Module 5 Leader Member Exchange Discussion Paper

PART I: (1-2 pages)

Based on the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership, whenever there is a team project, there is an in-group and an out-group. These two groups refer to the relationship between the leader and the employees (followers). Employees in the in-group always have more responsibilities and often learn about events/updates earlier than the out-group.

Thinking about this, please do the following:

As an employee, explain two benefits and two      disadvantages of being part of the in-group and      the out-group.

As a leader, mention two characteristics of employees      in the in-group and two      characteristics of employees in the out-group.

Explain why leaders categorize employees into in-group and an out-group.

Research LMX and provide a half page summary of the      findings on LMX that most resonate with you (go beyond what is provided in      this week’s readings). Use two sources with in-text citations

PART II(1–2 pages)

As we have studied during this week, transformational leaders encourage their employees to share ideas. This type of leader motivates employees and seeks collaboration to achieve goals. They take the time to listen to employees and evaluate ideas. Open communication, cooperation, and risk-taking are characteristics that often describe transformational leaders.

Explain ways that you exhibit transformational      leadership, and if you do not have examples write out a plan for how you      can be more transformational as a leader

PART III (1–2 pages)

As we have studied during this week, charismatic leadership is defined by a leader who uses his or her communication skills, persuasiveness, and charm to influence others. Charismatic leaders have an ability to connect with people on a deep level

Explain ways that you exhibit charismatic leadership,      and if you do not have examples write out a plan for how you can be more      charismatic as a leader.

1
LEADERSHIP
Ninth Edition
2
3
DEDICATION
To Madison, Isla, Sullivan, and Edison
4
5
LEADERSHIP
Theory and Practice
Ninth Edition
Peter G. Northouse
Western Michigan University
Los Angeles
London
New Delhi
Singapore
Washington DC
6
Melbourne
7
FOR INFORMATION:
SAGE Publications, Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
E-mail: order@sagepub.com
SAGE Publications Ltd.
1 Oliver’s Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP
United Kingdom
SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044
India
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.
18 Cross Street #10-10/11/12
China Square Central
Singapore 048423
Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
All rights reserved. Except as permitted by U.S. copyright law, no part of
this work may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or
8
stored in a database or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publisher.
All third party trademarks referenced or depicted herein are included solely
for the purpose of illustration and are the property of their respective
owners. Reference to these trademarks in no way indicates any relationship
with, or endorsement by, the trademark owner.
Printed in Canada
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Northouse, Peter Guy, author.
Title: Leadership : theory and practice / Peter G. Northouse, Western Michigan University.
Description: Ninth Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publishing, 2021. | Revised edition of
the author’s Leadership, [2019] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020045038 | ISBN 9781544397566 (paperback) | ISBN
9781071836149 | 9781071834466 (epub) | ISBN 9781071834473 (epub) | ISBN
9781071834480 (pdf)
Subjects: LCSH: Leadership. | Leadership—Case studies.
Classification: LCC HM1261 .N67 2021 | DDC 303.3/4—dc23 LC record available at
https://lccn.loc.gov/2020045038
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
21 22 23 24 25 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Acquisitions Editor: Maggie Stanley
Content Development Editor: Lauren Gobell
Editorial Assistant: Sarah Wilson
Production Editor: Tracy Buyan
Copy Editor: Melinda Masson
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
9
Proofreader: Jennifer Grubba
Indexer: Integra
Cover Designer: Gail Buschman
Marketing Manager: Jennifer Jones
10
11
BRIEF CONTENTS
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Author
About the Contributors
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Trait Approach
Chapter 3 Skills Approach
Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach
Chapter 5 Situational Approach
Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory
Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership
Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership
Chapter 10 Servant Leadership
Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership
Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership
Chapter 13 Followership
Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership
Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics
Chapter 16 Team Leadership
References
Author Index
Subject Index
12
13
DETAILED CONTENTS
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Author
About the Contributors
Chapter 1 Introduction
Leadership Defined
Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership
Definition and Components
Leadership Described
Trait Versus Process Leadership
Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Leadership and Power
Leadership and Coercion
Leadership and Morality
Leadership Is a Neutral Process
Leadership Is a Moral Process
Leadership and Management
Plan of the Book
Case Study
Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . .
Leadership Instrument
Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 2 Trait Approach
Description
Intelligence
Self-Confidence
Determination
Integrity
Sociability
Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership
Strengths and Leadership
Emotional Intelligence
How Does the Trait Approach Work?
Strengths
14
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research
Case 2.2 Recruiting for the Bank
Case 2.3 Elon Musk
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)
Summary
Chapter 3 Skills Approach
Description
Three-Skill Approach
Technical Skills
Human Skills
Conceptual Skills
Summary of the Three-Skill Approach
Skills Model
Individual Attributes
Competencies
Influences on Skills Development
Leadership Outcomes
Summary of the Skills Model
How Does the Skills Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team
Case 3.2 Andy’s Recipe
Case 3.3 2019 Global Teacher of the Year: Peter Tabichi
Leadership Instrument
Skills Inventory
Summary
Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach
Description
Task and Relationship Behaviors
Task Orientation
15
Relationship Orientation
Historical Background of the Behavioral Approach
The Ohio State Studies
The University of Michigan Studies
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid
Paternalism/Maternalism
Opportunism
Recent Studies
How Does the Behavioral Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First
Case 4.2 We Are Family
Case 4.3 Cheer Coach Monica Aldama
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 5 Situational Approach
Description
Leadership Style
Development Level
How Does SLII® Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels
Case 5.2 Getting the Message Across
Case 5.3 Philosophies of Chinese Leadership
Leadership Instrument
SLII® Questionnaire: Sample Items
Summary
Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory
Description
Leader Behaviors
16
Directive Leadership
Supportive Leadership
Participative Leadership
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Follower Characteristics
Task Characteristics
How Does Path–Goal Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors
Case 6.2 Playing in the Orchestra
Case 6.3 Row the Boat
Leadership Instrument
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Description
Early Studies
Later Studies
Leadership Development
Emotions and LMX Development
How Does LMX Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments
Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair
Case 7.3 Pixar: Creating Space for Success
Leadership Instrument
LMX-7 Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership
Description
Transformational Leadership Defined
17
Transformational Leadership and Charisma
A Model of Transformational Leadership
Transformational Leadership Factors
Transactional Leadership Factors
Nonleadership Factor
Transformational Leadership Measurements
Other Transformational Perspectives
Bennis and Nanus
Kouzes and Posner
How Does the Transformational Leadership Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 8.1 The Vision Failed
Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership
Case 8.3 Grandmothers and Benches
Leadership Instrument
Transformational Leadership Inventory
Summary
Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership
Description
Authentic Leadership Defined
Approaches to Authentic Leadership
Practical Approach
Theoretical Approach
How Does Authentic Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader?
Case 9.2 Kassie’s Story
Case 9.3 The Arena of Authenticity
Leadership Instrument
Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire
Summary
18
Chapter 10 Servant Leadership
Description
Servant Leadership Defined
Historical Basis of Servant Leadership
Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader
Building a Theory About Servant Leadership
Model of Servant Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Servant Leader Behaviors
Outcomes
Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership
How Does Servant Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 10.1 Global Health Care
Case 10.2 Servant Leadership Takes Flight
Case 10.3 Energy to Inspire the World
Leadership Instrument
Servant Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership
Description
Adaptive Leadership Defined
A Model of Adaptive Leadership
Situational Challenges
Technical Challenges
Technical and Adaptive Challenges
Adaptive Challenges
Leader Behaviors
Adaptive Work
How Does Adaptive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
19
Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness
Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus
Case 11.3 Agonizing Options for Marlboro College
Leadership Instrument
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership
Description
Inclusion Defined
A Model of Inclusive Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Leader Characteristics
Group Diversity Cognitions
Organizational Policies and Practices
Inclusive Leadership Behaviors
Outcomes
How Does Inclusive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Assessment
Challenge
Support
Case Studies
Case 12.1 Difficult Decision
Case 12.2 The Extraversion Advantage
Case 12.3 Inclusive Leadership During a Crisis
Leadership Instrument
Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument
Summary
Chapter 13 Followership
Description
Followership Defined
Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives
Typologies of Followership
The Zaleznik Typology
The Kelley Typology
20
The Chaleff Typology
The Kellerman Typology
Theoretical Approaches to Followership
Reversing the Lens
The Leadership Co-Created Process
New Perspectives on Followership
Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done
Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest of
the Organization’s Mission
Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders
Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader
Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders
Followership and Destructive Leaders
1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures
2. Our Need for Security and Certainty
3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special
4. Our Need for Membership in the Human Community
5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social Death
6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad
Leader
How Does Followership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 13.1 Bluebird Care
Case 13.2 Olympic Rowers
Case 13.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal
Leadership Instrument
Followership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership
Description
The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth
Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth
Understanding the Labyrinth
Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Effectiveness
21
Navigating the Labyrinth
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 14.1 The “Glass Ceiling”
Case 14.2 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status
Case 14.3 Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand
Leadership Instrument
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics
Description
Ethics Defined
Level 1. Preconventional Morality
Level 2. Conventional Morality
Level 3. Postconventional Morality
Ethical Theories
Centrality of Ethics to Leadership
Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
The Dark Side of Leadership
Principles of Ethical Leadership
Ethical Leaders Respect Others
Ethical Leaders Serve Others
Ethical Leaders Are Just
Ethical Leaders Are Honest
Ethical Leaders Build Community
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 15.1 Choosing a Research Assistant
Case 15.2 Reexamining a Proposal
Case 15.3 Ship Shape
Leadership Instrument
Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form)
22
Summary
Chapter 16 Team Leadership
Description
Team Leadership Model
Team Effectiveness
Leadership Decisions
Leadership Actions
How Does the Team Leadership Model Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates
Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper
Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team
Leadership Instrument
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader
Questionnaire
Summary
References
Author Index
Subject Index
23
24
PREFACE
As this ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice goes to press, the
number of confirmed deaths worldwide from the COVID-19 pandemic is
over 1 million. The horrific nature of this pandemic has challenged societies
on a global scale and highlights for all of us the importance of
understanding how leadership works and the value of leadership in times of
crisis. To that end, this edition is written with the objective of bridging the
gap between the often-simplistic popular approaches to leadership and the
more abstract theoretical approaches. Like the previous editions, this edition
reviews and analyzes a selected number of leadership theories, giving
special attention to how each theoretical approach can be applied in realworld organizations. In essence, my purpose is to explore how leadership
theory can inform and direct the way leadership is practiced.
