Influence tactics là gì

Chương 1. Giới thiệu: Bản chất của Lãnh đạo

C H A PTER1

Introduction: The Nature of LeadershipLearn ing ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter you should he ahle to:• Understand why leadership has heen defined in so mJny different W:t)iS.• Understand how leadership will be defined in this hook.• Understand the controversy about differences hetween leadership andmanagement.• Understand \vhy it is so difficult to assess leadership effectiveness.• Understand the different indicators used to assess leadership dTectivcnes,S.• Understand what aspects of leadership have been studied the most during the past50 years.• Understand how leadership can be described as an individual, dyadic. group, ororganizational pnKcss.

• Understand the organization of this book.

Mục tiêu học tập

• Sau khi nghiên cứu chương nầy có thể:
• Hiểu tại sao lại có nhiều lãnh đạo được định nghĩa theo nhiều cách khác nhau.
• Hiểu lãnh đạo được giáo trình nầy định nghĩa như thế nào.
• Hiểu cuộc tranh luận về sự khác biệt giữa lãnh đạo và quản lý.
• Hiểu lý do tại sao lại rất khó đánh giá hiệu lực lãnh đạo.
• Hiểu cách mô tả lanh đạo như một quá trình cá nhân, đôi, nhóm, hay tổ chức.
• Hiểu kết cấu của giáo trình nầy
  
• Hiểu các chỉ số khác nhau dùng để đánh giá hiệu lực lãnh đạo.
• Hiểu các khía cạnh của lãnh đạo được nghiên cứu nhiều nhâtt trong 50 năm qua.
  

Leadership is a subject rh~H has long excited interest among people. The term connotesimages of pc)\verfuL dynamic individuals who command victorious armies, directcorporate empires from atop gleaming skyscrapers, or shape the course of nations.The exploits of brave and clever leaders are the essence of many legends and myths.Much of our description of history is the story of military, political, religious, and socialleaders who are credited or hlamed for important historical events, even though we donot understand very well how the events were caused or how much influence theleader really had. The widespread fascination with leadership may be because it issuch a mysterious process, as well as one that touches everyone's life.

Lãnh đạo là một chủ đề đã lôi cuốn mọi người từ lâu. Thuật ngữ nầy bao hàm hình ảnh của những cá nhân mạnh mẽ, năng động chỉ huy những đạo quân chiến thắng, điều khiển những đế chế kinh doanh từ đỉnh những ngôi nhà bóng loáng chọc trời, hay định hình đường hướng của các quốc gia. Công tích của những lãnh đạo sáng suốt, dũng cảm là linh hồn của nhiều truyền thuyết và huyền thoại. Phần lớn mô tả tịch sử của chúng ta là những câu chuyện về những nhà lãnh đạo quân sự, chính trị, tôn giáo và xã hội, những người được ghi công hay kết tội đối với những sự kiên lịch sử quan trọng, cho dù chúng ta không hiểu rõ lắm các sự kiện đó được gây ra như thế nào hay mức độ ảnh hưởng thực sự của các nhà lãnh đạo. Sự say mê phổ biến đối với lãnh đạo có thể là do nó vừa là một quá trình bí ẩn, vừa là quá trình chạm đến cuộc sống cỉa mọi người.

Why did certainleaders (e.g., Gandhi, Mohammed, Mao Tse-tung) inspire such intense fervor anddedication' How did certain leaders (e.g., Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great) buildgreat empires? Why did some rather undistinguished people (e.g., Adolf Hitler,Claudius Caesar) rise to positions of great power' Why were certain leaders (e.g .•Winston Churchill. Indira Gandhi) suddenly deposed, despite their apparent powerand record of successful accomplishments? Why do some leaders have loyal followerswho are willing to sacrifice their lives, whereas other leaders are so despised that suhordinates

conspire to murder them?

Tại sao một số lãnh đạo (như Gandhi, Mohammed, Mao Trạch Đông) tạo nên niềm tin và sự sùng bái mãnh liệt như thế? Một số lãnh đạo (như Julius Caesar, Alexander Đại đế) xây dựng các đế chế vĩ đại bằng cách nào? Tại sao một số người không có gì nổi bật (như Adolf Hitler, Claudius Caesar) lại lên được đỉnh cao quyền lực tối thượng? Tại sao một số lãnh đạo (như Winston Churchill, Indira Gandhi) đột nhiên bị hạ bệ, bất chấp quyền lực hiển hiện và bề dày thành tích của họ? Tại sao một số lãnh đạo có những môn đồ trung thành sẵn sàng hy sinh mạng sống của họ, tong khi các nhà lãnh đoạ khác bị khing ghét đến nỗi thuộc cấp âm mưu giết họ đi?

