Management en leiderschap: een dualistisch perspectief ABK groep 39 module OB Prof. w de nijs 4 juni 2013
Chapter 15 Leadership
inhoud
Management en leiderschap is er een verschil? Het concept dualiteit Het kernvraagstuk: reguleren en mobiliseren Dysfunctionele aspecten van leiderschap Management en macht Overzicht belangrijkste benaderingen
Enige citaten als uitgangspunt
There is a possibility that the only thing of real importance that leaders do is to create and manage culture ( edgar schein, 1985) Alles wat het management doet om medewerkers te motiveren is per definitie demotiverend ( Sprenger: de motivatiemythe) De kwaliteiten die men nodig heeft om de top te bereiken zijn niet dezelfde om een organisatie ook te kunnen leiden. (kets de vries: leiderschap ontrafeld) Het feit dat veel topleiders het succes van de organisatie aan zichzelf toerekenen wil nog niet zeggen dat zij ook de verklaring zijn voor dit succes! ( de klassieke attributiefout)
Management/ leadership 1
Mintzberg (1973): managerial roles; one role is the leadership role Fayol (1949): leadership is aspect of management, a kind of a tool to influence people
Leading versus managing Leaders manage and managers lead, but the two are not synonymous Managers: • planning • investigating • organising • controlling Leaders: • inspiring others • providing emotional support • getting employees to rally around a common goal
management vs leadership 2 Manager
Kotter (1990): coping with complexity and bringing order in organization, esp. quality and profitability Bennis & Nanus (1985): do things right, e.g. organize and create order Management (overemphasises) control, systems,and processes at the expense of creativity, learning and adaptability
Leader
Coping with change toward a desired future. (many organizations are over-managed and underled) Do the right thing, e.g. develop vision and strategy, help organization adapt to change Higher level activity, mystical and mysterious, depending on leader’s charisma for its effectiveness
Manager/ leader (Bass, 1990)
Management
Transactional: (close to classical and transactional paradigm): focus is on managing day-to-day systems and processes, with relatively little need for providing a larger vision to inspire workers (workers can be robots or computer systems)
Leadership Transformational/ inspirational: (close to organic and visionary paradigm): to insipre people to work towards a shared vision and strategy rather than managing systems, processes and operations
Management versus leadership 4 Management Skills planning controlling communicating evaluation monitoring teamworking directing
Leadership skills inspiring motivating envisioning behaviour modeling involving promoting learning team-building
Management en leiderschap: is er een verschil? management
leiderschap
Regelen, coordineren Plannen, ontwerpen
richtinggeven, mobiliseren, verbinden
Organisatiegericht
Mensgericht
Top- down
erkenning door mede werkers
Functioneel
persoonsgebonden
Macht?
Gezag?
Management en leiderschap een dualiteit?
Dualiteit : een simultane werking van ogenschijnlijk aan elkaar tegengestelde behoeften/krachten maar die complementair zijn (elkaar veronderstellen)
Voorbeeld:individu zowel behoefte aan autonomie/vrijheid als aan verbinding/geborgenheid bij anderen
Basisdualiteit organisatie
Organisatie als product van menselijk handelen is daarmee per definitie zowel een collectieve uitdrukking van dualiteiten als een bewuste poging deze te beheersen/kanaliseren Kerndualiteit organisatie is ordenen/ reguleren--mobiliseren menselijk handelen (stabiliteit—veranderen, determinatie- vrijheid)
Twee onderscheiden logica’s? A. Management: rationalistisch, instrumenteel, technisch , formele kennis ten bos: hygienemachine B. Leiderschap: verbinding met non-rationale menselijke en sociale aspecten. Thema: organisatie als Gesellschaft vs Gemeinschaft?
Dysfunctioneel leiderschap: kets de vries
Conflictmijding Tiraniseren medewerkers Micro management Manisch gedrag Ontoegankelijkheid Politieke spelletjes
Weak managers vs. real leaders (!) Managers …
Leaders …
Wait until it happens
Are pro-active
Are happy with the status quo
Challenge the status quo
Are pursuing objectives
Have a vision
Are experts of the past
Are experts of the future
Do the things right
Do the right things
Follow their job description
Change their job description
Respect budgets
Create value
Avoid mistakes
Seek learning opportunities
See information as power
Share information
Are myopic
Take the broad view
Are difficult to reach
Are approachable
Adore status symbols
Want the best for all
Use reward and punishment
Inspire and motivate
Sick leaders vs. Dedicated managers Managers…
Leaders…
Remain humble
Are megalomaniac
Behave like a good citizen
Spend to much money on pet projects
Listen to collaborators
Listen to themselves
Keep balance
Become psychopaths
Think before they act
Have big hairy audacious goals
End with a golden watch
End in prison or mental hospitals
Remain in the background
Are on the front cover
Follow realistic strategies
Follow wish-driven strategies
Overview of leadership theories in OB
Trait theories: distinguish leaders from non-leaders by looking at personal qualities and traits (inspired by history of strong leaders, political (Kennedy, Castro, Thatcher) or business (Frits Philips, Jack Welch (GE), Steve Jobs (Apple)): focus on individual Theories concerning power: power is between the leader and followers Theories concerning behaviour (Ohio State University) Leadership behaviour: task/ structure and people/ consideration Contingency theories (leader-context adaptation) Charismatic/ inspirational and transformational leadership Network leadership
KENMERK BENADERING
Leiderschapskwaliteiten: kenmerken van persoon Heb je of heb je niet: aangeboren?