25
NEW TO THIS EDITION
First and foremost, this edition includes a new chapter on inclusive
leadership, which examines the nature of inclusive leadership, its
underpinnings, and how it functions. Authored by two scholars in the areas
of diversity and inclusion, Donna Chrobot-Mason and Quinetta Roberson,
the chapter presents definitions, a model, and the latest research and
applications of this emerging approach to leadership. Underscored in the
chapter is how inclusion is an integration of two factors: (1) an individual’s
connectedness to others and (2) a person’s uniqueness. Finally, this new
chapter provides case studies and leadership instruments to explore how to
practice inclusive leadership in a variety of contexts.
In addition to the discussion of inclusive leadership in Chapter 12, this
edition includes an expanded analysis of leadership and morality—the
“Hitler Question.” It discusses the perplexing question of whether the
process of leadership is inherently a moral process that is concerned with
the common good or whether it is a neutral process that is not dependent on
promoting the common good.
Another new feature in this edition is the inclusion of a real-world case
study in each chapter. Because it is important to acknowledge and see real
leaders exhibiting the behaviors and concepts behind the leadership
approaches discussed in the text, the third case study in each chapter
profiles a leader that epitomizes the chapter’s concepts. These new realworld case studies include profiles from across the globe including a mental
health program utilizing grandmothers in Africa, an Italian energy
company, and New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern. In addition,
there are profiles of leaders responding to crisis including closing a college
and battling COVID-19 on a U.S. aircraft carrier.
This edition retains many special features from previous editions but has
been updated to include new research findings, figures and tables, and
everyday applications for many leadership topics including leader–member
exchange theory, transformational and authentic leadership, team
leadership, the labyrinth of women’s leadership, and historical definitions of
26
leadership. In addition, it includes an expanded look at the relationship
between emotional intelligence and leadership. The format of this edition
parallels the format used in earlier editions. As with previous editions, the
overall goal of Leadership: Theory and Practice is to advance our
understanding of the many different approaches to leadership and ways to
practice it more effectively.
27
SPECIAL FEATURES
Although this text presents and analyzes a wide range of leadership
research, every attempt has been made to present the material in a clear,
concise, and interesting manner. Reviewers of the book have consistently
commented that clarity is one of its major strengths. In addition to the
writing style, several other features of the book help make it user-friendly.
Each chapter follows the same format: It is structured to include first
theory and then practice.
Every chapter contains a discussion of the strengths and criticisms of
the approach under consideration, and assists readers in determining
the relative merits of each approach.
Each chapter includes an application section that discusses the
practical aspects of the approach and how it could be used in today’s
organizational settings.
Three case studies are provided in each chapter to illustrate common
leadership issues and dilemmas. Thought-provoking questions follow
each case study, helping readers to interpret the case.
A questionnaire is provided in each of the chapters to help readers
apply the approach to their own leadership style or setting.
Figures and tables illustrate the content of the theory and make the
ideas more meaningful.
Through these special features, every effort has been made to make this text
substantive, understandable, and practical.
28
AUDIENCE
This book provides both an in-depth presentation of leadership theory and a
discussion of how it applies to real-life situations. Thus, it is intended for
undergraduate and graduate classes in management, leadership studies,
business, educational leadership, public administration, nursing and allied
health, social work, criminal justice, industrial and organizational
psychology, communication, religion, agricultural education, political and
military science, and training and development. It can also be utilized
outside of academia by small and large companies, as well as federal
government agencies, to aid in developing the learner’s leadership skills. It
is particularly well suited as a supplementary text for core organizational
behavior courses or as an overview text within MBA curricula. This book
would also be useful as a text in student activities, continuing education, inservice training, and other leadership-development programs.
29
TEACHING RESOURCES
This text includes an array of instructor teaching materials designed to save
you time and to help you keep students engaged. To learn more, visit
sagepub.com or contact your SAGE representative at
sagepub.com/findmyrep.
In the electronic edition of the book you have purchased, there are
several icons that reference links (videos, journal articles) to
additional content. Though the electronic edition links are not live,
all content referenced may be accessed at . This URL is referenced
at several points throughout your electronic edition.
30
31
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many people directly or indirectly contributed to the development of the
ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice. First, I would like to
acknowledge my editor, Maggie Stanley, and her talented team at SAGE
Publications (Lauren Gobell and Sarah Wilson), who have contributed in so
many different ways to the quality and success of this book. For their very
capable work during the production phase, I would like to thank the copy
editor, Melinda Masson, and the project editor, Tracy Buyan. In her own
unique way, each of these people made valuable contributions to the ninth
edition.
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of this manuscript:
Sidney R. Castle, National University
Jason Headrick, Texas Tech University
Michelle Jefferson, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Gary F. Kohut, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte
R. Jeffery Maxfield, Utah Valley University
Daniel F. Nehring, Morehead State University
Michael Pace, Texas A&M University
Heather I. Scott, Kennesaw State University
Charlotte Silvers, Texas Tech University
Elena Svetieva, University of Colorado Colorado Springs
Mark Vrooman, Utica College
32
Isaac Wanasika, University of Northern Colorado
Rosie Watwood, Concordia University Texas
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of the eighth-edition manuscript:
Sandra Arumugam-Osburn, St. Louis Community College–Forest Park
Rob Elkington, University of Ontario Institute of Technology
Abimbola Farinde, Columbia Southern University
Belinda S. Han, Utah Valley University
Deborah A. Johnson-Blake, Liberty University
Benjamin Kutsyuruba, Queen’s University
Chenwei Liao, Michigan State University
Heather J. Mashburn, Appalachian State University
Comfort Okpala, North Carolina A&T State University
Ric Rohm, Southeastern University
Patricia Dillon Sobczak, Virginia Commonwealth University
Victor S. Sohmen, Drexel University
Brigitte Steinheider, University of Oklahoma-Tulsa
Robert Waris, University of Missouri–Kansas City
Sandi Zeljko, Lake-Sumter State College
33
Mary Zonsius, Rush University
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of the seventh-edition manuscript:
Hamid Akbari, Winona State University
Meera Alagaraja, University of Louisville
Mel Albin, Excelsior College
Thomas Batsching, Reutlingen University
Cheryl Beeler, Angelo State University
Julie Bjorkman, Benedictine University
Mark D. Bowman, Methodist University
Dianne Burns, University of Manchester
Eric Buschlen, Central Michigan University
Steven Bryant, Drury University
Daniel Calhoun, Georgia Southern University
David Conrad, Augsburg College
Joyce Cousins, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland
Denise Danna, LSUHSC School of Nursing
S. Todd Deal, Georgia Southern University
Caroline S. Fulmer, University of Alabama
34
Brad Gatlin, John Brown University
Greig A. Gjerdalen, Capilano University
Andrew Gonzales, University of California, Irvine
Decker B. Hains, Western Michigan University
Amanda Hasty, University of Colorado–Denver
Carl Holschen, Missouri Baptist University
Kiran Ismail, St. John’s University
Irma Jones, University of Texas at Brownsville
Michele D. Kegley, University of Cincinnati, Blue Ash College
Jeanea M. Lambeth, Pittsburg State University
David Lees, University of Derby
David S. McClain, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Carol McMillan, New School University
Richard Milter, Johns Hopkins University
Christopher Neck, Arizona State University–Tempe
Keeok Park, University of La Verne
Richard Parkman, University of Plymouth
Lori M. Pindar, Clemson University
Chaminda S. Prelis, University of Dubuque
Casey Rae, George Fox University
35
Noel Ronan, Waterford Institute of Technology
Louis Rubino, California State University, Northridge
Shadia Sachedina, Baruch College (School of Public Affairs)
Harriet L. Schwartz, Carlow University
Kelli K. Smith, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
David Swenson, The College of St. Scholastica
Danny L. Talbot, Washington State University
Robert L. Taylor, University of Louisville
Precious Taylor-Clifton, Cambridge College
John Tummons, University of Missouri
Kristi Tyran, Western Washington University
Tamara Von George, Granite State College
Natalie Walker, Seminole State College
William Welch, Bowie State University
David E. Williams, Texas Tech University
Tony Wohlers, Cameron University
Sharon A. Wulf, Worcester Polytechnic Institute School of Business
Alec Zama, Grand View University
Xia Zhao, California State University, Dominguez Hills
36
In addition, I would like to thank, for their exceptional work on the
leadership profile tool and the ancillaries, Isolde Anderson (Hope College),
John Baker (Western Kentucky University), and Eric Buschlen.
