibly with respect to its
products, marketing, and the environment.
Many companies have adopted the QWL approach, but it
has not been without problems. Implementing QWL
procedures has often been troublesome. Some workers, and
even top management, have been slow to integrate these
changes into their thinking. Initial enthusiasm sometimes
diminishes when immediate results of the QWL approach are
not recognized. Workers occasionally feel that their new
roles and status have been diminished as a result of QWL
implementation.
Resistance to Change
One of the problems in implementing new ideas in
companies is that both workers and management are often
resistant to even minor changes. Psychologist Kurt Lewin
(1951) developed a "field" approach to evaluate
the positive and negative factors affecting change. Lewin
observed that change involved a three-step process:
unfreezing, moving, and then refreezing on a new level.
Lewin reported that behavior would frequently return to
the previous level unless a "force field" was
created to stablize the behavior on the new level.
There are three major factors that make change
threatening in organizations (Uris, 1986). The first is
that sudden announcements and unexpected developments
make people feel like they have no control. Resistance is
a way of coping with an unexpected situation. The second
is that people often see change as threatening to their
positions of authority. The third is that people fear
that change will result in some kind of loss, such as
status or privileges.
Management can counteract these fears by implementing
a program that includes the people who will be affected
by the change. This begins with an announcement that
clearly justifies the need for change. Management seeks
the cooperation and acceptance of the workers by
minimizing the negative effects and maximizing the
positive effects. Most importantly, management should
seek the participation of the workers in the planning
process. Requesting workers opinions and suggestions will
provide valuable information to management, and it will
also make workers' feel a part of the process (Uris,
1986).
Empowerment
According to Jaffe and Scott (1992), "empowerment
means that the organization shifts from limiting the
power to determine its future and how it will get there
to a few top executives, to include every level of the
organization in the process." (p. 140) They believe
that human resources like creativity, innovation, and
motivation are the keys to successful organizations
Unlike many theorists, Jaffe and Scott (1992) do not
equate empowerment with the maximization of personal
freedom. On the contrary, they stress that freedom is
constrained by a commitment to organizational visions,
and that workers knowingly and willingly accept the
organization's need to control the resources and
information. They argue that "empowerment is not an
individual process" (p. 141), but rather, it
requires an organization willing to make structural
changes to create a context for new behaviors.
Effective leadership manifests itself throughout an
organization by empowering its members. Bennis (1990)
list four themes of empowerment.
· People feel they are making a difference.
· People regard learning and competence as
important.
· People feel they are part of a community or
family.
· People believe their work is exciting.
Haas (1990) describes an empowered organization as one
that has "shed the traditional authoritarian
practices." (p. 106) The manager becomes a
facilitator rather than a decision maker.
Trust is critical to the process of empowerment.
(Dilenschneider, 1992) A leader must have a genuine trust
in the organization and its workers. Ouchi's (1981) book
on Japanese management practices stresses the importance
of supervisors who have a high level of trust in their
subordinants.
Bibliography
Albrecht, K. 1979. Stress and the Manager.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bass, B. M., 1981. Handbook of Leadership: A Survey
of Theory and Research. New York: Free Press.
Bennis, W. 1990. "Learning some basic truisms
about leadership." in The New Paradigm in
Business: Emerging Strategies for Leadership and
Organizational Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.)
1993 by the World Business Academy. p. 70-80. New York:
Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Bennis, W. 1990. Why Leaders Can't Lead. San
Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Campbell, J. P., et al. 1970. Managerial Behavior,
Performance, and Effectiveness. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Collins, J. C., and Porras, J. I. 1989. "Purpose,
mission, and vision." in The New Paradigm in
Business: Emerging Strategies for Leadership and
Organizational Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.)
1993 by the World Business Academy. p. 82-89. New York:
Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Dilenschneider, R. L. 1992. A Briefing for Leaders:
Communication as the Ultimate Exercise of Power. New
York: HarperCollins.
Drucker, P. 1974. Management Tasks,
Responsibilities, Practices. New York: Harper &
Row.
Fiedler, F. E. 1964. "A contingency model of
leadership effectiveness." In Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology. Berkowitz (ed.) New
York: Academic Press.
Fiedler, F. E. 1967. A Theory of Leadership
Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fiedler, F. E. 1986. "The conribution of
confitive resources to leadership perfomance." Journal
of Applied Social Psychology 16:532-548.
Fleishman, E. A. 1953. "The description of
supervisory behavior." Personnel Psychology
37: 1-6.
Fleishman, E. A., and Harris, E. F. 1962.
"Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee
grievances and turnover." Personnel Psychology
15: 43-56.
Funkenstein, D. H. 1957. Mastery of Stress.
Boston: Harvard University Press.
French, J., and Raven, B. H. 1959. "The bases of
social power." In Studies of Social Power.
Cartwright, D. (ed.) Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.
Georgopoulos, B. S., Mahoney, G. M., and Jones, N. W.,
Jr. 1957. "A path-goal approach to
productivity." Journal of Applied Psychology.
41: 345-353.
Giblin, P. A. D. 1990. "That red light was just a
suggestion." in Frontiers of Leadership: An
Essential Reader. Syrett, M. and Hogg, C. (eds.) p.
69-72. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Guest, R. H. 1956. "On time and foreman." Personnel
32:478-486.
Haas, R. D. 1990. "The corporation without
boundaries." in The New Paradigm in Business:
Emerging Strategies for Leadership and Organizational
Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.) 1993 by the
World Business Academy. p. 101-106. New York: Jeremy P.
Tarcher.
