Leader/Context Interaction and Theory Applicability
Leadership theories often examine the interaction between the leader and the situation or context. In this assignment, you will identify and contrast two leadership theories with regard to their treatment of the interaction between the leader and the situation or context and evaluate the applicability of the theories to a variety of situations.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
Refer to Chapters 2-4 of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.) for specific guidelines related to doctoral level writing. These chapters contain essential information on manuscript structure and content, clear and concise writing, and academic grammar and usage.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
Directions:
In a paper of 1,000-1,250 words, contrast two leadership theories with regard to their treatment of the interaction between the leader and the situation or context and evaluate the applicability of the theories to a variety of situations. Include the following in your paper:
A brief overview of each theory. Identify the theory and state its main components.
A clear, research-supported contrast of the two theories with regard to their treatment of the interaction between the leader and the situation or context.
An evaluation of the applicability of the theories given the contrast you described. Is one or the other more applicable to a variety of situations? Why or why not?
Rubic_Print_Format
Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
PSY-837 PSY-837-O500 Leader/Context Interaction and Theory Applicability 190.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (73.00%) Satisfactory (82.00%) Good (91.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 80.0%
Overview of Each Theory 20.0% An overview of each theory is either missing or not evident to the reader. An overview of each theory is present, but incomplete or inaccurate. An overview of each theory is presented, but is cursory and lacking in depth. The research cited in the analysis is outdated. An overview of each theory is thoroughly presented and includes a discussion of all necessary elements. Some research cited in the analysis is outdated. Av overview each theory is thoroughly presented with rich detail and includes a discussion of all necessary elements. The overview is firmly grounded in current and/or seminal research.
Research-Supported Contrast of the Two Theories 25.0% A research-supported contrast of the two theories is either missing or not evident to the reader. A research-supported contrast of the two theories is present, but incomplete or inaccurate. A research-supported contrast of the two theories is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated. A research-supported contrast of the two theories is present and thorough. It is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated. A research-supported contrast of the two theories is present, thorough, and well-detailed. It is well supported with current and/or seminal research.
Evaluation of the Applicability of The Theories 25.0% An evaluation of the applicability of the theories is either missing or not evident to the reader. An evaluation of the applicability of the theories is present, but incomplete or illogical. An evaluation of the applicability of the theories is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated. An evaluation of the applicability of the theories is present and thorough. The evaluation is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated. An evaluation of the applicability of the theories is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The evaluation is well supported with current and/or seminal research.
Synthesis and Argument 10.0% No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Synthesis of source information is present and is scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Organization and Effectiveness 10.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose 10.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis.
Format 10.0%
Mechanics of Writing 5.0% Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
APA Format 5.0% Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used. Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used. Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present. Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
Total Weightage 100% A Comparison of Leadership Models: Participative, Situational, & Charismatic Leadership
Danny B. Carr, Jr.
Capella University
Running head: A COMPARISON OF LEADERSHIP MODELS: PARTICIPATIVE, 1
A COMPARISON OF LEADERSHIP MODELS: PARTICIPATIVE, 4
Abstract
The three leadership models that will be compared are: participative leadership, situational leadership, and charismatic leadership. A review will be conducted on the development of these leadership models and its relative effectiveness on leadership within various organizations. Other leadership models will be mentioned to illustrate their effectiveness on the three selected leadership models. The three leadership models will also be compared and contrasted for their similarities and differences and how they support each other and other leadership models. The need for additional leadership models in the future will also be examined because leadership is an ongoing development as society and technology continue to change. Although there isnt any one leadership trait that will guarantee successful leadership in any given situation; leaders must adapt leadership models within their own leadership styles to become effective leaders within their organization. (Gardner, 1990).
A COMPARISON OF LEADERSHIP MODELS: PARTICIPATIVE, 3
Keywords:
Participative, Situational, Charismatic, Leadership, Models, Effectiveness
A Comparison of Leadership Models: Participative, Situational, & Charismatic Leadership
Participative, situational, and charismatic leadership models provide the necessary framework to provide any leader the ability to become an effective leader. (Zigarmi, Blanchard, OConnor, & Edeburn, 2005). The leader must be able to adapt to any situation by implementing the principles of different leadership models within their leadership style. Some leadership traits and characteristics come natural to leaders whereas others will be developed over time and through experience. (Zigarmi et al., 2005). These three leadership models are important for each leader to understand and adapt as it provides a solid foundation to becoming an effective leader. The importance of effective leadership within an organization is well known. Effective leaders have an impact on organizations and the moral level of the employees of an organization. (Zigarmi et al., 2005).