A very special acknowledgment goes to Laurel Northouse who has been my
number-one critic and supporter from the inception of the book in 1990 to
the present. In addition, I am especially grateful to Marie Lee for her
exceptional editing and guidance throughout this project. For her
comprehensive literature reviews and chapter updates, I would like to thank
Terri Scandura.
For his review of and comments on the morality and leadership section, I
am indebted to Joseph Curtin (Northeastern University). I would like to
thank Kate McCain (University of Nebraska–Lincoln) and Jason Headrick
(University of Nebraska–Lincoln) for their contributions to the adaptive
leadership chapter, John Baker for his contributions to the team leadership
chapter, Jenny Steiner for her case study on adaptive leadership, Jeff Brink
for sharing his story about transformational leadership, and Kassandra
Gutierrez for her case study on authentic leadership. In addition, I would
like to acknowledge Barbara Russell (Chemeketa Community College) for
her research and writing of many of the new real-world case studies.
Finally, I would like to thank the many undergraduate and graduate students
whom I have taught through the years. Their ongoing feedback has helped
clarify my thinking about leadership and encouraged me to make plain the
practical implications of leadership theories.
37
38
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Peter G. Northouse,
PhD, is Professor Emeritus of Communication in the School of Communication at
Western Michigan University. Leadership: Theory and Practice is the best-selling
academic textbook on leadership in the world and has been translated into 16 languages.
In addition to authoring publications in professional journals, he is the author of
Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (now in its fifth edition) and coauthor of Leadership Case Studies in Education (now in its third edition) and Health
Communication: Strategies for Health Professionals (now in its third edition). His
scholarly and curricular interests include models of leadership, leadership assessment,
ethical leadership, and leadership and group dynamics. For more than 30 years, he has
taught undergraduate and graduate courses in leadership, interpersonal communication,
and organizational communication on both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Currently, he is a consultant and lecturer on trends in leadership research, leadership
development, and leadership education. He holds a doctorate in speech communication
from the University of Denver, and master’s and bachelor’s degrees in communication
education from Michigan State University.
39
40
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Donna Chrobot-Mason,
PhD, is an associate professor and director of the Center for Organizational
Leadership at the University of Cincinnati (UC). She is director of UC
Women Lead, a 10-month executive leadership program for high-potential
women at UC. Her research and consulting work has spanned two decades
and centers on leadership across differences and strategies for creating
organizations that support diversity, equity, and inclusion and foster
intergroup collaboration. She has published nearly 40 articles and scholarly
works in journals such as the Journal of Management, The Leadership
Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Group and
Organization Management. She has served on the editorial review board for
the Journal of Management, Personnel Psychology, and the Journal of
Business and Psychology. Her book (co-authored with Chris Ernst),
Boundary Spanning Leadership: Six Practices for Solving Problems,
Driving Innovation, and Transforming Organizations, was published by
McGraw-Hill Professional in 2010. Dr. Chrobot-Mason has been invited to
address numerous audiences including the Brookings Institute, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Environmental Protection Agency, Internal
Revenue Service, Catholic Health Partners, and the International
Leadership Association. She has consulted with numerous organizations
including Briggs and Stratton, Dayton Public Schools, BoehringerIngelheim, Emory University, Milacron, and Forest City Enterprises. She
holds a PhD and master’s degree in applied psychology from the University
of Georgia.
Crystal L. Hoyt
is a professor and associate dean for academic affairs, and holds the
Thorsness Endowed Chair in Ethical Leadership at the Jepson School of
Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. Her research explores
the role of belief systems, such as mindsets, self-efficacy, stereotypes, and
political ideologies, in a range of social issues including stigma and
discrimination, ethical failures in leadership, leadership and educational
achievement gaps, public health, and wealth inequality. Dr. Hoyt’s research
appears in journals such as Psychological Science, Journal of Experimental
and Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Group
41
Processes & Intergroup Relations, and The Leadership Quarterly. She has
published over 70 journal articles and book chapters and has co-edited three
books. Dr. Hoyt is an associate editor at the Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, is on the editorial boards at Leadership Quarterly and
Sex Roles, and has served as a reviewer for over 45 journals.
Susan E. Kogler Hill
(PhD, University of Denver, 1974) is Professor Emeritus and former chair
of the School of Communication at Cleveland State University. Her
research and consulting have been in the areas of interpersonal and
organizational communication. She specializes in group leadership,
teamwork, empowerment, and mentoring. She is author of a text titled
Improving Interpersonal Competence. In addition, she has written book
chapters and published articles in many professional journals.
Quinetta Roberson,
PhD, is the John A. Hannah Distinguished Professor of Management and
Psychology at Michigan State University. Prior to her current position, she
was an Endowed Chair at Villanova University and a tenured professor at
Cornell University. She has been a visiting scholar at universities on six
continents and has more than 20 years of global experience in teaching
courses, facilitating workshops, and advising organizations on diversity and
inclusion, leadership, and talent management. Dr. Roberson has published
over 40 scholarly journal articles and book chapters and edited a Handbook
of Diversity in the Workplace (2013). Her research and consulting work
focus on developing organizational capability and enhancing effectiveness
through the strategic management of people, particularly diverse work
teams, and is informed by her background in finance, having worked as a
financial analyst and small business development consultant prior to
obtaining her doctorate. She earned her PhD in organizational behavior
from the University of Maryland and holds undergraduate and graduate
degrees in finance.
Stefanie Simon
is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Siena College.
She earned her PhD in social psychology from Tulane University and was
the Robert A. Oden Jr. Postdoctoral Fellow for Innovation in the Liberal
42
Arts at Carleton College before joining the faculty at Siena. Her research
centers on the psychology of diversity, with a focus on prejudice,
discrimination, and leadership. In her work, she focuses on the perspective
of the target of prejudice and discrimination, as well as the perspective of
the perpetrator of prejudice and discrimination. She is particularly
interested in how leaders of diverse groups can promote positive intergroup
relations and reduce inequality in society. She has published articles in
various psychology and leadership journals including The Leadership
Quarterly, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Social Psychological
and Personality Science, and Sex Roles.
43
44
1 INTRODUCTION
Leadership is a highly sought-after and highly valued commodity. In the 25 years since the first edition of this
book was published, the public has become increasingly captivated by the idea of leadership. People continue to
ask themselves and others what makes good leaders. As individuals, they seek more information on how to
become effective leaders. As a result, bookstore shelves are filled with popular books about leaders and how to be
a leader. Many people believe that leadership is a way to improve their personal, social, and professional lives.
Corporations seek those with leadership ability because they believe these individuals bring special assets to their
organizations and, ultimately, improve the bottom line. Academic institutions throughout the country have
responded by offering programs in leadership studies, including at the master’s and doctoral levels.
In addition, leadership has gained the attention of researchers worldwide. Leadership research is increasing
dramatically, and findings underscore that there is a wide variety of different theoretical approaches to explain the
complexities of the leadership process (e.g., Bass, 2008; Bryman, 1992; Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson, &
Uhl-Bien, 2011; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Dinh et al., 2014; J. Gardner, 1990; W. Gardner et al., 2020; Hickman,
2016; Mumford, 2006; Rost, 1991). Some researchers conceptualize leadership as a trait or as a behavior, whereas
others view leadership from an information-processing perspective or relational standpoint.
Leadership has been studied using both qualitative and quantitative methods in many contexts, including small
groups, therapeutic groups, and large organizations. In recent years, this research has included experiments
designed to explain how leadership influences follower attitudes and performance (Podsakoff & Podsakoff, 2019)
in hopes of increasing the practical usefulness of leadership research.
Collectively, the research findings on leadership provide a picture of a process that is far more sophisticated and
complex than the often-simplistic view presented in some of the popular books on leadership.
This book treats leadership as a complex process having multiple dimensions. Based on the research literature, this
text provides an in-depth description and application of many different approaches to leadership. Our emphasis is
on how theory can inform the practice of leadership. In this book, we describe each theory and then explain how
the theory can be used in real situations.
45
LEADERSHIP DEFINED
There are many ways to finish the sentence “Leadership is . . .” In fact, as Stogdill (1974, p. 7) pointed out in a
review of leadership research, there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are people who
have tried to define it. It is much like the words democracy, love, and peace. Although each of us intuitively knows
what we mean by such words, the words can have different meanings for different people. As Box 1.1 shows,
scholars and practitioners have attempted to define leadership for more than a century without universal consensus.
Box 1.1
The Evolution of Leadership Definitions
While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting a definition to the term has proved to be a
challenging endeavor for scholars and practitioners alike. More than a century has lapsed since leadership
became a topic of academic introspection, and definitions have evolved continuously during that period.
These definitions have been influenced by many factors, from world affairs and politics to the perspectives
of the discipline in which the topic is being studied. In a seminal work, Rost (1991) analyzed materials
written from 1900 to 1990, finding more than 200 different definitions for leadership. His analysis
provides a succinct history of how leadership has been defined through the last century:
46
1900–1929
Definitions of leadership appearing in the first three decades of the 20th century emphasized control and
centralization of power with a common theme of domination. For example, at a conference on leadership
in 1927, leadership was defined as “the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and [to] induce
obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927, p. 124).