Questions ahout leadership have long been a subject of speculation, hut scientificI"{~search on It:ader~hip did not begin untH the twentieth century. The focus of muchof the research has been on the dt:terminants of leadership effectiveness. SOCial scien-11:4{5 have attempted to discover what traits, abilirleH, behaviors, sources of POWt:f, oraHpccts of the situation determine how well a leader is able to influence followers andaccomplish task objectives,

Các vấn đề về lãnh đạo là một chủ đề đã được tìm hiểu từ lâu, nhưng mãi đến thế kỷ hai mươi vẫn chưa có nghiên cứu khoa học về lãnh đạo. Trọng tâm của phần lớn các nghiên cứu nầy là các yếu tố quyết định hiệu lực lãnh đạo. Các nhà khoa học xã hội cố gắng khám phá các tố chất, khả năng, hành vi, nguồn tạo quyền lực hay các khía cạnh của tình huống quyết định nhà lãnh đạo có thể ảnh hưởng lên nhân viên và hoàn thành mục tiêu nhiệm vụ tốt đến mức nào.

There is also a growing interest in understanding leadershipas a shared process involving different people in a team or organization, and thereasons why this process is efft>ctive or ineffective. Other important questions int-'ludethe reasons why some people emerge as leaders, and the determinants of a kader'S

arLions, hut the predominant concern ha.<;>

Cũng có mối quan tâm ngày càng tăng nhằm hiểu lãnh đạo như một quá trình chung liên quan đến những người khác nhau trong một đội ngũ hay tổ chức, và lý do tại sao quá trình nầy có hiệu lực hay không. Các vấn đề qun trọng khác là những lý do tại sao một số người nổi lên thành nhà lãnh đạo, và các yếu tố quyết định hành động của nhà lãnh đạo, nhưng mối quan tâm lớn nhất là hiệu lực lãnh đạo.

Some progre .... s has heen made in probing the mystt.'ries surrounding leadership, but many questions remain unar1.S\vered, In this honk, J1l~ljor theories and fL'scarch findings on leadership etfCl..:livenesf, will he ft'viewcd, with particular cmph~isis on rnjJnagerial leadership in formal org:Anizatiuns such as business corporations) govemrnent agencies, hospitals, jJ1(j univer . ..;,ities, This first chapter introduu .. 's the suhject hy considering different conceptions of leadership, different ways of evaluating its cfkctivenl'SS. and ditrerent approaches f(x studying leadership, l11c chapter ~llso provides an oycrvie\\' of the book and explains how the subjects are organized,

Đã có một vài tiến triển trong việc tìm hiểu những bí ẩn chung quanh vấn đề lãnh đạo, nhưng nhiều câu hỏi vẫn chưa có đáp án. Trong sách nầy, sẽ trình bày các lý thuyết chính và kết quả nghiên cứu về hiệu lực lãnh đạo, đặc biệt nhấn mạnh lãnh đạo quản lý trong các tổ chức chính thức như công ty kinh doanh, cơ quan chính quyền, bệnh viện và trường đại học. Chương đầu tiên giới thiệu chủ đề đó thông qua khảo sát các khái niệm khác nhau về lãnh đạo, các các đánh giá khác nhau hiệu lực của nó và các cách tiếp cận khác nhau để nghiên cứu lãnh đạo. Chương nầy cũng trình bày tổng quan của cuốn sách và giải thích cách kết cấu các chủ đề.