The Leadership Models Participative Leadership
Northouse (2010) explains participative leadership as a style that invites subordinates into the leaders decision-making process. This leadership model allows personnel from all levels of the organization to be involved. The ideology of this leadership model is that the more participation by the members of the organization will lead to greater ownership in the mission of the organization. (Northouse, 2010). This is accomplished by having the participative leader consult with their followers, gather ideas and opinions, and incorporate their suggestions into the leaders decision on how the organizational task will be completed. (Northouse, 2010).
The participative leadership model is important to every leader that strives to be an effective leader within their organization. The involvement of subordinates and fellow leaders into the decision-making process improves the understanding of the tasks and the issues involved by the individuals that must execute the decisions that are made by the leaders. (Northouse, 2010). Subordinates also tend to be more committed to carrying out the decisions that are made when they were involved in the decision-making process. It provides each follower with a since of purpose and ownership in the accomplishments of the tasks that are important to the organization. (Northouse, 2010).
Research conducted in participative leadership and management has shown that participative decision making has led to higher job satisfaction, which can also be very beneficial to the employees mental health and personal well-being. (Cotton, Vollrath, Froggatt, Lengnick-Hall, & Jennings, 1988; Macy, Peterson, & Norton, 1989). The leader that utilizes participative leadership is controlling the outcome of two important issues within the organization. First, the leader is ensuring the mission is being completed at optimal performance by including the employees into the decision-making process. (Kim, 2002). Secondly, the leader is improving job satisfaction and moral amongst the employees. (Kim, 2002). Every organization will benefit from this type of leadership and each leader is continuing along the path of being an effective leader. (Kim, 2002).
It has become obvious that leaders must make their tasks ambiguous in order to get the best results from implementing participative leadership. This will allow for the path to the goals to become clear to the followers and provide them with the detailed understanding of the task and goals that will allow them to execute successfully. (Northouse, 2010). Participative leadership will also have a positive effect on the followers that have a sense of control and want to feel as a part of the decision-making process prior to the task being executed. This will have a positive impact on job satisfaction and low employee turn-over rate, which is also great for morale. (Northouse, 2010).
The Leadership Models Situational Leadership
Northouse (2010) explains that the ideology of situational leadership stresses that effective leadership is composed of both a directive and supportive leadership style. A leader must know how each is applied appropriately to each given situation. (Northouse, 2010). Each situation that a leader is confronted with requires a different type of solution. This is one reason why it is important for leaders to adapt the situational leadership model into their leadership styles. Organizations are complex and are run by human-beings, which makes decision-making take on many different shapes and sizes for a leader. In order for a leader to become an effective leader they cannot be limited to one particular leadership style. (Northouse, 2010).
Situational leadership is the backbone to effective leadership because a leader must be able to adapt to each situation presented by the organization and the employees. (Northouse, 2010). The action that a leader will take depends on a range of situational factors and the leader must be versatile with their various leadership styles. It is also important for the leader to be able to wear many types of hats and is keen to a wide variety of possible sound solutions to an organizational task or problem. Various studies have shown that the appropriate application of a leadership style can increase employee motivation and morale. (Zigarmi et al., 2005).
These studies provide a linkage between participative and situational leadership models as they both have a positive impact on job satisfaction and moral as long as they are implemented properly. (Zigarmi et al., 2005). The situational leadership model was derived from the situational leadership theory (1977) by Hersey and Blanchard (1969). Situational leadership guides effective leaders to formulate task-relevant maturity of the employees through job maturity and psychological maturity. (Graeff, 1983).