Halpin A. W., and Winer, B. J. 1957. "A factorial
study of the leader behavior descriptions." In Leader
Behavior: Its Description and Measurement. Stogdill,
R. M., and Coons, A. E. (eds.) Columbus, OH: Bureau of
Business Research of Ohio State University.
Hemphill, J. K. and Coons, A. E. 1957.
"Development of the leader behavior description
questionnaire." In Leader Behavior: Its
Description and Measurement. Stogdill, R. M., and
Coons, A. E. (eds.) Columbus, OH: Bureau of Business
Research of Ohio State University.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. 1959. The
Motivation to Work. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Herzberg, F. 1966. Work and the Nature of Man.
Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.
Hollander, E. P. 1958. "Conformity, status, and
idiosyncracy credit. Psychological Review.
65:117-127.
Hollander, E. P. 1979. "Leadership and social
exchange processes." In Social Exchange: Advances
in Theory and Research. Gregen, K., Greenberg, M. S.,
and Willis, R. H. (Eds.) New York: Winston-Wiley.
Jacobs, T. O. 1970. Leadership and Exchange in
Formal Organizations. Alexandria, VA: Human Resources
Research Organization.
Jaffe, D. T., and Scott, C. D. 1992. "Building a
committed workplace: An empowered organization as a
competitive advantage." in The New Paradigm in
Business: Emerging Strategies for Leadership and
Organizational Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.)
1993 by the World Business Academy. p. 139-146. New York:
Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Kanter, R. M. 1989. "In search of the
entrepreneurial hero: Individual skills for
success." in Frontiers of Leadership: An
Essential Reader. Syrett, M. and Hogg, C. (eds.) p.
73-78. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Katz, D., and Kahn, R. L. 1952. "Some recent
findings in human relations research. In Readings in
Social Psychology. Swanson, E., Newcomb, T., and
Hartley, E. (eds.) New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N., Gurin, G., and Floor, L. 1951. Productivity,
Supervision, and Morale among Railroad Workers. Ann
Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center, University of
Michigan.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N., and Morse, N. 1950. Productivity,
Supervision, and Morale in an Office Situation. Ann
Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Kotter, J. P. 1990. "What leaders really
do." in Frontiers of Leadership: An Essential
Reader. Syrett, M. and Hogg, C. (eds.) p. 16-24.
Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Lewin, K. 1951. Field Theory in Social Science.
New York: Harper & Row.
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., and White, R. K. 1939.
"Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally
created social climates." Journal of Social
Psychology. 10: 271-301.
Likert, R. 1961. New Patterns of Management.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Machiavelli, N. 1972. The Prince. (ed.)
Crocker, L. G., New York: Pocker Books.
Maslow, A. H. 1954. Personality and Motivation.
New York: Harper & Row.
McGregor, D. 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
McGregor, D. 1967. The Professional Manager.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Miller, K. I., and Monge, P. R. 1986.
"Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A
meta-analytic review." Academy of Management
Journal. 29: 727-753.
Mintzberg, H. 1973. The Nature of Managerial Work.
New York: Harper & Row.
Osterberg, R. V. 1987. "A new kind of company
with a new kind of thinking." in The New Paradigm
in Business: Emerging Strategies for Leadership and
Organizational Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.)
1993 by the World Business Academy. p. 67-69. New York:
Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Ouchi, W. B. 1981. Theory Z. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Pascale, R. T. 1990. Managing on the Edge. New
York: Simon and Schuster.
Podsakoff, P. M., and Schriesheim, C. A. 1985.
"Field studies of French and Raven's bases of power:
Critique, reanalysis, and suggestions of future
research." Psychological Bulletin. 97:
387-411.
Ponder, Q. D. 1957. "The effective manufacturing
foreman." In Proceedings of the Industrial
Relations Research Association Meetings. Young, E.
(Ed.) p. 41-54. Madison, WI.
Porter, L. W. and Lawler, E. E., III. 1968. Managerial
Attitudes and Performance. Homewood, IL: Richard D.
Irwin.
Schmidt, W. H. 1974. "Conflict: A powerful
process for (good or bad) change." Management
Review 63: 5.
Schneier, C. E. "Behavior modification in
management: A review and critique." Academy of
Management Journal 17: 528-548.
Schweiger, D. M., and Leana, C. R. 1985.
"Participation in decision making." In Generalizing
from Laboratory to Field Settings. Locke, E. A. (ed.)
Boston: Heath-Lexington.
Senge, P. 1990. "The art & practice of the
learning organization." in The New Paradigm in
Business: Emerging Strategies for Leadership and
Organizational Change (eds. Ray, M. and Rinzler, A.)
1993 by the World Business Academy. p. 126-138. New York:
Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Stogdill, R. M., 1948. "Personal factors
associated with leadership: A survey of the
literature." Journal of Psychology. 25:
35-71.
Stogdill, R. M., 1974. Handbook of Leadership: A
Survey of the Literature. New York: Free Press.
Syrett, M. and Hogg, C. 1992. Frontiers of
Leadership: An Essential Reader. Cambridge, MA:
Blackwell.
Uris, A. 1964. Techniques of Leadership. New
York: McGraw Hill.
Vroom, V. H. 1964. Work and Motivation. New
York: Wiley.
Wagner, J. A., and Gooding, R. Z. 1987. "Shared
influence and organizational behavior: A meta-analysis of
situational variables expected to moderate
participation-outcome relationships." Academy of
Management Journal. 30: 524-541.
Walton, R. E. 1985. "From control to commitment:
Transforming workforce management in the U.S." In The
Uneasy Alliance. Clark, R. K., Hayes, R., and Lorenz,
C. (eds.) Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Yukl, G. A. 1989. Leadership in Organizations.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
|