Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
58 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Trait & Behavior Theory
What is leadership? Hint: 6 possible answers |
1. The position: ex. The President, the best position will be the leader
2. The leader: ex. Harry Potter, the characteristics, what makes them stand out? 3. The led: focus on characteristics or behaviors of group being led 4. The influence process: leader/subordinate relationship 5. The situation: ex. missile crisis, situational influences and forces on leadership 6. Emergent vs. Assignment |
|
|
Describe Trait Theory.
What does the emergence depend on (5 factors)? |
It's who you are that matters. Oldest way to view leadership. It assumes innate traits. The leader can emerge in any situation.
-Intelligence: leaders are above average intelligence, but too far above can create a disconnect -Self-confidence: must be confident -Determination -Integrity Sociability: seek out relationships |
|
|
Describe the Big 5 in relation to Trait Theory.
What do leaders tend to be in relation to Needs? So traits = good performance? true or false. |
Extraversion: most tied to leadership
Conscientiousness: detailed focused Openness Low Neuroticism Agreeableness: hard to give back negative feedback Leaders tend to be high in need for power (want to make the hard decisions) and low in need for affiliation Its not true, in the end, traits are necessary for leadership but don't necessary guarantee it. |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses of trait theory?
|
Strengths: intuitive, oldest theory, lots of research, and provides benchmark
Weaknesses: few traits clearly supported, ignore situation, can't explain "why", and not useful for training leaders |
|
|
Describe the Style/Behavior Theory. Describe the OSU studies.
|
Its not who you are, but what you do
Best leaders: high consideration (relate interpersonally), high initiating structure (hold people accountable) Worst leaders: high consideration, low initiating structure |
|
|
Style/Behavior Theory
Describe the managerial grid. |
Concern for people on the vertical axis and concern for production on the horizontal axis. High on concern for people & high on concern for production = Team Leader, high people & low production = country club (cozy comfortable but not production), low people & high production = Produce or Perish (feel challenge, but no sense of belonging), low people & low production = impoverished (apathetic)
|
|
|
Describe the strengths and weaknesses of Style/Behavior Theory.
|
Strengths: shifted from traits to behaviors, research valid, and training can improve behaviors
Weaknesses: ignores person & doesn't consider situation |
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Zaccaro, Foti, & Kenny (1991). Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. How much variance has been found to be attributed to some stable characteristic? What are some possible leadership dispositions? |
49% - 82% of leadership variance attributed to some stable characteristic
Social perceptiveness- ability to recognize what group members expect of them in each group situation Behavioral flexibility- respond accordingly Self-monitoring- an ability to monitor and control one's expressive behaviors |
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Zaccaro, Foti, & Kenny (1991). Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. What support was provided for leadership emergence? |
-Found support for a leader emergence to be stable across different situations as to infer a relationship trait
-Self-monitoring received partial support -Self-monitoring is a trait of leadership (it removes barriers) - Lay person have views of what leadership is |
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Lord, DeVader, & Alliger (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of Validity generalization procedures. How have the work by Mann (1959) and Stogdill (1948) been misinterpreted? Why should the relationship be reconsidered? |
1. Methodological artifacts
2. Variablitiy of the relationship between personality and leadership perceptions 3. Unreliable measures 4. Range restrictions in the samples studied 5. Median correlations do not give good estimates of population parameters a) Theoretically: a cognitive perspective would argue that the traits of potential leaders should affect the extent to which they are perceived as leaders by others b) Methodologically: there have been several important development in statistically aggregating results across studies since the Mann and Stogdill reviews were published |
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Lord, DeVader, & Alliger (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of Validity generalization procedures. What is the overall conclusion for this meta analysis? |
-Results suggest that there is a significant relationship between some personality traits (intelligence, masculinity-femininity, dominance) and leadership perception
|
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Hutchinson, Valentine, Kirkner (1998). What works for the gander does not work as well for the goose: The effects of leader behavior. What orientation is more associated with males and then females? What situation was rated the most favorable? When are men and women favored more when they have the same orientation? - Why is this? |
Task orientation: initiating structure; stereotypically male
Interpersonal orientation: consideration; stereotypically female Most successful leaders are high on both task and interpersonal orientation (despite gender) - Most effective, strongest effect on employees' commitment and perceptions of support from the organization Male supervisors with high consideration-high initiating structure style get more commitment from subordinates than female supervisors with the same style - The reverse is true when supervisors use low consideration-low initiating structure style Strong interpersonal orientation may be a bonus for male supervisors Females who are high on task orientation violate gender role expectations |
|
|
Leadership: Trait Theory & Behavior Theory
Judge, Piccolo, Ilies (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. What is consideration and initiating structure? What (outcomes) did the authors find the two were most related to? |
Consideration: the degree to which a leader shows concern and respect for followers, looks out for their welfare, and expresses appreciation and support
Initiating structure: the degree to which a leader defines and organizes his role and the role of his followers, is oriented toward goal attainment, and established well-defined patterns and channels of communication * C is more strongly related to follower satisfaction than IS, IS is slightly more related to leader performance than C; however, C was more strongly related to leader effectiveness than it was to follower job satisfaction |
|
|
What are two perspectives to the Attribution theory?