The situational leadership model also provides guidelines to the leader as to what type of leadership they should utilize based on the organizational task and the competence level of the employees. The situational leadership model consist of four leadership styles, which are: directing (S1), coaching (S2), supporting (S3), and delegating (S4). (Northouse, 2010). The leader must be able to determine which leadership style to enforce for each given situation. A leader that is concerned about the accomplishment of an important organizational task will often utilize the directing (S1) leadership style to ensure the task is accomplished to organizational and leader standard. A leader that has competence in their employees may use the delegating (S4) leadership style for common organizational tasks. (Northouse, 2010, p. 90).
The Leadership Models Charismatic Leadership
The term charisma was borrowed from Rudolph Sohm by Max Weber. (Gardner, 1990). Rudolph Sohm borrowed the term from St. Paul, which shows how far back this term goes in relation to describing some traits of a person. The term charisma has been reemphasized and redeveloped over the centuries and is now a popular term within leadership development and understanding. James MacGregor Burns once pointed out that the term charisma is often surrounded by ambiguity and is used in various means, which makes it difficult to use the word in a set standard. (Gardner, 1990).
Charismatic leadership contains the ability to move an organization by the leaders personality. Charismatic leaders are known for their charm and grace that can create followers within an organization. (Northouse, 2010). It is also a known fact that people will follow a leader that they personally admire. The charismatic leadership model works effectively because it links the employees self-concepts to the identity of the organization. (Northouse, 2010).
Charismatic leadership is a leadership model that is often found in both great and bad leaders. Charismatic leaders are able to self-motivate individuals to follow their ideology and be productive in meeting the leaders organizational goals or personal goals. (Northouse, 2010). The downside to charismatic leadership is that some leaders can use their personality characteristics to manipulate their followers to accomplish organizational or personal goals that are unethical or negative in nature, for example Adolf Hitler and David Koresh. (Northouse, 2010).
Charismatic leaders use the participative and situational leadership models, along with their personal charisma to meet their organizational and personal goals. (Michaelis, Stegmaier, & Sonntag, 2009). Charismatic leaders have the ability to focus on the employees emotions and values and form a way to make tasks and goals meaningful to their employees. The charismatic leader also displays the ability of personality and charm while also implementing participative and situational leadership styles to get their employees involved in the task at hand. They are able to motivate their employees to make personal sacrifices in order to achieve the organizational goals or the leaders goal. (Michaelis et al., 2009).
The leaders agenda will determine if the charismatic leader is an effective leader for good or bad reasons. Employees that have charismatic leaders will develop their sense of direction and self-expression from the leaders message and not from their personal empathy with their leader. (Humphreys, Zhao, Ingram, Gladstone, & Basham, 2010). In charismatic relationships, the employees will place constraints on the amount of influence of their leader, actively determine their leaders values, will become less dependent on their leader, and will less likely to be manipulated by their leader. (Humphreys et al., 2010).
This type of analyzing of the leaders message will allow the followers to understand the difference between the leaders agenda and the organizational agenda. (Humphreys et al., 2010). A leader must keep the followers informed through participative leadership in order to use their charismatic leadership style effectively. Otherwise, the followers will not trust the leader and believe they are only out to achieve their personal goals and not those of the organization. (Humphreys et al., 2010).
Charismatic leadership has also been considered to be an equivalent to transformational leadership. (Boerner, Dutschke, & Wied, 2008). Rowold and Heinitz (2006) discovered that the dimensions of charismatic leadership and transformational leadership often share a high amount of change but will have a different impact on organizational profit. (Boerner et al., 2008). Charismatic leaders can instill change within the organization just as with transformational leadership. The employees are willing to follow their leaders guidance because they have come to trust their leader and have developed a level of loyalty and obedience. This allows the employee to become self-motivated and identifiable to their role in executing the organizational or leaders assigned tasks. (Boerner et al., 2008).
Similarities & Effectiveness of the Leadership Models
The leadership models (participative, situational, and charismatic) have similar leadership characteristics as they provide a solid foundation to effective leadership. (Anderson, Gisborne, & Holliday, 2006). The leader is responsible for managing the expectations of their followers within the organization. Providing a foundation of participative management allows each follower to know in advance the expected outcome of completing a particular task. The situational leadership model provides a detailed foundation for the leader to manage the execution of the assigned task. (Anderson et al., 2006).