47
1930s
In the 1930s, traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an emerging view of leadership as
influence rather than domination. Leadership was also identified as the interaction of an individual’s
specific personality traits with those of a group; it was noted that while the attitudes and activities of the
many may be changed by the one, the many may also influence a leader.
48
1940s
The group approach came into the forefront in the 1940s with leadership being defined as the behavior of
an individual while involved in directing group activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same time, leadership
by persuasion was distinguished from “drivership” or leadership by coercion (Copeland, 1942).
49
1950s
Three themes dominated leadership definitions during the 1950s:
continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what leaders do in groups;
leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which defined leadership based on behavior
of the leader; and
effectiveness, in which leadership was defined by the ability to influence overall group effectiveness.
50
1960s
Although a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw harmony among leadership scholars. The
prevailing definition of leadership as behavior that influences people toward shared goals was underscored
by Seeman (1960), who described leadership as “acts by persons which influence other persons in a shared
direction” (p. 53).
51
1970s
In the 1970s, the group focus gave way to the organizational behavior approach, where leadership became
viewed as “initiating and maintaining groups or organizations to accomplish group or organizational goals”
(Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns’s (1978) definition, however, was the most important concept of leadership to
emerge: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing by persons with certain motives and values,
various economic, political, and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to
realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers” (p. 425).
52
1980s
The 1980s exploded with scholarly and popular works on the nature of leadership, bringing the topic to the
apex of the academic and public consciousness. As a result, the number of definitions for leadership
became a prolific stew with several persevering themes:
Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still predominantly delivered the message that
leadership is getting followers to do what the leader wants done.
Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership definitions of the 1980s, influence was
examined from every angle. To distinguish leadership from management, however, scholars insisted
that leadership is noncoercive influence.
Traits. Spurred by the national best seller In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982), the
leadership-as-excellence movement brought leader traits back to the spotlight. As a result, many
people’s understanding of leadership is based on a trait orientation.
Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a movement defining leadership as a
transformational process, stating that leadership occurs “when one or more persons engage with
others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and
morality” (p. 83).
53
1990s
While debate continued through the 1990s as to whether leadership and management were separate
processes, research emphasized the process of leadership with the focus shifting to followers. Several
approaches emerged that examine how leaders influence a group of individuals to achieve a common goal,
placing particular attention on the role of followers in the leadership process. Among these leadership
approaches were
servant leadership, which puts the leader in the role of a servant who utilizes “caring principles”
focusing on followers’ needs to help followers become more autonomous, knowledgeable, and like
servants themselves (Graham, 1991);
followership, which puts a spotlight on followers and the role they play in the leadership process
(Hollander, 1992); and
adaptive leadership, in which leaders encourage followers to adapt by confronting and solving
problems, challenges, and changes (Heifetz, 1994).
54
The 21st Century
The turn of the 21st century brought the emergence of moral approaches to leadership, with authentic and
ethical leadership gaining interest from researchers and executives. These new approaches also include
leader humility and spirituality. Leadership theory and research also highlighted communication between
leaders and followers, and as organizational populations became increasingly diverse, inclusive leadership
was introduced. Among these approaches were
authentic leadership, in which the authenticity of leaders and their leadership is emphasized (George,
2003);
ethical leadership, which draws attention to the appropriate conduct of leaders in their personal
actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers (Brown,
Treviño, & Harrison, 2005);
spiritual leadership, which focuses on leadership that utilizes values and sense of calling and
membership to motivate followers (Fry, 2003);
discursive leadership, which posits that leadership is created not so much through leader traits, skills,
and behaviors, but through communication practices that are negotiated between leader and follower
(Aritz, Walker, Cardon, & Zhang, 2017; Fairhurst, 2007);
humble leadership, in which leaders’ humility allows them to show followers how to grow as a result
of work (Owens & Hekman, 2012); and
inclusive leadership, which focuses on diversity and leader behaviors that facilitate followers’ feeling
of belongingness to the group while maintaining their individuality (Shore, Cleveland, & Sanchez,
2018).
After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a common
definition for leadership. Because of such factors as growing global influences and generational
differences, leadership will continue to have different meanings for different people. The bottom line is
that leadership is a complex concept for which a determined definition may long be in flux.
55
Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership
In the past 60 years, as many as 65 different classification systems have been developed to define the dimensions
of leadership (Fleishman et al., 1991). One such classification system, directly related to our discussion, is the
scheme proposed by Bass (2008, pp. 11–20). He suggested that some definitions view leadership as the focus of
group processes. From this perspective, the leader is at the center of group change and activity and embodies the
will of the group. Another set of definitions conceptualizes leadership from a personality perspective, which
suggests that leadership is a combination of special traits or characteristics that some individuals possess. These
traits enable those individuals to induce others to accomplish tasks. Other approaches to leadership define it as an
act or a behavior—the things leaders do to bring about change in a group.
In addition, some define leadership in terms of the power relationship that exists between leaders and followers.
From this viewpoint, leaders have power that they wield to effect change in others. Others view leadership as a
transformational process that moves followers to accomplish more than is usually expected of them. Finally, some
scholars address leadership from a skills perspective. This viewpoint stresses the capabilities (knowledge and
skills) that make effective leadership possible.
56
Definition and Components
Despite the multitude of ways in which leadership has been conceptualized, the following components can be
identified as central to the phenomenon: (a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c)
leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals. Based on these components, the following
definition of leadership is used in this text:
Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common
goal.
Defining leadership as a process means that it is not a trait or characteristic that resides in the leader, but rather a
transactional event that occurs between the leader and the followers. Process implies that a leader affects and is
affected by followers. It emphasizes that leadership is not a linear, one-way event, but rather an interactive event.
When leadership is defined in this manner, it becomes available to everyone. It is not restricted to the formally
designated leader in a group.
Leadership involves influence. It is concerned with how the leader affects followers and the communication that
occurs between leaders and followers (Ruben & Gigliotti, 2017). Influence is the sine qua non of leadership.
Without influence, leadership does not exist.
Leadership occurs in groups. Groups are the context in which leadership takes place. Leadership involves
influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose. This can be a small task group, a community
group, or a large group encompassing an entire organization. Leadership is about one individual influencing a
group of others to accomplish common goals. Others (a group) are required for leadership to occur. Leadership
training programs that teach people to lead themselves are not considered a part of leadership within the definition
that is set forth in this discussion.
Leadership includes attention to common goals. Leaders direct their energies toward individuals who are trying to
achieve something together. By common, we mean that the leaders and followers have a mutual purpose. Attention
to common goals gives leadership an ethical overtone because it stresses the need for leaders to work with
followers to achieve selected goals. Stressing mutuality lessens the possibility that leaders might act toward
followers in ways that are forced or unethical. It also increases the possibility that leaders and followers will work
together toward a common good (Rost, 1991).
Throughout this text, the people who engage in leadership will be called leaders, and those toward whom
leadership is directed will be called followers. Both leaders and followers are involved together in the leadership
process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders (Burns, 1978; Heller & Van Til, 1983; Hollander,
1992; Jago, 1982). An extended discussion of followership is provided in Chapter 12. Although leaders and
followers are closely linked, it is the leader who often initiates the relationship, creates the communication
linkages, and carries the burden for maintaining the relationship.
In our discussion of leaders and followers, attention will be directed toward follower issues as well as leader
issues. Leaders have an ethical responsibility to attend to the needs and concerns of followers. As Burns (1978)
pointed out, discussions of leadership sometimes are viewed as elitist because of the implied power and
importance often ascribed to leaders in the leader–follower relationship. Leaders are not above or better than
followers. Leaders and followers must be understood in relation to each other (Hollander, 1992) and collectively
(Burns, 1978). They are in the leadership relationship together—and are two sides of the same coin (Rost, 1991).
57
LEADERSHIP DESCRIBED
In addition to definitional issues, it is important to discuss several other questions pertaining to the nature of
leadership. In the following section, we will address questions such as how leadership as a trait differs from
leadership as a process; how appointed leadership differs from emergent leadership; and how the concepts of
power, coercion, morality, and management interact with leadership.
58
Trait Versus Process Leadership
We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader” or “She is a natural leader.” These statements are
commonly expressed by people who take a trait perspective toward leadership. The trait perspective suggests that
certain individuals have special innate or inborn characteristics or qualities that make them leaders, and that it is
these qualities that differentiate them from nonleaders. Some of the personal qualities used to identify leaders
include unique physical factors (e.g., height), personality features (e.g., extraversion), and other characteristics
(e.g., intelligence and fluency; Bryman, 1992). In Chapter 2, we will discuss a large body of research that has
examined these personal qualities.
To describe leadership as a trait is quite different from describing it as a process (Figure 1.1). The trait viewpoint
conceptualizes leadership as a property or set of properties possessed in varying degrees by different people (Jago,
1982). This suggests that it resides in select people and restricts leadership to those who are believed to have
special, usually inborn, talents.
Description
Figure 1.1 The Different Views of Leadership
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter,
1990, New York, NY: Free Press.
