бесплатно рефераты

бесплатно рефераты

бесплатно рефераты бесплатно рефераты


Курсовая: Теории лидерства бесплатно рефераты

Курсовая: Теории лидерства

Managers do things right

Leaders do the right things.

Value Based Leadership Theory

Russian Example of the research

Department of Economic and Social Sciences

Academy of National Economy

Under the Government of Russian Federation

Instructor: Dr. Mikhail V. Gratchev

Moscow 1999

“Leaders are dealers in hope” Bonaparte Napoleon

“We will build a winning tradition” Vince Lombardi to the Green Bay Packers

Consider the above quotations. These statements of leaders reflect commitment to

a value position. In this paper I am going to describe a brand new theory of

leadership, developed by Professor House - the Value Based Leadership

Theory. I will also present a preliminary test of several hypotheses

derived from Value Based Theory. The tests of hypotheses are based on data

descriptive of 25 relationships between chief executives and their immediate

subordinates. As a concrete example, I am going to present the results of the

real interviews, which took plase in Russia in 1999 among the CEOs. In the

process of testing these hypotheses I replicate the study of charismatic

leadership in the U. S. presidency conducted by House, Spangler & Woycke

(1991) using a sample of chief executive officers and different measurement

methods. What I am trying to prove in this paper is the following: It was

considered to think that managers are always the leadres in the organization.

This opinion was proved to be wrong. According to the first research which

appaered in press in the end of 70-s: manager is the position, and leader is

the person who leads others to the desired result. According to the personal

trends and characteristics, managers should be leaders, and they are, but

not always. The question of leadership is a very interesting topic for me,


Being a first year student I was researching the topic “Faberge”. Leaders in

the field of jewelry production, they have really impressed me by the way,

the process of work was organized. Good managers? Of course! Born to be

Leaders? Yes they were! An interesting fact, that at the moment of history,

where they have lived, noone researched the topic of the proper management,

but the entrepreneurs of the past did their work and organized the

technological process in a brilliant way!

At my second year in the Academy, I have devoted a lot of time to the

question of World Economic Forum. Leaders from the whole world gather

together to discuss the problems of the present and the next century. How

have these people managed to achieve such results? Is this the question of a

good management or is there something else, above?

Last year I described the psychological aspects of leadership in my year

project. How these people manage to cope with others? Do they have a special

way for that? Conflicts are a very common thing for the business and everyday

life. Is there a way to avoid them? All people are equal, but some people are

more equal then the others? Is that right?

So, as you have already seen, I am deeply interested in the question of

leadership, and I do think, that this question and the existing theories have

a long life to live. Leadership is a real fact, which has already been

proved. You can be a born leader, but you also can create the leader in

yourself. You can manage to influence, motivate and enable others. You can

succeed, because there is nothing impossible for a human being. Especially,

if he is intelligent on the one hand and really wishes to achieve something

on the other.


During the period between the mid-seventies and the present time a number of

theories have been introduced into the leadership literature. These new

theories and the empirical research findings constitute a paradigm shift in the

study of leadership. The theories to which I refer are the 1976 Theory of

Charismatic Leadership (House, 1977), the Attributional Theory of

Charisma (Conger & Kanungo, 1987), and the Transformational Theory

(Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985), and Visionary Theories of Leadership (Bennis

& Nanus, 1985; Sashkin, 1988; Kousnes & Posner, 1987).

I believe these theories are all of a common genre. They attempt to explain

how leaders are able to lead organizations to attain outstanding

accomplishments such as the founding and growing of successful

entrepreneurial firms, corporate turnarounds in the face of overwhelming

competition, military victories in the face of superior forces, leadership of

successful social movements and movements for independence from colonial rule

or political tyranny. They also attempt to explain how certain leaders are

able to achieve extraordinary levels of follower motivation, admiration,

respect, trust, commitment, dedication, loyalty, and performance.