Definitions of Leadership

Định nghĩa Lãnh đạo

The term leadcrsbijJ is a word taken from the common vocahulary and ino)rpom. ted into the technical vocabulalY of a scientific disl.:ipline without being precisely redefined. As a consequeno:, it carries ex1raneous connotations that create ambiguity of meaning (janda, 19(0), Additi!mal confusion is caused by tht." usc of other imprecise H.:rms SUdl as pOll'er, (j{ftb()ri~}', lll(J1wf,?eJ11ent, admiJll\tra/{O/l, cUIl/ro/, Jnd slfjlerlJistoJl to descrihe similar phl'110Illl..'I1a. An observation hy Bennis (19')'), p, 2::;9) is :15 true today as when he made it many years 'lgO:

Thuật ngữ lãnh đạo là một từ lấy từ từ vựng phổ thông đưa vào từ vựng chuyên môn của các môn khoa học mà không được định nghĩa lại chính xác. Do đó, nó mang theo những nghĩa ngoại lai tạo nên sự mơ hồ về nghĩa (Janda, 1960). Sự rối rắm còn do việc dùng những thuật ngữ không chuẩn xác khác như quyền lực, thẩm quyền, quản lý, điều hành, kiểm soát, và giám sát để mô tả những hiện tượng tương tự. Nhận xét cách đây nhiều năm của Bennis (1959, tr. 259) đến nay vẫn đúng:

Always, it st'ems, the concept of leadership dudl.:'s us or turns up in another I"onn !o taunt us again with its slippt:'riness and complexity. So we haye invented an endless prolikr.:ttion of terms to deal with it .. , and still the concept is not sufficiently defined.

Dường như, khái niệm lãnh đạo luôn luôn lẫn tránh chúng ta hay xuất hiện ở một dạng khác để chế giễu chúng ta bằng tính khó nắm bắt và phức tạp của nó. Vì thế chúng ta đã nghĩ ra sự gia tăng vô hạn các thuật ngữ nhằm đối phó với nó...., và khái niệm đó vẫn không được định nghĩa thích đáng.

Researchers usually define leadership according to their individual perspectives and the aspects of the phenomenon of most interest to them. After a comprehensive review of the leadership literature, Stogdill 0974, p. 259) concluded that "there are almost as many definitions of leadership as there are persons who have attempted to define the concept." The stream of new definitions has continued unabated since Stogdill made his observation, Leadership has been defined in terms of traits, behaviorS, influence, interaction patterns, role relationships, and occupation of an administrative position, Table 1-1 shows some representative definitions presented over the past 50 years.

Các nhà nghiên cứu định nghĩa lãnh đạo theo quan điểm cá nhân và các khía cạnh của hiện tượng họ quan tâm nhất. Sau khi khảo sát toàn diện các công trình nghiên cứu về lãnh đạo, Stogdill (1974, tr.259) kết luận rằng "có bao nhiêu người cố định nghĩa lãnh đạo thì có bấy nhiêu định nghĩa của khái niệm đó." Loạt các định nghĩa mới tiếp tục không suy giảm từ khi Stogdill đưa ra nhận xét của mình. Lãnh đạo được định nghĩa dưới dạng tố chất, hành vi, ảnh hưởng, kiểu tương tác, quan hệ vai trò, và công việc của mộ vị trí điều hành. Bảng 1-1 trình bày một số định nghĩa tiêu biểu được đưa ra trong 50 năm qua.

Table 1-1

Bảng 1-1 Định nghĩa Lãnh đạo

• Leadership is "the behavior of an individual, , directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal," (Hemphill & Coons, 1957, P9, 7)

Lãnh đạo là "hành vi của một cá nhân, định hướng các hoạt động của một nhóm người vào một mục tiêu chung." (Hemphill & Coons, 1957, tr.7)

• Leadership is "the influential increment over and above mechanical compliance with the routine directives of the organization:' (Katz & Kahn, 1978, P9, 528)

Lãnh đạo là "sự gia tăng ảnh hưởng lên khắp và bên trên sự tuân thủ máy móc các chỉ thị hằng ngày của tổ chức" (Katz & Kahn, 1978, tr.528)

• "Leadership is exercised when persons, , , mobilize, , , institutional, political, psychological, and other resources 50 as to arouse, engage, and satisfy the motives of followers<">

Lãnh đạo thực thi khi nguời ta...huy động...các nguồn lực thiết chế, chính trị, tâm lý, và các nguồn lực khác để khuấy động, kích hoạt và thoả mãn động cơ của nhân viên." (Burns, 1978, tr.18)

• "Leadership is realized in the process whereby one or more individuals succeed in attempting to frame and define the reality of others," (Smircich & Morgan, 1982, pg, 258)