The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon that resides in the context of the interactions
between leaders and followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a process, leadership can be
observed in leader behaviors (Jago, 1982) and can be learned. The process definition of leadership is consistent
with the definition of leadership that we have set forth in this chapter.
59
Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Some people are leaders because of their formal position in an organization, whereas others are leaders because of
the way other group members respond to them. These two common forms of leadership are called assigned
leadership and emergent leadership. Leadership that is based on occupying a position in an organization is
assigned leadership. Team leaders, plant managers, department heads, directors, and administrators are all
examples of assigned leaders.
Yet the person assigned to a leadership position does not always become the real leader in a particular setting.
When others perceive an individual as the most influential member of a group or an organization, regardless of the
individual’s title, the person is exhibiting emergent leadership. The individual acquires emergent leadership
through other people in the organization who support and accept that individual’s behavior. This type of leadership
is not assigned by position; rather, it emerges over a period through communication. Some of the positive
communication behaviors that account for successful leader emergence include being verbally involved, being
informed, seeking others’ opinions, initiating new ideas, and being firm but not rigid (Ellis & Fisher, 1994).
Researchers have found that, in addition to communication behaviors, personality plays a role in leadership
emergence. For example, Smith and Foti (1998) found that certain personality traits were related to leadership
emergence in a sample of 160 male college students. The individuals who were more dominant, more intelligent,
and more confident about their own performance (general self-efficacy) were more likely to be identified as
leaders by other members of their task group. Although it is uncertain whether these findings apply to women as
well, Smith and Foti suggested that these three traits could be used to identify individuals perceived to be emergent
leaders.
Leadership emergence may also be affected by gender-biased perceptions. In a study of 40 mixed-sex college
groups, Watson and Hoffman (2004) found that women who were urged to persuade their task groups to adopt
high-quality decisions succeeded with the same frequency as men with identical instructions. Although women
were equally influential leaders in their groups, they were rated significantly lower than comparable men were on
leadership. Furthermore, these influential women were also rated as significantly less likable than comparably
influential men were. Another study found that men who spoke up to promote new ideas in teams were granted
higher status compared to women who did so (McClean, Martin, Emich, & Woodruff, 2018). These results suggest
that there continue to be barriers to women’s emergence as leaders in some settings.
A unique perspective on leadership emergence is provided by social identity theory (Hogg, 2001). From this
perspective, leadership emergence is the degree to which a person fits with the identity of the group as a whole. As
groups develop over time, a group prototype also develops. Individuals emerge as leaders in the group when they
become most like the group prototype. Being similar to the prototype makes leaders attractive to the group and
gives them influence with the group.
The leadership approaches we discuss in the subsequent chapters of this book apply equally to assigned leadership
and emergent leadership. When a person is engaged in leadership, that person is a leader, whether leadership was
assigned or emerged. This book focuses on the leadership process that occurs when any individual is engaged in
influencing other group members in their efforts to reach a common goal.
60
Leadership and Power
The concept of power is related to leadership because it is part of the influence process. Power is the capacity or
potential to influence. People have power when they have the ability to affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses
of action. Judges, doctors, coaches, and teachers are all examples of people who have the potential to influence us.
When they do, they are using their power, the resource they draw on to effect change in us.
Although there are no explicit theories in the research literature about power and leadership, power is a concept
that people often associate with leadership. It is common for people to view leaders (both good and bad) and
people in positions of leadership as individuals who wield power over others, and as a result, power is often
thought of as synonymous with leadership. In addition, people are often intrigued by how leaders use their power.
Understanding how power is used in leadership is instrumental as well in understanding the dark side of
leadership, where leaders use their leadership to achieve their own personal ends and lead in toxic and destructive
ways (Krasikova, Green, & LeBreton, 2013). Studying how famous leaders, such as Adolf Hitler or Alexander the
Great, use power to effect change in others is titillating to many people because it underscores that power can
indeed effectuate change and maybe if they had power they too could effectuate change.
In her 2012 book The End of Leadership, Kellerman argues there has been a shift in leadership power during the
last 40 years. Power used to be the domain of leaders, but that is diminishing and shifting to followers. Changes in
culture have meant followers demand more from leaders, and leaders have responded. Access to technology has
empowered followers, given them access to huge amounts of information, and made leaders more transparent. The
result is a decline in respect for leaders and leaders’ legitimate power. In effect, followers have used information
power to level the playing field. Power is no longer synonymous with leadership, and in the social contract
between leaders and followers, leaders wield less power, according to Kellerman. For example, Posner (2015)
examined volunteer leaders, such as those who sit on boards for nonprofit organizations, and found that while
these individuals did not have positional authority in the organization, they were able to influence leadership.
Volunteer leaders engaged more frequently in leadership behaviors than did paid leaders.
In college courses today, the most widely cited research on power is French and Raven’s (1959) work on the bases
of social power. In their work, they conceptualized power from the framework of a dyadic relationship that
included both the person influencing and the person being influenced. French and Raven identified five common
and important bases of power—referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and coercive—and Raven (1965) identified a
sixth, information power (Table 1.1). Each of these bases of power increases a leader’s capacity to influence the
attitudes, values, or behaviors of others.
Table 1.1 Six Bases of Power
61
Referent
Power
Based on followers’ identification and liking for the leader. A teacher who is adored by students
has referent power.
Expert
Power
Based on followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. A tour guide who is knowledgeable
about a foreign country has expert power.
Legitimate
Power
Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge who administers sentences in the
courtroom exhibits legitimate power.
Reward
Power
Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. A supervisor who compliments
employees who work hard is using reward power.
Coercive
Power
Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coach who sits players on the
bench for being late to practice is using coercive power.
Information Derived from possessing knowledge that others want or need. A boss who has information
Power
regarding new criteria to decide employee promotion eligibility has information power.
Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research and
Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper & Row; and “Social Influence and Power,” by B. H. Raven, 1965, in I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein
(Eds.), Current Studies in Social Psychology (pp. 371–382), New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
In organizations, there are two major kinds of power: position power and personal power. Position power, which
includes legitimate, reward, coercive, and information power (Table 1.2), is the power a person derives from a
particular office or rank in a formal organizational system. It is the influence capacity a leader derives from having
higher status than the followers have. Position power allows leaders to attain central roles in organizations; for
example, vice presidents and department heads have more power than staff personnel do because of the positions
62
they hold in the organization. In addition, leaders’ informal networks bring them greater social power, which
separates leaders from nonleaders (Chiu, Balkundi, & Weinberg, 2017).
Table 1.2 Types and Bases of Power
Position Power Personal Power
Legitimate
Referent
Reward
Expert
Coercive
Information
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.
Personal power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and
knowledgeable. When leaders act in ways that are important to followers, it gives leaders power. For example,
some managers have power because their followers consider them to be good role models. Others have power
because their followers view them as highly competent or considerate. In both cases, these managers’ power is
ascribed to them by others, based on how they are seen in their relationships with others. Personal power includes
referent and expert power (Table 1.2).
In discussions of leadership, it is not unusual for leaders to be described as wielders of power, as individuals who
dominate others. In these instances, power is conceptualized as a tool that leaders use to achieve their own ends.
Contrary to this view of power, Burns (1978) emphasized power from a relationship standpoint. For Burns, power
is not an entity that leaders use over others to achieve their own ends; instead, power occurs in relationships. It
should be used by leaders and followers to promote their collective goals.
In this text, our discussions of leadership treat power as a relational concern for both leaders and followers. We pay
attention to how leaders work with followers to reach common goals.
63
Leadership and Coercion
Coercive power is one of the specific kinds of power available to leaders. Coercion involves the use of force to
effect change. To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may include
manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment. Coercion often involves the use of threats,
punishment, and negative reward schedules and is most often seen as a characteristic of the dark side of leadership.
Classic examples of coercive leaders are Adolf Hitler in Germany, the Taliban leaders in Afghanistan, Jim Jones in
Guyana, and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, each of whom used power and restraint to force followers to
engage in extreme behaviors. At an extreme, coercion combines with other bullying and tyrannical behaviors
known as abusive supervision (Tepper, 2007).
It is important to distinguish between coercion and leadership because it allows us to separate out from our
examples of leadership the behaviors of individuals such as Hitler, the Taliban, and Jones. In our discussions of
leadership, coercive people are not used as models of ideal leadership. Our definition suggests that leadership is
reserved for those who influence a group of individuals toward a common goal. Leaders who use coercion are
interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in the wants and needs of followers. Using coercion runs
counter to working with followers to achieve a common goal.
64
Leadership and Morality
In considering the relationship of leadership and morality, let’s start with a simple question: Do you agree or
disagree with the following statement:
Hitler’s rule in Germany could be considered a good example of leadership.
Throughout the United States and around the world, in classroom discussions of leadership, the question about
whether or not Adolf Hitler was a “great” leader inevitably comes up. Your response to this statement is intended
to bring out whether your conceptualization of leadership includes a moral dimension or if you think that
leadership is a neutral concept that treats leadership as amoral.
If you answered agree to the statement, you probably come down on the side of thinking the phenomenon of
leadership is neutral, or amoral. You might think it is obvious that Hitler was a leader because he was very
charismatic and persuasive and his actions had a huge impact on Germany and the world. On the other hand, if you
answered disagree, you most likely do not think of Hitler’s leadership as being in any way positive and that the
notion of Hitler as a model of leadership is repugnant because you reserve the concept of leadership for
nondestructive leaders who create change for the common good. That is, you believe leadership cannot be
divorced from values; it is a moral phenomenon and has a moral component.