Describe Kelly's Cube Model. |
- Leadership is in the eye of the beholder
1) What subordinates believe: how leaders should look 2) How leaders behave: gave structure to attribution theory Social Psychology: Kelly's Cube Model - Distinctiveness: is the event/behavior unique or common? - Consistency: is their change over time, or is it consistent? - Consensus: to what extent does the event affect people (is everyone behaving the same way) *weakness: not convinced this is how people really think, complicated |
|
|
Attribution Theory
What determines attributions? |
1) visibility: making attributions because actions are visible
2) innovation: making attributions because leader is taking action that is innovative 3) evidence of influence: attribute leadership because obvious whats happening is based on their actions 4) crisis situation: when perceive situation to be a crisis more likely to make a leader attributions (ex. gladiator movie) |
|
|
What are some strengths and weaknesses to the Attribution Theory?
|
Strengths: takes different new points in account, backed by research
Weaknesses: Can't be complicated, people don't think this way necessarily (expects people to be rationale) |
|
|
What is Fielder's Contingency Theory?
|
Leadership depends on the situation.
Least Preferred Coworker - Picks out the person you least would like to work with - 64+ (High LPC) = value relationship (associated with higher JS) - 57- (Low LPC) = value task outcomes (associated with higher performance) - Then fall into leadership match paradigm (what leader should go with what situation) - Some anchors have challenges --> don't know why they work 8 different situations The more structured the task, the more the leader has power Practice: you would make the leader around to match their "correct" situation |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses to Fielder's Contingency Theory?
|
Strengths: supported by a lot of research, make us look at situation, we don't need to be all things to all people, and LPC score is practically useful
Weaknesses: Are some styles better?- no theoretical ground, LPC scale itself- convergent validity not always there, How do we fix the fit?- hard to just move all the time, this is a personality theory, so if can't move person, what do you do? |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Ayman, Chemers, & Fiedler (1995). The contingency model of leadership effectiveness: Its level of analysis What are the two main factors to the contingency model? When are leaders in match or out-match? What are the three constructs the model consists of? |
- Model predicts that leader's effectiveness is based on two main factors: a leaders attributes and a leaders situational control
- A leader is "in-match" in situations where the model predicts high group performance and a leader is "out-match" in situations with lower group performance - Model consists of three constructs: 1) leaders characteristics (the LPC) 2) situational control 3) leadership effectiveness |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Ayman, Chemers, & Fiedler (1995). The contingency model of leadership effectiveness: Its level of analysis What is LMR, task structure, and position power? |
Situational Control
Leader Member Relations (LMR): cohesiveness of the team and support of the team for the leader - it is considered most important because if leader lacks support, energy is diverted to controlling the group rather than toward planning, problem-solving, and productivity Task structure: represents the clarity and certainty in task goals and procedures that allow the leader confidentiality to guide the group's activities Position Power: the authority given to a leader by an organization |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Ayman, Chemers, & Fiedler (1995). The contingency model of leadership effectiveness: Its level of analysis What are the strengths and weaknesses to the contigency model? |
Strengths: the conceptual and statistical independent constructs, emphasis on independent organizational outcomes, constructs are less vulnerable to invalidation, proven predictive validity, and practical applications
Weaknesses: arise from inductive development, little face or concurrent validity, and lower construct validity |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Schriesheim, Tepper, & Tetrault (1994). Least Preferred Co-worker score, situational control, and leadership effectiveness: A meta-analysis of contingency model performance predictions How are leadership styles assessed? How is situational control measured? Results? |
Assessed: Least Preferred Coworker
Measured: leader-member relationships, task structure, and leader position by dichotomizing each variable into high and low -For low LPC leaders, there are tistuations in which they are clearly more effective than they are in others -Either organizations can try to create these conditions (situational engineering) or they can try to make all situations more favorable -We should not assume that the performance of high and low-LPC leaders are the same in the two sets of octants (meaning that their performance depends on situational characteristics) - Relationships may be more important than previously thought |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Green & Mitchell (1979). Attributional processes of leaders in leader-member interactions. What is the primary attributional task of a leader? Describe the attributions made to successful effort or failured effort? |