Lãnh đạo được thực hiện trong quá trình ở đó một hay một vài cá nhân thành công trong nỗ lực điều chỉnh và xác định hiện thực của những người khác." (Smircich & Morgan, 1982, tr. 258)

• Leadership is "the process of influencing the activities of an organized group toward goal achievement" (Rauch & Behling, 1984, pg, 46)

Lãnh đạo là "quá trình ảnh hưởng lên các hoạt động của một nhóm người có tổ chức nhằm đạt mục tiêu" (Rauch & Behling, 1984, tr. 46)

• "Leadership is about articulating visions, embodying values, and creating the environment within which things can be accomplished," (Richards & Engle, 1986, pg, 206)

Lãnh đạo là tuyên bố rõ ràng tầm nhìn, nêu rõ các giá trị, và tạo nên môi trường trong đó mọi việc được hoàn thành." (Richards & Engle, 1986, tr. 206)

• "Leadership is a process of giving purpose (meaningful direction) to collective effort, and causing willing effort to be expended to achieve purpose" (Jacobs & Jaques, 1990, P9, 281)

Lãnh đạo là một qúa trình đưa ra mục đích (đường hướng đầy ý nghĩa) để tập hợp nỗ lực và tạo nên những nỗ lực tự nguyên dùng để đạt mục đích." (Jacobs & Jaques, 1990, tr. 281)

• Leadership "is the ability to step outside the culture ... to start evolutionary change processes that are more adaptive." (Schein, 1992, pg. 2)

Lãnh đạo "là khả năng vượt ra khỏi văn hoá...để bắt đầu những quá trình thay đổi phát triển cso khả năng thích ứng hơn."(Schein, 1992, tr. 2)

• "Leadership IS the process of making sense of what people are doing together so that people will understand and be committed." (Drath & Palus, 1994, p. 4)

Lãnh đạo là quá trình làm cho điều mọi người cùng nhau thực hiện trở nên đầy ý nghĩa để mọi người hiểu và tận tâm thực hiện." (Drath & Palus, 1994, tr. 4)

• Leadership is "the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success olthe organization. ." (House et aI" 1999, pg. 184)

Lãnh đạo là "khả năng của một cá nhân ảnh hưởng, động viên và làm cho người khác có thể góp phần vào hiệu quả và thành công của tổ chức." (House và đtg, 1999, tr. 184)

Most definitions of leadership reflect the assumption that it involves a process whereby intentional influence is exerted over other people to guide, structure, and facilitate activities and relationships in a group or organization. The numerous definitions of leadership appear to have little else in common. They differ in many respecls, including who exclts influence, the intended purpose of the influence, the manner in which influence is exerted, and the outcome of the influence attempt. The differences are not just a case of scholarly nit-picking; they reflect deep disagreemem about identification of leaders and leadershi p processes. Researchers who differ in their conception of leadership select different phenomena to investigate and interpret the results in different ways. Researchers who have a very narrow definition of leadership are less likely to discover things that are unrelated to or inconsistent with their initial assumptions about etIective leadership.

Because leadership has so many different meanings to people, some theorists question whether it is even useful as a scientific construct (e.g., Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2003; Miner, 1975), Nevertheless, most behavioral scientists and practitioners seem to believe leadership is a real phenomenon that is important for the effectiveness of organizations. Interest in the subject continues to increase, and the deluge of articles and books about leadership shows no sign of abating.

Specialized Role or Shared Influence Process?