Geen universele of stabiele set van kenmerken van effectief leiderschap.
Great (wo)men theory (Traits)
A historical perspective which argues that the fate of societies, and organizations, is in the hands of powerful, idiosyncratic (male) individuals: great men are born leaders and take power, regardless of context: what are the traits of these special people? Stogdill (1948) found the following traits: Strong drive for responsibility Focus on completing the task Vigour and persistence in pursuit of goals Venturesomeness and originality in problem-solving Drive to exercise initiative in social settings Self-confidence Sense of personal identity Willingness to accept consequences of decisions and actions and four more traits
Leadership Traits
Leadership Traits: represent the personal characteristics that differentiate leaders from followers.
Historic findings reveal that leaders and followers vary by
Intelligence
Dominance
Self-confidence
Level of energy and activity
Task-relevant knowledge
Gender as a Trait
Men and women differ in the type of leadership roles they assume in work groups: men display more task leadership and women exhibit more social leadership
Leadership styles vary by gender: women are more democratic and men are more autocratic and directive
Female and male leaders are equally effective
Men are perceived as more effective when the job is defined in masculine terms, and women are more effective in roles defined in less masculine terms
Male leaders are perceived as more effective when there are a greater percentage of male leaders and male direct reports; the same positive bias is not true for women leaders
Leadership: ‘power’ between leader and follower
Referent power: coming from the leader’s personality characteristics that command identification and respect. Elected power: power derived from votes of interested parties, such as trade union representatives. Resource power: the power to allow use of exclusive resources such as land or capital.
Legitimate power: power coming from a formal position in the organisation and from the authority attached to it. Reward power: stemming from the leader’s ability to bestow rewards, financial or otherwise. Coercive power: the power to punish or recommend punishment. Expert power: resulting from the leader’s knowledge or skill regarding the tasks performed by followers.
MANAGEMENT EN MACHT
PARTICIPATIEF MANAGEMENT LEIDT PARTICIPATIE VAN MEDEWERKERS TOT MACHTSVERLIES MANAGEMENT?
Leidt participatie niet altijd tot democratisering?
- macht is kansbegrip - theorie zwellende machtskoek - Mauk Mulder: theorie van machtsafstandsreductie:
in het geval van grote machtsafstand leidt participatie tot vergroting van machtsverschillen
LEIDERSCHAPSSTIJL
Stijl versus rol (stijl = profiel van persoonsspecifieke transsituationele dimensies: is situatie onafhankelijk!) one best way McGregor: X-Y theorie Geen theorie maar wel actueel: Gedrag leiding gebaseerd op stereotype opvattingen over werknemers. Probleem zijn niet de medewerkers maar management zelf! Ohio: tweedeling: taak of mensgericht
Behavioural Styles Theory
Ohio State Studies: two critical dimensions of behaviour: • •
University of Michigan Studies: Two similar styles • •
Employee centred Job centred
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid •
Consideration: creating mutual respect and trust with followers Initiating Structure: organizing and defining what group members should be doing
Four leadership styles found by crossing concern for production and concern for people
Evidence: •
There is not one best style of leadership. The effectiveness of a particular leadership style depends on the situation at hand.
Leadership styles
The Leadership Grid
Best fit
Fiedler: stijl gekoppeld aan situatie Graen: vertical dyad linkage model of leadership: stijl varieert per medewerker. (in - versus out groep) Hersey/blanchard: leiders en medewerkers: 4 stijlen gecombineerd met niveau en houding medewerkers! Kritiek: geen echte contigentiefactoren die er toe doen: lukraak wat factoren?
Situational Leadership
Leiderschap en invloed naar “boven”
Leiderschapsstijlen zijn naar beneden gericht: hoe leiders ondergeschikten benaderen en behandelen. De vergeten les van PELZ (1952): Effectieve leiders zijn zij die met succes invloed uitoefenen buiten de groep. Niet stijl is bepalend: omdat ondergeschikten ook verwachten dat hun leidinggevende de belangen van de groep en medewerkers met succes behartigen!
Van stijl naar structurering en zingeving
Transformationeel versus transactioneel Leiderschap Visionair die in staat is organisatie te committeren aan nieuwe gewenste situatie en deze ook te verankeren! Transactionele leider = Manager? Kritiek: Te veel nadruk op charismatisch persoon (terug naar kenmerk benadering: persoonlijkheid!) Gevaar: individuele heroe (redder) met gevaar narcisme!
Transactional Leadership
Transactional Leadership •
Focuses on the interpersonal interactions between managers and employees
Transactional Leaders • •
Use contingent rewards to motivate employees Exert corrective action only when employees fail to obtain performance goals
Charismatic Leadership
Charismatic Leadership •
Emphasises symbolic leader behaviour that transforms employees to pursue organisational goals over self-interests
Charismatic Leaders • • • • • •
Use visionary and inspirational messages Rely on non-verbal communication Appeal to ideological values Attempt to intellectually stimulate employees Display confidence in self and followers Set high performance expectations
The future of leadership According to Senge (1990) and others leadership in the new knowledge-based organisation requires a different set of skills than before. - Technical competence is less important than the softer skills of communication, dealing with ambiguity and people development. - Leaders might emerge in the future who are not ‘heros’ but just people who were able to inspire performance and develop a vision that others could contribute to. - Old style leadership, which centred on being tougher, faster or smarter than everyone else, might give way to a style that is more inclusive, more willing to listen and better able to capture the knowledge resources of the organisation wherever they exist.