Depending on the importance of the task and the competence level of the followers, the leader will determine the level of management when overseeing the execution of the task. Each situation will call for a different leadership solution, ensuring the assigned tasks are completed to standard. (Anderson et al., 2006). The charismatic personality of the leader enables a leader-follower relationship to be developed, which also has a positive effect on the execution of the assigned tasks. (Boerner et al., 2008). Job satisfaction and moral is high when; the employee understands the assigned tasks, the leader provides specific guidance, and the followers enjoy working for their leader. (Anderson et al., 2006).
Just like the follower, the leader must have the proper leadership tools to become and remain an effective leader. The combination of these three leadership models, and the addition of other leadership models, will provide the proper foundation for any leader to develop into an effective leader. (Ortmeier & Meese III, 2010). These three leadership models only differ at the level of implementation during the display of leadership styles. Each interacts with the other and leads the leader to the development of becoming an effective leader within their organization. It is equally important for leaders to understand the leader-follower interactions-centered theories because it provides guidance on how these leadership models are similar and must be used in cohort to become an effective leader. (Ortmeier & Meese III, 2010).
Each of the three leadership models also displays a level of passion for success by the leader. If the leader does not have the passion to become an effective leader, then they will not effectively implement these three leadership models into their leadership style. (Anderson et al., 2006). The leader must want to include their followers into the decision-making process as it will allow each follower to develop a relationship and sense of ownership with the assigned task. It also provides the followers a chance to provide input on how the task should be completed. (Kim, 2002). The followers will develop a sense of job satisfaction and a high level of moral when their leader allows them to provide input on how the task should be completed. (Anderson et al., 2006).
The leader will also display their level of passion to the mission by utilizing the correct situational leadership style that will ensure the mission is completed to standard. Leaders with a great deal of passion for an important organizational task will be more directing in the completion of the task. (Northouse, 2010). This will also be the point when the leader will use their charismatic personality and developed leader-follower relationships to self-motivate the followers to perform at their best abilities. (Humphreys et al., 2010). The combination of these leadership models will allow the leader to complete the task in an effective manner, which is also a great format to utilize when implementing organizational change, as it is done with transformational leadership. (Northouse, 2010).
These leadership models also allow the leader to increase job satisfaction and moral through recognition of the followers through various means, such as with employee of the month awards, etc. (Northouse, 2010). That is why it is important for leaders to do face-to-face communication when implementing these leadership models as much as possible. With the increase in technology, we often find ourselves communicating primarily by e-mail and text messages. The leaders must implement their leadership styles in person and understand the non-verbal as well as the verbal communication received by the followers. (Remland, 1981). This will allow the leader to properly implement the correct leadership model and style for each situation. Too much is lost in translation through e-mails and text messages. (Remland, 1981).
These three leadership models also provide additional leadership tools that allow the leader to train, coach, mentor, and develop their followers into potential leaders of the future. (Anderson et al., 2006). The participative and situational leadership models complete these tasks by creating leader-follower interaction which is paramount to effective leadership and leadership development. (Kim, 2002). The leader is able to listen to their followers decision-making process in the participative leadership role and further expound on the followers skills, knowledge, and abilities by implementing the correct situational leadership style. The leader must also use their charisma to increase the leader-follower relationship in order for the follower to trust the guidance that is coming from the leader. (Anderson et al., 2006).
Relationships are important to human nature and everyone looks to develop some type of relationship with another person. How these relationships are created and treated will make or break the spirit of a human. (Anderson et al., 2006). The leadership models discussed thus far provides the framework for the development of great leader-follower relationships. These developed relationships are also signs of effective leaderships and can allow for effective leadership, regardless of the leadership model that has been chosen by the leader. (Northouse, 2010). Transformational leadership has a great deal in common with these leadership models as change within the organization can also be accomplished and not only with just organizational and leader tasks. (Northouse, 2010).