For as long as leadership has been studied, the debate of whether or not leadership has a moral dimension has been
a focus of leadership scholars. It is an important debate because it gets at the core of what we think the
phenomenon of leadership actually entails. How we define leadership is central to how we talk about leadership,
how we develop the components of leadership, how we research it, and how we teach it.
There are two consistent trains of thought regarding the relationship of leadership and morality: Either leadership
is a neutral process that is not guided or dependent on a value system that advances the common good, or
leadership is a moral process that is guided and dependent on values promotive of the common good.
Leadership Is a Neutral Process
It is common for people to think of leadership as a neutral concept—one that is not tied to morality. From this
perspective, leadership can be used for good ends or bad, and can be employed both by individuals who have
worthy intentions and by those who do not. For example, moral leaders like Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, and
Martin Luther King Jr. used leadership for good. On the other hand, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, and Idi Amin used
leadership destructively. Common to all of these examples is that these leaders used leadership to influence
followers to move toward and accomplish certain goals. The only difference is that some leaders used leadership in
laudatory ways while others used leadership in highly destructive ways.
A classic historical example of treating leadership as an amoral concept can be found in Niccolò Machiavelli’s The
Prince (c. 1505; Nederman, 2019). In this book, Machiavelli philosophizes that moral values need not play a role
in decision making; instead, leaders should concentrate on using power to achieve their goals. Their focus should
be on the ends, or consequences, of their leadership and need not be about the means. Machiavelli endorsed
leaders’ use of fear and deception, if necessary, to accomplish tasks; he was concerned with the pragmatics of what
leaders do and not the rightness or wrongness of a leader’s actions (Nederman, 2019).
There are an abundance of definitions of leadership, and most of these treat the concept of morality in a neutral
fashion (e.g., Rost’s 1991 analysis of 221 definitions of leadership). These definitions do not require that
leadership result in only positive outcomes. To use a specific example, Padilla (2013) defines leadership as “an
organized group process with associated goals resulting in a set of outcomes” (p. 12), which involves a leader,
followers, and contexts. From his perspective, leadership is value-neutral and can be used for constructive or
65
destructive ends. Padilla argues that Hitler should be considered a leader even though the outcome of his
leadership was horrendously destructive.
Leadership Is a Moral Process
In contrast to describing leadership as a neutral process, some in the field of leadership argue (as we do in this
chapter) that leadership has a value dimension—it is about influencing others to make changes to achieve a
common good. From this perspective, Hitler, who thwarted the common good, cannot be considered a “great”
leader.
One of the first scholars to conceptualize leadership as a moral process was James MacGregor Burns in his book
Leadership (1978). For Burns, leadership is about raising the motivations and moral levels of followers. He argued
it is the responsibility of a leader to help followers assess their own values and needs in order to raise them to a
higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress values such as liberty, justice, and equality (Ciulla, 2014).
Burns (2003) argued that values are central to what leaders do.
Expanding on Burns, Bass (1985) developed a model of leadership (see Chapter 8, “Transformational Leadership”)
that delineated transforming leadership, a kind of leadership that affects the level of values of followers. Because it
is difficult to use the term transformational leadership when describing a leader such as Adolf Hitler, the term
pseudotransformational leadership was coined by Bass to refer to leaders who focus on their own personal goals
over the common good and are self-consumed, exploitive, and power-oriented, with warped moral values (Bass &
Riggio, 2006; Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). In contrast to pseudotransformational leadership, “real” or “ideal”
transformational leadership is described as socialized leadership—leadership that is concerned with the collective
good. Socialized leaders transcend their own interests for the sake of others (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Additionally, morals have a central role in two established leadership theories, authentic leadership and servant
leadership. Authentic leadership (see Chapter 9) is an extension of transformational leadership, stressing that
leaders do what is “right” and “good” for their followers and society. They understand their own values, place
followers’ needs above their own, and work with followers to align their interests in order to create a greater
common good. Similarly, servant leadership has a strong moral dimension. It makes altruism the central
component of the leadership process and frames leadership around the principle of caring for others. Within this
paradigm, leaders are urged to not dominate, direct, or control others; they are urged to give up control rather than
seek control.
Referring back to the question about whether you agree or disagree that Hitler is an example of leadership, your
answer has to be predicated on what you think leadership is. If you think leadership is a neutral process that does
not have a moral requirement, then Hitler is an example of leadership. On the other hand, if you think leadership
includes ethical considerations such as elevating the morals, values, and goals of followers to make more
principled judgments (Burns, 1978), then Hitler is not an example of leadership. In this view, he was nothing more
than a despotic, Machiavellian autocrat and an evil dictator responsible for the imprisonment, abuse, and execution
of millions of innocent people and the unprovoked origin of World War II—the deadliest armed conflict in history.
66
Leadership and Management
Leadership is a process that is similar to management in many ways. Leadership involves influence, as does
management. Leadership entails working with people, which management entails as well. Leadership is concerned
with effective goal accomplishment, and so is management. In general, many of the functions of management are
activities that are consistent with the definition of leadership we set forth at the beginning of this chapter.
But leadership is also different from management. Whereas the study of leadership can be traced back to Aristotle,
management emerged around the turn of the 20th century with the advent of our industrialized society.
Management was created as a way to reduce chaos in organizations, to make them run more effectively and
efficiently. The primary functions of management, as first identified by Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing,
staffing, and controlling. These functions are still representative of the field of management today.
In a book that compared the functions of management with the functions of leadership, Kotter (1990) argued that
they are quite dissimilar (Figure 1.2). The overriding function of management is to provide order and consistency
to organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement. Management is
about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and constructive change.
As illustrated in Figure 1.2, the major activities of management are played out differently than the activities of
leadership. Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7–8) contended that both management and
leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper. For example, if an organization has strong management
without leadership, the outcome can be stifling and bureaucratic. Conversely, if an organization has strong
leadership without management, the outcome can be meaningless or misdirected change for change’s sake. To be
effective, organizations need to nourish both competent management and skilled leadership.
Figure 1.2 Functions of Management and Leadership
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter,
1990, New York, NY: Free Press.
Many scholars, in addition to Kotter (1990), argue that leadership and management are distinct constructs. For
example, Bennis and Nanus (2007) maintained that there is a significant difference between the two. To manage
means to accomplish activities and master routines, whereas to lead means to influence others and create visions
for change. Bennis and Nanus made the distinction very clear in their frequently quoted sentence, “Managers are
people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (p. 221).
Rost (1991) has also been a proponent of distinguishing between leadership and management. He contended that
leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a unidirectional authority relationship.
67
Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of developing mutual purposes, management is directed toward
coordinating activities to get a job done. Leaders and followers work together to create real change, whereas
managers and subordinates join forces to sell goods and services (Rost, 1991, pp. 149–152).
In a recent study, Simonet and Tett (2012) explored how best to conceptualize leadership and management by
having 43 experts identify the overlap and differences between leadership and management in regard to 63
different competencies. They found a large number of competencies (22) descriptive of both leadership and
management (e.g., productivity, customer focus, professionalism, and goal setting), but they also found several
unique descriptors for each. Specifically, they found leadership was distinguished by motivating intrinsically,
creative thinking, strategic planning, tolerance of ambiguity, and being able to read people, and management was
distinguished by rule orientation, short-term planning, motivating extrinsically, orderliness, safety concerns, and
timeliness.
Approaching the issue from a narrower viewpoint, Zaleznik (1977) went so far as to argue that leaders and
managers themselves are distinct, and that they are basically different types of people. He contended that managers
are reactive and prefer to work with people to solve problems but do so with low emotional involvement. They act
to limit choices. Zaleznik suggested that leaders, on the other hand, are emotionally active and involved. They seek
to shape ideas instead of responding to them and act to expand the available options to solve long-standing
problems. Leaders change the way people think about what is possible.
Although there are clear differences between management and leadership, the two constructs overlap. When
managers are involved in influencing a group to meet its goals, they are involved in leadership. When leaders are
involved in planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, they are involved in management. Both processes
involve influencing a group of individuals toward goal attainment. For purposes of our discussion in this book, we
focus on the leadership process. In our examples and case studies, we treat the roles of managers and leaders
similarly and do not emphasize the differences between them.
68
PLAN OF THE BOOK
This book is user-friendly. It is based on substantive theories but is written to emphasize practice and application.
Each chapter in the book follows the same format. The first section of each chapter briefly describes the leadership
approach and discusses various research studies applicable to the approach. The second section of each chapter
evaluates the approach and how it works, highlighting its strengths and criticisms. Special attention is given to how
the approach contributes or fails to contribute to an overall understanding of the leadership process. Finally,
beginning with Chapter 2, each chapter has an application section with case studies and a leadership questionnaire
that measures the reader’s leadership style to prompt discussion of how the approach can be applied in ongoing
organizations. Each chapter ends with a summary and references.
69
Case Study
Case 1.1 is provided to illustrate different dimensions of leadership as well as allow you to examine your own
perspective on what defines a leader and leadership. At the end of the case, you will find questions that will help in
analyzing the case.
Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . .
When asked by a sports editor for the Lanthorn, Grand Valley State University’s student publication, what three
historical figures he would most like to have dinner with, Morris Berger, the newly announced offensive
coordinator for the GVSU Lakers football team, responded Adolf Hitler, John F. Kennedy, and Christopher
Columbus.