A major controversy involves the issue of whether leadership should be viewed as a specialized role or as a shared influence process. One view is that all groups have role specialization that includes a leadership role with some responsibilities and functions that cannot be shared too widely without jeopardizing the effectiveness of fhe group. The person with primary responsibility to perform tbe specialized leadership role is designated as the "leader." Other members are called "followers" even fhough some of them may assist the primary leader in canying out leadership functions. The distinction between leader and follower roles does not mean that a person cannot peri()nll both roi-e,s at rhe same time" For eX3mple, a department 111:m:lger who j:; the le3der of depaltrHent employees is also a foHo\-ver of higher-level managers in the organization. Researchers who view leadership as ~l t>pedaliz<,-'d> that occursnaturally within a social system and is diffused among the members. Writers with thisperspective believe it is more useful to study "leadership'; as a sodal process or patternof relationships rather than as a specialized role. According to this view, any memberof the sodal system may exhibit le,l(lership at any time, and there is no dear distinctionbet\veen leaders and followers. Various k Some theorists\:vould limit [he definition of leadership to the exercise of influence n:sulting in enthusiastic('Omlilitnient !)y f()lk)wl'rs, as ()ppo~'ll t() inditlerent ('()Jnpiiancc or Jelut,.'tmr ()bedit:rx'e.'}'Il.ese theorists argtK tll~n the lise (l c(H1tn)1 over fCwards and punisluncnts (() manipulateOf ,,'{Jerce j()lIo'Vvcl's is not fl'ally ··1t.'';:ldinE( tIK'111 ~U1d may involve the unethical use of power.An opposing view is [hat this definition is too restrictive !X:GlUSe it excludes sorneinfluence pHKes'-;t::s that are impunant for umJerstanding \vhy a manager is dIe-eti\'(:, orineffective in a given situation. f low leadership is defined sh( )uld not predetermine the3n.'i"Vef to the research question of what makes a leader effective_ The same outcome canbe accomplished with different influence methods, and the same type of influence attemptcan result in different outcomes, depending on the nature of the situation. Even peoplewho are forced or manipulated into doing something may become committed to it if theysubsequently discover that it really is fhe best option for them and for tlle organization.The ethical use of power is a legitimate concern for leadership scholars, but it should notlimit fhe definition of leadership or fhe type of influence processes that are studied.

Purpose of Influence AttemptsAnother controversy about which influence attempts are part of leadershipinvolves their purpose and outcome. One viewpoint is that leadership OCCurs onlywhen people are influenced to do what is ethical and beneficial for the organizationand themselves. This definition of leadership does not include influence attempts thatare irrelevant or detrimental to followers, such as a leader's attempts to gain personalbenefits at the follower'S expense.An opposing view would include all attempts to influence the attitudes andbehavior of follow~rs in an organizational context, regardless of the intended purposeor actual beneficiary. Acts of leadership often have multiple motives, and it is seldompossible to determine the extent to which they are selfless rather than selfish. The outcomesof leader actions usually include a mix of costs and benefits, some of which areunintended, making it difficult to infer purpose. Despite good intentions, the actionsof a leader are sometimes more detrimental than beneficial for followers. Conversely,actions motivated solely by a leader's personal needs sometimes result in unintendedbenefits for followers and the organization. Thus, the domain of leadership processesto be studied should not he limited by their intended purpose.Influence Based on Reason or EmotionsMost of the Icader;;hip definition.s listed earliC:f emphasize rational, cognitiveprocesses. For many years it was common to view leadership as a pn)(..'ess whereinleaders influence followers to believe it is in their best interest to cooperate in achievinga shared task objective. Until the 19805, few conceptions of leadership recognizedthe importance of emotions as a basis for influence.In contrast, many recent conceptions of leadership emphasize the emotionalaspects of influence much more than reason. According to this view, only the emotional,value-based aspects of leadership influence can account for the exceptionalachievements of groups and organizations. Leaders inspire [0Ik)'\\/er5 to willingly sacrificetheir selfish interests for a higher cause. For example, soldiers risk their lives tocarry out an important mission or to protect their comrades. The relative importanceof rational and emotional processes, and how they interact, are issues to be resolvedby empirical research, and the conceptualization of leadership should not excludeeither type of process,Direct vs. Indirect LeadershipMost theories ahout effective leadership focus on behaviors used to directly influ~ence immediate subordinates, hut a leader can also influence other people inside theorganization. Some theorists make a distinction between direct and indirect form':> ofleadership to help explain how a leader can influence people when there is no directintemction with them (Hunt, 1991; Lord & Maher, 1991; Yammarino. 1994).Indirect leadership has been used to describe how a chief executive can influencepeople at lower levels in the organization who do not interact directly with theleader. A CEO has many ways to influence people at lower levels in the organization.Examples include sending memos or reports to employees, communicating bye-mail,presenting speeches on television. holding meetings with small groups of employees,and participating in activities involving employees (e,g., attending orientation or trainingsessions, company picnics). Most of these forms of influence can be classified as directleadership.One form of indirect leadership by a CEO is called "cascading" (Bass, Waldman,Avolio, & Bebb, 1987; Waldman & Yammarino, 1999; Yammarino, 1994), and it occurswhen the direct influence of the CEO on immediate subordinates is transmitteddown the authority hierarchy of an organization (e.g., from the CEO to middle managers,to lower-level managers, to regular employees). The influence can involve-changes in employee attitudes, belief.:.;, values, or behaviors. For example, a CEOwho sets a good example of ethical and supportive behavior may influence similarbehavior by employees at lower levels in the organization.Another form of indirect leadership involves influence over formal programs,management systems, and structural forms (lIun!, 1991; Lord & Maher, 1991; Yuki &Lepsingerj 2004). Many large organizations have progran1s or managen'!ent systemsintended to influence the attitudes, skills, behavior, and performance of employees.Examples include programs for recruiting, selection, and promotion of employt:'cs.A CEO can select only people with similar trajt,s in order to develop a strong cultureof shared values (Giberson, Resick, & Dickson, 20(5). Structural forms and variouslypes of programs can be used to increase control, coordination, dficiency, andinnovation. Examples include formal rules and procedures. ~pecializt'd suhunits,decentralized product diVisions, standardized facilities, and self-managed teams. Inmost organizations only top executives have sufficient auth()rlty t(J implement newprograms or change the structural forms (see Chapter 13).A third form of indirecr leadership involves leader influence over the organizationculture, which is defined as the shared belief;' and value.s of members (Schein,1992; Trice & Beyer, ] 991} Leaders may attcmpt either to strengthen exi.sting culturalbeliefs and values or to change 1hem, There are many \vays to iniluence culture, andthey rnay involve direct influence (e,g" communicating a compelling vision or leadingby example) or other forms of indirect influence, such as I..'lunging the organizationstructure or reward systems (see Chapter 10),111e interest in indirel..1 lC:1dership is useful to remind scholars that leadershipinfluence is not limited to the types of observable behavior emphasized in many theoriesof effective leadership. However, there are many different types of direct andindin:ct influence, and some forms of int1uence L'annot be classified easily as eitherdirect or indirect leadership. Thus, a simple dichotomy does not capture the complexityinvolved in these inf1uence processes, Moreover. the direct and indirect