Primary attributional task of a leader is to categorize the causes of behavior into source dimensions
When success is accompanied by effort, the person is evaluated most positively (regardless of ability) When failures are seen as due to lack of effort, individuals are severly punished - most severely punished are those who are failing that have the ability, but didn't try However, if failure was due to an external cause, successes aren't likely to be rewarded and failures result in sympathy |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Green & Mitchell (1979). Attributional processes of leaders in leader-member interactions. Name some moderators to consider in the leader-member exchange. What are most effect leaders like? |
1. Consensus information
a) self based consensus: something about the suboridnate cause the failure b) sample-based conses: something about the task caused the failure 2. Self-serving attribution: leaders attribute causation to themselves for successful ventures and attribute failures to external causes, such as subordinates 3. Relationship of Leader and member: the closer a leader is to a member, the more the leader will make positive attributions to said member 4. Personal characteristics: those that are subject to stereotypes and prejudice often suffer 5. Leader expectations: when a leader expects a member to succeed or fail, and the member does, the leader is likely to credit them for their performance * the most effective leaders are those that can establish distinctive patterns of attributions, are accurate in their analysis, and avoid using those moderators that bias attributions. |
|
|
Leadership: Fielder's Contingency Theory & Attribution Theory
Offerman, Schroyer, & Green (1998). Leader attributions for subordinate performance: consequences for subsequent leader interactive behaviors and ratings. What is the Green and Mitchell's Theoretical Model? What are the results to the study in relation to attributions to certain behaviors? |
- Suggests that subordinate behavior produces certain attributions for the behavior by the leader, and that these attributions in turn affect the type of behavior the leader will exhibit
- Leader responses to subordinate behavior are predicted in four domains: expectations of future performance, aspirations for subordinates, perceptions of needs for closer supervision in the future, and behavioral responses (typically reward or punishment) Results: - Results showed that leaders were most verbally involved with groups that either failed due to effort or succeeded due to luck - Subordinates that were successful were less likely to be punished - Those that failed due to effort were more likely to be punished than those that failed due to luck -Leaders were less likely to punish subordinates who failed due to ability *If leader's don't attribute to the right causes, they themselves will respond inappropriately *High performers still need the recognition & attention as lower performers |
|
|
Is leadership a "thing"? - What is implicit leadership theory?
|
- Leadership is determined by who makes the evaluation
- Only exists within the mind of the beholder - Basing leadership on mental prototypes --> best example of a certain type of leader -Become the prototype of an I-O psychologist |
|
|
What three (levels) components make up the Implicit Leadership theory? How do you "make" an implicit leader? So, when are you more likely to be a leader?
|
Superordinate level: Common attributes/traits with every leader, but these are different from non-leaders
Basic level: Attributes are different between leadership categories - helps us define the different leadership roles Subordinate level: What specific type it is How do you make an implicit leader? 1. Family resemblance: the overlap to prototype - the extent to which common attributes can be shared by all types of leaders 2. Cue validity: the extent to which attributes differ among leaders *making judgments: more fit prototype, more likely to be a leader *The less fit in culture, the less viewed as a leader |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses to the implicit leadership theory?
|
Strengths: Cognitively based, explains how new leaders have trouble being viewed as a leader (b/c new leader in old position & LPC: saying certain people fit certain prototypes), explains "new leader" problems, and implications for mentoring - "look like a leader" helping coworkers fit leader prototypes
Weaknesses: not clear on how categories are defined, and incremental validity (other theories explain how, why, but adds onto the theory) |
|
|
What is the LMX Theory?
|
- Vertical dyad linkage
- This is all about the relationship between a leader and a subordinate - One-on-one relationship with every single person |
|
|
Describe characteristics of the in-group and out-group for LMX Theory.