“This is probably not going to get a good review,” he said, “but I’m going to say Adolf Hitler. It was obviously
very sad and he had bad motives, but the way he was able to lead was second-to-none. How he rallied a group and
a following, I want to know how he did that. Bad intentions of course, but you can’t deny he wasn’t a great leader”
(Voss, 2020).
When the article ran, it caused a stir. Shortly after, the writer, Kellen Voss, was asked by someone in the
university’s athletics department to alter the online story to remove those comments. The Lanthorn initially
complied, but then changed course and added the full interview back in. Once the Lanthorn republished the quote,
the story went viral. It was covered in the Washington Post, on ESPN, and in Sports Illustrated and even ended up
in the monologue of The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon (Boatner, 2020).
In addition to public dismay, GVSU’s Hillel chapter, a Jewish campus organization, spoke out strongly against
Coach Berger after his comments were made public. “It is unfortunate to see a member of our Grand Valley
community glorify the Holocaust, a period that brought such destruction and travesty to the world,” the group
posted to its Facebook page. “We appreciate the university’s swift response and we will continue to partner with
them to educate our campus community and provide a safe and inclusive environment for all students” (Colf,
2020).
Seven days after the article appeared, GVSU announced that Coach Berger, who had been suspended by the
university, had resigned. Matt Mitchell, the team’s head coach, gave a statement: “Nothing in our background and
reference checks revealed anything that would have suggested the unfortunate controversy that has unfolded,”
Coach Mitchell said. “This has been a difficult time for everyone. I accepted Coach Berger’s resignation in an
effort for him to move on and for us to focus on the team and our 2020 season” (Wallner, 2020).
In another statement, Coach Berger said he was disappointed to leave, but added, “I do not want to be a distraction
to these kids, this great university, or Coach Mitchell as they begin preparations for the upcoming season”
(Wallner, 2020).
Coach Berger also issued a more personal apology in a Twitter post:
I failed myself, my parents, and this university—the answer I attempted to give does not align with the
values instilled in me by my parents, nor [does it] represent what I stand for or believe in—I mishandled
the answer, and fell way short of the mark.
For the last 11-years, I worked tirelessly for each and every opportunity and was excited to be a Laker.
Throughout my life, I have taken great pride in that responsibility—as a teacher, mentor, coach, rolemodel, and member of the community.
It is my hope that you will consider accepting my apology.
70
I recognize that I cannot undo the hurt and the embarrassment I have caused.
But I can control the way I choose to positively learn from my mistake moving forward—as I work to
regain the trust and respect of everyone that I have let down. (Berger, 2020)
A few weeks later, GVSU announced that it would increase its curriculum around the Holocaust and Native
American history. “We will use this moment to work diligently toward institutional systemic change that creates a
healthier campus climate for all,” the university’s president, Philomena Mantella, said (Colf, 2020).
71
Questions
1. Who are the leaders in this situation? How would you describe their actions as leaders based on the definition
of leadership in this chapter?
2. Do you think it was wrong for Coach Berger to cite Hitler as a “great leader”?
3. What is your reaction to Coach Berger resigning one week after signing a contract to coach at GVSU?
4. Based on our discussion of morality and leadership in this chapter, would you say Coach Berger’s comments
are based on leadership as a neutral process or on leadership as a process that has a moral dimension? Why?
5. What does the university’s response suggest regarding how the university views leadership?
6. If you were the president of the university and you were asked to define leadership, how would you define it?
7. Bobby Knight was a coach who was known to use questionable leadership tactics. Do you think Coach
Berger would have been safe to ask Coach Knight to dinner? Why?
72
Leadership Instrument
The meaning of leadership is complex and includes many dimensions. For some people, leadership is a trait or an
ability, for others it is a skill or a behavior, and for still others it is a relationship or a process. In reality, leadership
probably includes components of all of these dimensions. Each dimension explains a facet of leadership.
Which dimension seems closest to how you think of leadership? How would you define leadership? Answers to
these questions are important because how you think about leadership will strongly influence how you practice
leadership. In this section, the Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire is provided as an example of a measure
that can be used to assess how you define and view leadership.
Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire
Purpose: To identify how you view leadership and to explore your perceptions of different aspects of
leadership
Instructions: Using the scale below, indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following
statements about leadership.
Key:
1 = Strongly disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral 4 = Agree
73
5 = Strongly agree
1.
When I think of leadership, I think of a person with special personality traits.
1 2 3 4 5
2.
Much like playing the piano or tennis, leadership is a learned ability.
1 2 3 4 5
3.
Leadership requires knowledge and know-how.
1 2 3 4 5
4.
Leadership is about what people do rather than who they are.
1 2 3 4 5
5.
Followers can influence the leadership process as much as leaders.
1 2 3 4 5
6.
Leadership is about the process of influencing others.
1 2 3 4 5
7.
Some people are born to be leaders.
1 2 3 4 5
8.
Some people have the natural ability to be leaders.
1 2 3 4 5
9.
The key to successful leadership is having the right skills.
1 2 3 4 5
10. Leadership is best described by what leaders do.
1 2 3 4 5
11. Leaders and followers share in the leadership process.
1 2 3 4 5
12. Leadership is a series of actions directed toward positive ends.
1 2 3 4 5
13. A person needs to have certain traits to be an effective leader.
1 2 3 4 5
14. Everyone has the capacity to be a leader.
1 2 3 4 5
15. Effective leaders are competent in their roles.
1 2 3 4 5
16. The essence of leadership is performing tasks and dealing with people.
1 2 3 4 5
17. Leadership is about the common purposes of leaders and followers.
1 2 3 4 5
18. Leadership does not rely on the leader alone but is a process involving the leader,
followers, and the situation.
1 2 3 4 5
19. People become great leaders because of their traits.
1 2 3 4 5
74
20. People can develop the ability to lead.
1 2 3 4 5
21. Effective leaders have competence and knowledge.
1 2 3 4 5
22. Leadership is about how leaders work with people to accomplish goals.
1 2 3 4 5
23. Effective leadership is best explained by the leader–follower relationship.
1 2 3 4 5
24. Leaders influence and are influenced by followers.
1 2 3 4 5
75
Scoring
1. Sum scores on items 1, 7, 13, and 19 (trait emphasis)
2. Sum scores on items 2, 8, 14, and 20 (ability emphasis)
3. Sum scores on items 3, 9, 15, and 21 (skill emphasis)
4. Sum scores on items 4, 10, 16, and 22 (behavior emphasis)
5. Sum scores on items 5, 11, 17, and 23 (relationship emphasis)
6. Sum scores on items 6, 12, 18, and 24 (process emphasis)
76
Total Scores
1. Trait emphasis: ____________________
2. Ability emphasis: __________________
3. Skill emphasis: ____________________
4. Behavior emphasis: _______________
5. Relationship emphasis: ____________
6. Process emphasis: _________________
77
Scoring Interpretation
The scores you received on this questionnaire provide information about how you define and view
leadership. The emphasis you give to the various dimensions of leadership has implications for how you
approach the leadership process. For example, if your highest score is for trait emphasis, it suggests that
you emphasize the role of the leader and the leader’s special gifts in the leadership process. However, if
your highest score is for relationship emphasis, it indicates that you think leadership is centered on the
communication between leaders and followers, rather than on the unique qualities of the leader. By
comparing your scores, you can gain an understanding of the aspects of leadership that you find most
important and least important. The way you think about leadership will influence how you practice
leadership.
78
Summary
Leadership is a topic with universal appeal; in the popular press and academic research literature, much has been
written about leadership. Despite the abundance of writing on the topic, leadership has presented a major challenge
to practitioners and researchers interested in understanding the nature of leadership. It is a highly valued
phenomenon that is very complex.
Through the years, leadership has been defined and conceptualized in many ways. The component common to
nearly all classifications is that leadership is an influence process that assists groups of individuals toward goal
attainment. Specifically, in this book leadership is defined as a process whereby an individual influences a group of
individuals to achieve a common goal.
Because both leaders and followers are part of the leadership process, it is important to address issues that confront
followers as well as issues that confront leaders. Leaders and followers should be understood in relation to each
other.
In prior research, many studies have focused on leadership as a trait. The trait perspective suggests that certain
people in our society have special inborn qualities that make them leaders. This view restricts leadership to those
who are believed to have special characteristics. In contrast, the approach in this text suggests that leadership is a
process that can be learned, and that it is available to everyone.
Two common forms of leadership are assigned and emergent. Assigned leadership is based on a formal title or
position in an organization. Emergent leadership results from what one does and how one acquires support from
followers. Leadership, as a process, applies to individuals in both assigned roles and emergent roles.
Related to leadership is the concept of power, the potential to influence. There are two major kinds of power:
position and personal. Position power, which is much like assigned leadership, is the power an individual derives
from having a title in a formal organizational system. It includes legitimate, reward, information, and coercive
power. Personal power comes from followers and includes referent and expert power. Followers give it to leaders
because followers believe leaders have something of value. Treating power as a shared resource is important
because it de-emphasizes the idea that leaders are power wielders.
