Курсовая: Теории лидерства
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,
personally.
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.
A BRIEF HISTORICAL REVIEW
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.
VALUE BASED LEADERSHIP THEORY
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
effective.
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
vision.
The result is strongly internalized member commitment, and intrinsic
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4
|