|
In-group: people you have close relationships with
- Friendly and informal relationship - Autonomy - Challenging tasks - Open communication: get to make more decisions - Work harder and stay longer - Personality plays a role (we like people like us) - Leader extroversion and follower agreeableness does not contribute to in-group formation - What matters is performance Out-group - More formal relationships - More directive - Receive more structure/less challenges - Less participation in decision making participation - People may end up here because refuse to take on more work from leader |
|
|
What are the three stages to LMX Theory process?
|
1. Initial (stranger) stage: getting to know the person (out-group) relationship
2. Identification stage: leader begins to determine who is going to be in the in-group and out-group 3. Maturation stage or partnership: in-group happens, deeper relationships |
|
|
What do leaders want in followers?
What do followers want in leaders? |
Leaders want: enthusiastic, participative, rigorous, and extroverted
Followers want: pleasant, trusting, cooperative, and agreeable |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses to the LMX Theory?
|
Strengths: descriptive- LMX can describe leadership, relationships are central (only theory), emphasizes communication, and lots of research support
Weaknesses: It's not "fair" - Out-group members may think this (but really Performers vs non performers), basics aren't fully developed (about forming), what about context?, and validity of scales? |
|
|
Implicit Leadership Theory & LMX Theory
Lord, Foti, & Devader (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Categorization theory (Implicit leadership theory) - Describe the difference between vertical and horizontal dimensions. Support for categorization theory? |
Vertical: the degree of inclusiveness, or the number of different kinds of stimuli that can be classified into the same category (superordinate, basic, and subordinate levels)
Horizontal: differentiates categories at the same vertical level of inclusiveness (dimensions where the different superordinate, basic, and subordinate levels very) Study 1 Leader family resemblance, cue validity, diagnostically, and prototypically were all strongly correlated Leader and non leader family resemblance scores and prototypically ratings were significantly correlated, suggesting leadership is better described as a person-in-situation category Study 2 Attributes seemed to be order within categories from most to least prototypical and are search accordingly (according to reaction times) -Being perceived as a leader may result in acceptance of organizational goals and compliance, commitment, and positive affect for subordinates |
|
|
Implicit Leadership Theory & LMX Theory
Van Quaquebeke, Van Knippenberg, & Bordbeck (2011). More than meets the eye: The role of subordinates' self-perceptions in leader categorization processes. How does self-conception play into implicit leadership theories? |
Self-conception: mental representation of person's understanding and evaluation of themselves
-Individuals tend to seek information of others to fulfill their self-schemas The relationship between subordinates' perceptions of their leaders against the ideal leader prototype and their favorability towards their leaders leadership (respect for the leader and leadership effectiveness) was stronger when subordinates' perceived themselves to possess prototypical leadership qualities |
|
|
Implicit Leadership Theory & LMX Theory
Gerstner & Day (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: correlates and construct issues What does LMX correlate with? |
- job performance, satisfaction with supervision, overall satisfaction, commitment, role conflict, role clarity, member competence, and turnover intentions, but not actual turnover
|
|
|
Implicit Leadership Theory & LMX Theory
Zhou & Schriesheim (2010). Quantitative and qualitative examination of propositions conceding supervisor-subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader-member (LMX) quality. |
Overall, bosses and subordinates tend to use different LMX sub dimensions to evaluate working relationships between them. Bosses use TASK-related dimensions and subordinates use SOCIALLY-related dimensions as well as different task-related dimensions.
- The most frequently mentioned category in both samples was communication -Challenges generalizability, and that we all perceive things (leadership) the same |
|
|
What is Path-Goal Theory? What theory is it based on? What does it predict?
|
Leader must do, leader needs to make a clear path
Leaders help to create a "path" to the "goals" of subordinates -"goals" are things like satisfaction, money, etc. Based on expectancy theory: you get more efforts if employees believe they can achieve the goal -create path to reduce obstacles in order to reach goal Predicts: leaders will be more effective if they can keep up the motivational levels |
|
|
What are the 4 leadership styles associated with Path-Goal theory?
|
1. Directive leadership: providing specific guidelines on when activities should be completed, when, how
- don't let them guess how to be successful 2. Supportive: shows concerns for employee welfare and consider employee needs - leader is approachable 3. Participative: involving employees in decision making process - taking their input 4. Achievement-oriented: set challenging goals and seeking excellent performance - show confidence in subordinates Can show any of these styles at any time because based on employee motivational need because employees needs determine what you do |
|
|
With Path-Goal theory does environment matter? What characteristics are included here?