While coercion has been a common power brought to bear by many individuals in charge, it should not be viewed
as ideal leadership. Our definition of leadership stresses using influence to bring individuals toward a common
goal, while coercion involves the use of threats and punishment to induce change in followers for the sake of the
leaders. Coercion runs counter to leadership because it does not treat leadership as a process that emphasizes
working with followers to achieve shared objectives.
There are two trains of thought regarding leadership and morality. Some argue that leadership is a neutral process
that can be used by leaders for good and bad ends and treats Hitler as an example of strong leadership. Others
contend that leadership is a moral process that involves influencing others to achieve a common good. From this
perspective Hitler would not be an example of leadership.
Leadership and management are different concepts that overlap. They are different in that management
traditionally focuses on the activities of planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, whereas leadership
emphasizes the general influence process. According to some researchers, management is concerned with creating
order and stability, whereas leadership is about adaptation and constructive change. Other researchers go so far as
to argue that managers and leaders are different types of people, with managers being more reactive and less
emotionally involved and leaders being more proactive and more emotionally involved. The overlap between
leadership and management is centered on how both involve influencing a group of individuals in goal attainment.
In this book, we discuss leadership as a complex process. Based on the research literature, we describe selected
approaches to leadership and assess how they can be used to improve leadership in real situations.
79
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Trait definition of leadership: Leadership is defined by the traits such as height, intelligence, extraversion, fluency,
and other traits that a leader with followers possesses.
Process definition of leadership: Leadership is defined as the interaction between leader and followers.
80
81
2 TRAIT APPROACH
82
DESCRIPTION
Of interest to scholars throughout the 20th century, the trait approach was one of the first systematic attempts to
study leadership. In the early 20th century, leadership traits were studied to determine what made certain people
great leaders. The theories that were developed were called “great man” theories because they focused on
identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social, political, and military leaders (e.g.,
Catherine the Great, Mohandas Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc, and Napoleon Bonaparte).
It was believed that people were born with these traits, and that only the “great” people possessed them. During
this time, research concentrated on determining the specific traits that clearly differentiated leaders from followers
(Bass, 2008; Jago, 1982).
In the mid-20th century, the trait approach was challenged by research that questioned the universality of
leadership traits. In a major review, Stogdill (1948) suggested that no consistent set of traits differentiated leaders
from nonleaders across a variety of situations. An individual with leadership traits who was a leader in one
situation might not be a leader in another situation. Rather than being a quality that individuals possess, leadership
was reconceptualized as a relationship between people in a social situation. Personal factors related to leadership
continued to be important, but researchers contended that these factors were to be considered as relative to the
requirements of the situation.
The trait approach has generated much interest among researchers for its explanation of how traits influence
leadership (Bryman, 1992). For example, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) went so far as to claim that effective
leaders are actually distinct types of people. Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986) found that traits were strongly
associated with individuals’ perceptions of leadership. More recently, Dinh and Lord (2012) examined the
relationship between leadership effectiveness and followers’ perception of leadership traits.
The trait approach has earned new interest through the current emphasis given by many researchers to visionary
and charismatic leadership (see Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Jacquart & Antonakis, 2015; Nadler &
Tushman, 2012; Zaccaro, 2007; Zaleznik, 1977). Charismatic leadership catapulted to the forefront of public
attention with the 2008 election of the United States’ first African American president, Barack Obama, who is
perceived by many to be charismatic, among many other attributes. In a study to determine what distinguishes
charismatic leaders from others, Jung and Sosik (2006) found that charismatic leaders consistently possess traits of
self-monitoring, engagement in impression management, motivation to attain social power, and motivation to
attain self-actualization. In short, the trait approach is alive and well. It began with an emphasis on identifying the
qualities of great persons, shifted to include the impact of situations on leadership, and, currently, has shifted back
to reemphasize the critical role of traits in effective leadership.
When discussing the trait approach, it is important to define what is meant by traits. Traits refer to a set of
distinctive characteristics, qualities, or attributes that describe a person. They are inherent and relatively
unchanging over time. Taken together, traits are the internal factors that comprise our personality and make us
unique. Because traits are derived from our personality and are fundamentally fixed, this chapter will not
emphasize how people can use this approach to develop or change their leadership. Instead, the focus of the
chapter will be on identifying leaders’ traits and overall role of traits in leadership.
While research on traits spanned the entire 20th century, a good overview of the approach is found in two surveys
completed by Stogdill (1948, 1974). In his first survey, Stogdill analyzed and synthesized more than 124 trait
studies conducted between 1904 and 1947. In his second study, he analyzed another 163 studies completed
between 1948 and 1970. By taking a closer look at each of these reviews, we can obtain a clearer picture of how
individuals’ traits contribute to the leadership process.
Stogdill’s first survey identified a group of important leadership traits that were related to how individuals in
various groups became leaders. His results showed that an average individual in a leadership role is different from
an average group member with regard to the following eight traits: intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility,
initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability.
83
The findings of Stogdill’s first survey also indicated that an individual does not become a leader solely because
that individual possesses certain traits. Rather, the traits that leaders possess must be relevant to situations in which
the leader is functioning. As stated earlier, leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in another
situation. Findings showed that leadership was not a passive state but resulted from a working relationship between
the leader and other group members. This research marked the beginning of a new approach to leadership research
that focused on leadership behaviors and leadership situations.
Stogdill’s second survey, published in 1974, analyzed 163 new studies and compared the findings of these studies
to the findings he had reported in his first survey. The second survey was more balanced in its description of the
role of traits and leadership. Whereas the first survey implied that leadership is determined principally by
situational factors and not traits, the second survey argued more moderately that both traits and situational factors
were determinants of leadership. In essence, the second survey validated the original trait idea that a leader’s
characteristics are indeed a part of leadership.
Similar to the first survey, Stogdill’s second survey identified traits that were positively associated with leadership.
The list included the following 10 characteristics:
1. Drive for responsibility and task completion
2. Vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals
3. Risk-taking and originality in problem solving
4. Drive to exercise initiative in social situations
5. Self-confidence and sense of personal identity
6. Willingness to accept consequences of decision and action
7. Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress
8. Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay
9. Ability to influence other people’s behavior
10. Capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand
Mann (1959) conducted a similar study that examined more than 1,400 findings regarding traits and leadership in
small groups, but he placed less emphasis on how situational factors influenced leadership. Although tentative in
his conclusions, Mann suggested that certain traits could be used to distinguish leaders from nonleaders. His
results identified leaders as strong in the following six traits: intelligence, masculinity, adjustment, dominance,
extraversion, and conservatism.
Lord et al. (1986) reassessed Mann’s (1959) findings using a more sophisticated procedure called meta-analysis
and found that intelligence, masculinity, and dominance were significantly related to how individuals perceived
leaders. From their findings, the authors argued strongly that traits could be used to make discriminations
consistently across situations between leaders and nonleaders.
Both of these studies were conducted during periods in American history where male leadership was prevalent in
most aspects of business and society. In Chapter 15, we explore more contemporary research regarding the role of
gender in leadership, and we look at whether traits such as masculinity and dominance still bear out as important
factors in distinguishing between leaders and nonleaders.
Yet another review argued for the importance of leadership traits: Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991, p. 59) contended
that “it is unequivocally clear that leaders are not like other people.” From a qualitative synthesis of earlier
research, Kirkpatrick and Locke postulated that leaders differ from nonleaders on six traits: drive, motivation,
integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge. According to these writers, individuals can be born
with these traits, they can learn them, or both. It is these six traits that make up the “right stuff” for leaders.
Kirkpatrick and Locke asserted that leadership traits make some people different from others, and this difference
should be recognized as an important part of the leadership process.
In the 1990s, researchers began to investigate the leadership traits associated with “social intelligence,” which is
characterized as the ability to understand one’s own and others’ feelings, behaviors, and thoughts and act
appropriately (Marlowe, 1986). Zaccaro (2002) defined social intelligence as having such capacities as social
awareness, social acumen, self-monitoring, and the ability to select and enact the best response given the
contingencies of the situation and social environment. A number of empirical studies showed these capacities to be
84
a key trait for effective leaders. Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (2017) included such social abilities in the categories of
leadership traits they outlined as important leadership attributes (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics
Stogdill
(1948)
Mann
(1959)
Stogdill (1974)
Lord, DeVader,
and Alliger (1986)
Kirkpatrick and Zaccaro, Kemp,
Locke (1991)
and Bader (2017)
intelligence
intelligence
achievement
intelligence
drive
cognitive ability
alertness
masculinity
persistence
masculinity
motivation
extraversion
insight
adjustment
insight
dominance
integrity
conscientiousness
responsibility dominance
initiative
confidence
emotional stability
initiative
extraversion
self-confidence
cognitive ability
openness
persistence
conservatism responsibility
task knowledge
agreeableness
selfconfidence
sociability
cooperativeness
motivation
tolerance
social intelligence
influence
self-monitoring
sociability
emotional
intelligence
problem solving
Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. P. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics: Research
and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper and Row; Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader (2004).
Table 2.1 provides a summary of the traits and characteristics that were identified by researchers from the trait
approach. It illustrates clearly the breadth of traits related to leadership. Table 2.1 also shows how difficult it is to
select certain traits as definitive leadership traits; some of the traits appear in several of the survey studies, whereas
others appear in only one or two studies. Regardless of the lack of precision in Table 2.1, however, it represents a
general convergence of research regarding which traits are leadership traits.
Over the past 10 years, i…