f()rms of influence are not mutually eXdlt,>ive, and "vhen used Iog<:ther type>scncc of Icade1':-.hip. For the lillie lx-ing, it is lx-Herto usc tht' various conceptions of kadership as a source of different perspectives on acomplex, multifaceted pIWJ1()Il'lL'I1{H).

In research. the oper~ltion:l! definition (If !<.:adt:rship>ntly vcry difficult to settle on a single definition of k'adershipth:H is gt:neral enough to accollllllodate Ihese lllany meanings and specificenough to :-;erve as ;1n operationalization of the variahle" \'\-'hencver feasible, leadershiprcsearch should be designed to provide information relevant to a wide range ofdefinition~, so that over tim:e it will Ix? possible [0 compare the utility of different conceptionsand Mrive at some consensus 011 The matter.

In this book, !e~ldcrship is defined hrO<: type>;ociale hasbecome popular in husiness organizations as another substitute for subordinate,because it conveys a relationship in which employees are valued and supposedly

empowere<.;>

Immediate and Delayed OutcomesSome outcomes afe more immedbte than others. For example, the irnmediateresult of an influence attempt is whether t()llowers are willing to do v.--hat the leaderasks, hut ~l delayed effect is how well followers actually perform the ;Issignment. The

effects of <:ot type>emphasized most often over the past half-century, Another (ommon practice is to limitthe focus to one type of leader characteristic, namely traits, behavior, or power. To Ix:consistent with most of the leadership literature, the theories and empirical researchreviewed in this hook arC' cbssified into lhe follovdng r1\'e approaci1e:::.: (J) the traitapproach. (2) the beh~lVi()r approach, (3) the po\ver-influence approach. (4.) the situationajappro:lCh, and ('j) the integrative ~!pproJch, Each ;lppro;J(h is described hrieflyin the following sections,Trait ApproachOne of the earliest approaches for studying leadership \V~IS the trait approach,This approach el1lph~tsiz(:'s attrihutes of leaders such ;]s person;:t!ity, motives, valucs,and skills, Underlying this approach \-vas the a,Ssumption tJut some peopk: are naturalleaders, endo\-\'ed v,:ith certain traits not possessed hI' other people, Early leadershiptheories attrihuted managerial success to extraordinary abilities such as tireless energy,penetrating intuition, uncanny foresight. and irrl'sistil)ie persuasiYc po\vers. Hundreds