The Leadership Models & the Generation Gap
Transformational leadership basically focuses on the ability of the leaders to influence and inspire their followers through the organizational and leaders vision, goals, and actions. (Northouse, 2010). The main focus thus far has been how to accomplish this agenda through the three chosen leadership models, which has been done effectively. Another aspect of leadership that is important to leaders is addressing the generational gap between the leaders and the followers. This generational gap has a huge impact on the effectiveness of the leader if they fail to understand their followers. (Salahuddin, 2010). The participative leadership style helps leaders address the generation gap by listening and understanding their followers decision-making process. (Salahuddin, 2010).
All leaders must be prepared to deal with their leaders, peers, and followers that fall within four different generations that are in the workforce at various levels. (Salahuddin, 2010). From 1922-1943 are The Veterans who experienced similar events, such as The Great Depression, WWII, and the rise of labor unions. (Salahuddin, 2010). From 1943-1960 (some authors suggest 1946-1964) are The Baby Boomers who experienced similar events, such as Vietnam, Civil Rights movement, and various assassinations. (Salahuddin, 2010). From 1960-1980 are the Generation Xers who experienced similar events, such as the Challenger disaster and the development of Computers and various technology. (Salahuddin, 2010). The last group is called the Nexters, whom experienced similar events with the advancement of technology, schoolyard violence, Columbine, and the Oklahoma City bombings, are from 1980-2000. (Salahuddin, 2010).
Each group will call for a different approach from the leader in order to address concerns that may adversely affect the organizational work environment. The generation gap can lead to difficulty in making effective organizational changes and getting different generational gaps to work together effectively. (Salahuddin, 2010). The three leadership models chosen can be implemented in detail and help alleviate these types of problems. The leader can focus on participative management and understand the thoughts and concerns of the followers and implement the proper situational leadership style that will help ensure each follower, regardless of their generational group, are working together effectively to accomplish the assigned tasks. (Salahuddin, 2010).
The Leadership Models & the Demography Variables
Relationships formed through participative leadership will not only address the generational gap but will also address the demography variables that plague effective leadership. (Somech, 2003). The age, education level, gender, and tenure of the followers will also have an impact on how well the leader can relate to their followers. Each organization will address this issue based on how they conduct business and the overall mission of the organization. In a military or para-military organization, such as a law enforcement agency, there are policies that ensure each person is treated equally but the mission will continue on without little adjustment to the follower. (Anderson et al., 2006). Other organizations may adapt a bit to the follower to meet their particular issues but most organizations will implement policies that the leader must address when they decide on how to deal with a situation and what leadership model/style that will be used. (Somech, 2003).
The Leadership Models & Outside the Organization
The charismatic leadership model is not only important for the organization internally but externally as well. (Boerner et al., 2008). The leader must be able to present the organization in appealing manner to customers and supporters of the organization. These leadership models are also important in dealing with outside sources that impact the organization. Charismatic leaders use persuasive skills to manage employees within an organization; therefore, one would expect the same impact on external audiences. (Flynn & Staw, 2004).
Charismatic leaders not only have ability to guide and influence the followers within an organization but they can also do the same during difficult times when the customers and supporters of the organization need their confidence restored. (Flynn & Staw, 2004). The current state of the economy places leaders in a difficult position to keep confidence high among the followers and outsiders of the organization. The leader must implement these different leadership models across the board and ensure to provide guidance and confidence to all their employees or the leader and the organization will become ineffective. During these difficult times, having a leader that understands charismatic leadership can not only save a workforce but an organization as well. (Flynn & Staw, 2004).
The Leadership Models & the Followers with Disabilities
The attitude towards individuals with disabilities in the workforce is always a concern for leaders. There are several disability acts and laws in place to help guide each leader down the correct path to becoming an effective leader over a follower with disabilities. (Cubero, 2007). The participative and situational leadership models also assist the leader in making sound decisions when assigning a disabled employee with an organizational task. The leader is able to sit down with the employee and discuss the organizational goals and the followers limitations to meet at a common ground of what tasks the follower is able to accomplish. (Cubero, 2007).
The leader will be able to select the appropriate situational leadership style that best ensures the leader can oversee the follower complete the organizational task. The key is to ensure the task is completed to standard in a manner that keeps the follower safe and risk free of possible injuries. Additionally, the leader is also responsible to ensure that the organization is meeting the needs of the follower and that all