|
Subordinate characteristics: locus of control, ability level of employee, and need for affiliation
- how are they motivated and receive recognition - how much structure they need Task characteristics: clarity of path, clarity of expectations, interest level of the task, and formal organizations clear or unclear structure |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses to Path-Goal theory?
|
Strengths: not leader focused- task and characteristic focus, uses expectancy theory, leaders primary purpose: to remove obstacles that block employee success
Weaknesses: complex, only partially supported, doesn't consider other methods (i.e. training, resources, or tools), and can put an extra burden on leader and not the employee |
|
|
What is the Vroom-Yetton Theory?
Name the questions. |
Leadership is defined by your ability to make good decisions
The best decisions are determined by a set of questions 1. Decision quality 2. Leader's knowledge of problem area (info available to make correct decision) 3. Whats the structure of the problem (leader know info needed and how to obtain & how much time to make decision) 4. Importance of decision acceptance (does it matter if everyone hates it?) 5. Probability of decision acceptance (likelihood group will accept decision) 6. Sub. trust & motivation (do subordinates organizations goals and can they be trusted to solve complex problems 7. What the probability of subordinates conflict? |
|
|
What are the 5 ways to make decisions?
|
Autorcratic I: user makes decision with information available to them
Autocratic II: leader who obtains necessary info from subordinates then makes decision Consultative I: shares problem with subordinate, but they do it with one individual at a time (decision may represent subordinates opinions or not) Consultative II: leader shares problem with group then receive information from group and makes decision on own Group II: leader shares problem with group and together receive consensus of a decision (participating as a group) |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses for Vroom-Yetton Theory?
|
Strengths: results support model & something managers can use
Weaknesses: only focuses on decision making (big distinctions auto-cons-group-vertical), assumes leaders have enough skill to navigate leadership environment, and complex |
|
|
Describe Substitues Theory. What are substitutes and neutralizers?
|
Do you even need a leader?
Why even have leaders? - Attempt to identify the aspects that reduce the importance of managers Substitutes: things that make leaders not necessary (assembly line, role clarity) Neutralizer: (any characteristics that prevent an ability for a person to lead) -ex. a personality trait, ability to reward, subordinates lack of interest of task |
|
|
What (3) characteristics influences leadership? Name a neutralizer and substitute.
|
1. Subordinates characteristics- help define population you are working with
ex. prior experience (neutralizer) ex. attraction to organization rewards, different to organizational rewards 2. Task: simple repetitive task can be a substitutive, task feedback, is work interesting and enjoyable? --> stay focused committed to it 3. Organizational characteristics: detail written rules (commitment), workflow (substitute) -large geographical distance can serve as a substitute -limited position authority (neutralizer) |
|
|
What are implications to Substitute Theory? What are the strengths and weaknesses to Substitute Theory?
|
Implications: can make leadership more important by removing neutralizers & make leadership less important by use of substitutes
Strengths: overall, some evidence for substitute & practical Weaknesses: doesn't really explain why, lacks detail for cause and effect, how do we effectively measure? , & not enough research |
|
|
What is transformational theory?
|
The difference between compliance and influence
Not just about rationale, but also about emotional bond between leader and follower -because follower fully engaged, but also about emotional bond |
|
|
How do transformational and transactional leaders differ?
|
1. Transactional leaders: exchange rewards for compliance
3 Types a. contingent reward: leader clarifies reward & what is needed to get it (behavior & reward) b. active management-by-exception: leader actively looks for subordinate behaviors, takes active action to ensure things are being run correctly c. Passive management-by-exception: passive in behavior and avoiding giving direction if things are going okay, only time intervene if things aren't working 2. Transformational leaders: act as role models - get you to improve performance by aligning your goals with team goals - seek group goals over individuals goals (get employees to see this = successful leader) - 4 behaviors a) charisma: arousing strong emotions and identification b) individual consideration: leaders show support c) intellectual stimulation: leaders increase followers awareness of problems and rethink their old ways d) inspirational motivation: leaders use symbols signs to give to followers, so they know what to do |
|
|
What are the strengths and weaknesses of transformational theory?