of trait studies conducted during the 19jOs and 19<10s>-"es hetwecn leaders and othvrpcoph:. Like most research on traits and behavior, some of the po\ver-influence rcs(;"archtakes a leadt'T~c~;ntered perspectiVe" wilh :m implicit assumption Ihat clusality is unidin.:c{ion:J! (leaders ;1(1 and j()II{)\vers n.:~lCt). Tlli.;; rcsc,!fch seeks to cxpbin leadership e!Tectivenessin terms of thc amount and lype of po\ycr possess,-'d hy a lc~lder ~ll1d htw;power is exercised. POV""~'r j,.;; viewed as impol1ant not only for inllucncing suhordinates,hut also for influencing peers, superior;." and pl.'ople outside the organization, such asclients and suppliers. The bvorlle rnethodology has hCL'n the use of survey questionnairesto rdatl' leader power [0 various measures of leadership etTectivenl.'ss.Other PO\",'cf-influence n;,s~::Jrch used qlH.:stionn~1in.:s and descriptivc incidents todeterminc how leaders intluenn: the attitudes and hehavior of f()llo\.vers. The study ofinfluence tactics can he viewed as a bridge linking the puwer-influel1ce approach andthe bt:'h~lvior approach. 11K' lise or diffi..':rl"nt influence ta,,'tics is cnrnparcd in ternh nftheir reLtti\'(:, dk"ctiveness t()f getting pc>ople to do \vbat the leader wants.Pal1icipative leadership is concerned Wilh PO\VCT sharing and empowerment offollowt:r:-., but it is firmly rooted in the tradition of hehavior research as well. Manystudies used questionnaires to correblc subordinme perceptiun:-. of partJcipative lcJJershipwith lTiteria ()f leadership effectiveness such as subordinate satisfaction, eff0!1. andperformance. Laboratory and field experiments compared autocratic and patticipativeleadership styles. Finally, descriptive case studies of effective manJgers examined howthey use consultation and delegation to give people a sense of ownership for decisions.Situational ApproachThe situational approach emphasizes the importance of contextual factors thatinfluence leadership processes. Major situational variables include the characteristicsof followers, the nature of the work performed by the leader'S unit, the type of organization,and the nature of the external environment. This approach has tvio major subcategories,One line of research is an attempt to discover the extent to which leadershipprocesses are the same or unique across different types of organizations, levels ofmanagement, and cultures. The primary research method is a comparative study oftwo or more situations. The dependent variabJes may be managerial perceptions andattitudes, managerial activities and behavior patterns, or influence processes.The other sulxategory of situational research attempts to identify aspects of thesituation that "moderate" the relationship of leader attributes (e.g., traits, skills, behavior)to leadership effec.tiveness. 1he assumption is that different attributes will be effective indifferent situations, and that the sanle attribute is not optimal in all situations. ll1coriesdesctibing this reiatioIl.',hip are sometimes caJled '"contingenty theories" of leadership.A more extreme form of situational theOIY ("leadership substitutes") identifies the conclition...,that can make hierarchical leadership redundant and unnecessary (Chapter 6).Integrative ApproachAn integrative approach involves more than one type of leadership variable. Inrecent years it has become more common for researchers to include two or moretypes of leadership variahlt:'s in the same study, hut it is still rare to tlnd a theory thatincludes all of them O.e., tr~lils, hehavior. influence processes, situational vari:Jhles,and outcomes), An exampk' of tht:' integrative approach is the self--concept theory ofdwrismatic leadership (see Chapter 9), \vhich attempts to explain why the fo!1o"\versof some leaders are willing to exert exceptiol1fd effort and make persomll sacrifices toaccomplish the group objective or mission.level of Conceptualization for leadership TheoriesAnother way to classify leadership theories is in terms of the "level of con(\.-:ptualization"or lype of constructs used to describe leaders and their influence on orhers.Leadership can he described as (1) an intra-individual process, (2) a dyadic process,(3) a group process, or (4) an organizational process, The levels can be viewed as ahierarchy, as depicted in Figure 1-3. What level is emphasized will depend on theprimary research question, the type of criterion variables used to evaluate leadershipeffectiveness, and the type of mediating processes used to explain leadership influence.