The dependent variables of earlier theories are follower expectations,

satisfaction, and normal levels of performance. The dependent variables of

the more recent theories include a number of affective consequences such as

followers’ emotional attachment to leaders; followers’ emotional and

motivational arousal, and thus enhancement of follower valences and values

with respect to the missions articulated by leaders; followers’ trust and

confidence in leaders; and values that are of major importance to the

followers. These more recent theories also address the effect of leaders on

several follower conditions not addressed in earlier theories, such as

followers' self-worth and self-efficacy perceptions, and identification with

the leader’s vision.

Earlier theories describe leader behavior that are theoretically instrumental to

follower performance and satisfy follower needs for support, generally referred

to as task-and person-oriented leader behaviors (Fleishman & Harris, 1962;

Katz & Kahn, 1952; Likert, 1961; Feidler, 1967; House, 1971, House, 1996).

In contrast, the more recent theories stress the infusion of values into

organizations and work through leader behaviors that are symbolic,

inspirational and emotion arousing.

Earlier theories take follower attitudes, values, desires, and preferences as

given. The more recent theory claim that leaders can have substantial, if

not profound effects on these affective and cognitive states of followers.

Accordingly, leaders are claimed to transform both individuals and total

organizations by infusing them with moral purpose, thus appealing to

ideological values and emotions of organizational members, rather than by

offering material incentives and the threat of punishment, or by appealing to

pragmatic or instrumental values.

Also, McClelland (1975) introduced a theory intended to explain leader

effectiveness as a function of a specific combination of motives referred to

as the Leader Motive Profile (LMP). As will be shown below, this theory

complements the newer theories referred to above.

Since the early 1980s, more than fifty empirical studies have been conducted

to test the validity of the more recent theories of leadership. Empirical

evidence is discussed in more detail below. First, however, the valued based

leadership theory will be described.


The theory is intended to integrate the newer theories and the empirical

evidence alluded to above. Value based leadership is defined as a relationship

between an individual (leader) and one or more followers based on shared

strongly internalized ideological values espoused by the leader and strong

follwower identification with these values. Ideological values are values

concerning what is morally right and wrong. Such values are expressed in

terms of personal moral responsibility, altruism, making significant social

contributions to others, concern for honesty, fairness, and meeting obligations

to others such as followers, customers, or organizational stakeholders.

Value based leadership is asserted to result in: a) exceptionally

strong identification of followers with the leader, the collective vision

espoused by the leader, and the collective; b) internalized commitment

to the vision of the leader and to the collective; c) arousal of

follower motives that are relevant to the accomplishment of the collective

vision; and d) follower willingness to make substantial self sacrifices

and extend effort above and beyond the call of duty.

The title Value Based Leadership Theory has been chosen to reflect the

essence of the genre of leadership described by the theory. The 1976 theory

of charismatic leadership is a precursor to the value based leadership

theory. The title “charismatic leadership” has been chosen because of its

cavalier popular connotation. The term charisma is often taken in the

colloquial sense, rather than the somewhat technical sense conceived by Max

Weber. The word charisma commonly invokes impressions of a person who is

charming, attractive, and sometimes macho, flamboyant, and sexually

appealing. In contrast, Value Based Leadership is intended to convey the

notion of a leader who arouses follower latent values or causes followers to

internalize new values. Such value communication can be enacted in a quiet,

non-emotionally expressive manner or in a more emotionally expressive manner.

Examples of leaders who have communicated values to followers in an

emotionally expressive manner are Winston Churchill, Lee Iacocca, Martin

Luther King, and John F. Kennedy. Examples of leaders who have communicated

values to followers in a less emotionally expressive manner are Mother

Teresa, Mahatma Ghandi, and Nelson Mandela.

A second reason for abandoning the term charisma is that in current usage it

implies that the collectivities led by charismatic leaders are highly

leader-centered and that the leader is the source of all, or almost all,

organizational strategy and inspiration of followers. One popular conception

of charismatic leadership is that it is necessarily highly directive and

disempowering of followers (Lindholm, 1990). In this paper, I hope to

demonstrate the huge potential for value based leadership to be empowering and


The Process and Effects of Value Based Leadership

In this section, an overview of what Value Based leadership is and how it works

is presented. There is both theory and empirical evidence to suggest that value

based leadership has a substantial effect on organizational performance.