|
Strengths: a lot of research and higher performance for high transformational leaders, higher performance groups, incorporates other theories, and suggests morale dimension to leadership
Weaknesses: difficult to set boundaries (when so engaged), often seen as dichotomy, and often though of as a trait |
|
|
Path-Goal Theory & Vroom-Yetton Theory
Wofford & Liska (1993). Path-goal theories of leadership: A meta-analysis. What are some characteristics that may moderate the leader --> subordinate outcomes relationship? |
Leader --> Subordinate Outcomes
- Task characteristics: structure, role ambiguity, job autonomy, job scope, and task interdependence - Subordinate characteristics: dependence, authoritarianism, ability, and locus of control The meta-analysis partially supported path-goal theories because deficiencies in path-goal theories were identified. Only 6/19 potential moderators were supported by research. - Analyses were limited because leadership behaviors are affected my instrument used. *Path-goal theory has issues |
|
|
Path-Goal Theory & Vroom-Yetton Theory
Dixon & Hart (2010). The impact of path-goal leadership styles on work group effectiveness and turnover intentions. |
Path-goal leadership styles were found to be significantly and positively correlated with work group effectiveness with instrumental (directive) leadership style demonstrating the strongest correlation
In addition, supportive leadership style was the path-goal style most highly correlated with reduced work group turnover intention |
|
|
Path-Goal Theory & Vroom-Yetton Theory
Heilman, Hornstein, Cage, & Herschlag (1984). Reactions to prescribed leader behavior as a function of a role perspective: The case of Vroom Yetton-model What leadership style is most favored? |
Study 1: This suggests that being consultative is the best strategy no matter what the problem is
Overall: Subordinates have strong bias toward seeing participative behavior as effective and bosses do not - Everyone seems like to like participative leaders more than autocratic leaders Zao: bosses and subordinates have different expectations -article supports PARTICIPATIVE leadership styles |
|
|
Path-Goal Theory & Vroom-Yetton Theory
Field & Andrews (1998). Testing the incremental validity of the Vroom-Jago versus the Vroom-Yetton models of participation in decision making. What is the difference between Vroom-Yetton and Vroom-Jago? |
Vroom-Yetton: takes both a situational and perspective stance in the model asks questions regarding the current context in which a decision needs to be made, and based on these questions provides best methods for making those decisions
-after answering the questions Vroom-Jago: extends the V-Y model by increasing the situation analysis from 7 to 12 items Results: -Finally, in 59% of the decisions sampled from the Vroom-Yetton model did not discriminate among decision methods, and thus suggests the Vroom-Jago model provides greater diagnostic power - The amount of variance in decision effectiveness accounted for by the Vroom-Jago model was relatively low (6.25%) and could be a cause for concern |
|
|
Substitutes Theory & Transformational Theory
Kerr & Jermier (1978). Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Name a couple substitutes. What does this mean if substitute theory is true? |
Substitutes for leadership:
professional orientation - substitute for leadership because employees form horizontal rather than vertical relationships indifference toward organizational rewards inflexibility: rigid, unbending rules, and procedures -If true different situational factors enhance, neutralize, or substitute for leader behaviors. This means that if there are more substitutes the less subordinates would rely on their leaders |
|
|
Substitutes Theory & Transformational Theory
Podsakoff & Mackenzie (1997). Kerr and Jermier's substitutes for leadership model: Background, empirical assessment, and suggestions for future research Is there support for substitutes? How is it related to other leadership theories? |
- Many of the initial empirical tests of the substitute model were not very supportive
- Substitutes for leadership actually account for more variance in criterions than leader behavior - There is little support for the hypothesized moderating effect of the substitute variables. * Substitue theory is underlying all other theories, out-group=neutralizers & in-group= substitutes |
|
|
Substitutes Theory & Transformational Theory
Barling, Weber, & Kelloway (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. |
Transformational leadership strategies can result in changes of subordinates perception of their leadership behaviors, subordinates commitment to their organization, and may even benefit financial components
Leaders using the transformational strategy will have a greater chance of being perceived by their subordinates in a more effective way to enhance an organizations effectivness |
|
|
Substitutes Theory & Transformational Theory
Kearney & Gerbert (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the promos of transformational leadership |
Transformational leadership helps to tap the benefits of team diversity by fostering the utilization of the enlarged pool of ideas and perspectives
Finding and developing transformational leaders is considerable more important when teams are diverse than when they are homogeneous Transformational theory draws out benefits of diversity (the unique beliefs, opinions, etc.) |