Waldman and his associates reported two studies of value based leader behavior

as an antecedent to organizational profitability (Waldman, Ramirez & House,

1996; Waldman, Atwater & House, 1996). In these studies value based

leadership accounted for between fifteen and twenty five percent of firm

profitability over the three years following the time at which value based

leadership was assessed. The design of these studies controlled for executive

tenure, firm size, environmental turbulence, and prior firm profitability.

The theoretical process by which value-based leadership functions is

described in the following paragraphs. Evidence for this process is presented

in more detail in later sections in which the specific theories contributing

to value based leadership theory is discussed.

Value based leaders infuse collectives, organizations, and work with ideological

values by articulating an ideological vision, a vision of a better future to

which followers are claimed to have a moral right. By claiming that

followers have this right, the values articulated in the vision are rendered

ideological - expressions of what is morally right and good. Ideological values

are usually, if not always, end values which are intrinsically satisfying in

their own right. In contrast to pragmatic values such as material gain, pay,

and status, end values cannot be exchanged for other values. Examples of end

values are independence, dignity, equality, the right to education and

self-determination, beauty, and a world of peace and order. Ideological values

theoretically resonate with the deeply held values and emotions of followers.

Acccording to value based leadership theory the visions articulated by this

genre of leaders are consistent with the collective identity of the

followers, and are emotionally and motivationally arousing. Emotional and

motivational arousal induces follower identification with the collective

vision and with the collective, results in enhncement of follower self-

efficacy and self-worth, and have powerful motivtional effects on followers

and on overall orgnizational performance.

Leaders of industrial and government organizations often articulate visions

for their organizations. Such visions need not be grandiose. Visions of

outstanding leaders in the normal work world can embrace such ideological

values as a challenging and rewarding work environment; professional

development opportunities; freedom from highly controlling rules and

supervision; a fair return to major constituencies; fairness, craftsmanship

and integrity; high quality services or products; or respect for

organizational members, clients or customers and for the environment in which

the organization functions. Whether conceived solely by the leader, by prior

members of the collective, or jointly with followers, the articulation of a

collective ideological vision by leaders theoretically results in self-

sacrifice and effort, above and beyond the call of duty, by organizational

members and exceptional synergy among members of the collective.

Follower respect, trust, and self-sacrifice are stimulated by identification

with the values inherent in the leader's vision and the leader's

demonstration of courage, determination and self-sacrifice in the interest of

the organization and the vision. According to this perspective, value based

leaders use follower value identifiction, and the respect and trust they earn

to motivate high performance and a sense of mission in quest of the

collective vision, and to introduce major organizational change. For some

individuals, latent values are brought to consciousness as a result of the

vision articulated by value based leaders. Also, some individuals change

their values to be consistent with those of the leader.

Visions articulated by value based leaders need not be formulated exclusively

by a single leader. The collective vision may have been initially conceived

by leaders and members of the collective who preceded the current leader. In

this case, the leader is one who perpetuates the vision by continuing to

communicate it and institutionalizing it through the establishment and

maintenance of institutional means such as strategies, policies, norms,

rituals, ceremonies, and symbols. Alternatively, organizational visions can

be formulated by leaders in conjunction with organizational members.

The effects of the articulation of and emphasis on ideological values are

rather profound. Organizational members become aware of ideological values

that they share with the leader and as a collective. Members identify with

the collective vision and with the organization--thus a high level of

collective cohesion is developed. Collaborative interactions among

organizational members is enhanced. Individuals experience a sense of

collective efficacy and a heightened sense of self-esteem as a result of

their cohesion and the leader's expressions of confidence in their ability to

attain the vision. Further, motives relevant to the accomplishment of the

vision are aroused and organizational members come to judge their self-worth

in terms of their contribution to the collective and the attainment of the


The result is strongly internalized member commitment, and intrinsic

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4