Get Ready Academy for Managerial Skills

Celebrating my 3rd year on Facebook. Thank you for your continuing support. I could never have made it without you. 🙏🤗🎉

Situational Substitutes for Leadership
The contingency leadership approaches considered so far focus on the leader’s style, the
subordinates’ nature, and the situation’s characteristics. The final contingency approach
suggests that situational variables can be so powerful that they actually substitute for or
neutralize the need for leadership.55 This approach outlines those organizational settings
in which a leadership style is unimportant or unnecessary.
Exhibit 15.9 shows the situational variables that tend to substitute for or neutralize
leadership characteristics. A substitute for leadership makes the leadership style unnecessary
or redundant. For example, highly professional subordinates who know how to do their
tasks do not need a leader who initiates structure for them and tells them what to do. A
neutralizer counteracts the leadership style and prevents the leader from displaying certain
behaviors. For example, if a leader has absolutely no position power or is physically removed
from subordinates, the leader’s ability to give directions to subordinates is greatly reduced.
Situational variables in Exhibit 15.9 include characteristics of the group, the task, and
the organization itself. When followers are highly professional and experienced, both leadership
styles are less important. People do not need much direction or consideration. With
respect to task characteristics, highly structured tasks substitute for a task-oriented style
and a satisfying task substitutes for a people-oriented style. With respect to the organization
itself, group cohesiveness substitutes for both leader styles. Formalized rules and
procedures substitute for leader task orientation. Physical separation of leader and subordinate
neutralizes both leadership styles.The value of the situations described in Exhibit 15.9 is that they help leaders
avoid leadership overkill. Leaders should adopt a style with which to complement the
organizational situation. Consider the work situation for bank tellers. A bank teller
performs highly structured tasks, follows clearly written rules and procedures, and has
little flexibility in terms of how to do the work. The head teller should not adopt a taskoriented
style because the organization already provides structure and direction. The
head teller should concentrate on a people-oriented style to provide a more pleasant work
environment. In other organizations, if group cohesiveness or intrinsic satisfaction meets
employees’ social needs, the leader is free to concentrate on task-oriented behaviors. The
leader can adopt a style complementary to the organizational situation to ensure that both
the task needs and people needs of the work group will be met.

Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Whereas the situational model focused on the characteristics of followers, Fiedler and his associates
looked at some other elements of the organizational situation to assess when one leadership
style is more effective than another.48 The starting point for Fiedler’s theory is the extent
to which the leader’s style is task-oriented or relationship-(people) oriented. Fiedler considered
a person’s leadership style to be relatively fixed and difficult to change; therefore, the basic
idea is to match the leader’s style with the situation most favorable for his or her effectiveness.
By diagnosing leadership style and the organizational situation, the correct fit can be arranged.
Situation: Favorable or Unfavorable?
The suitability of a person’s leadership style is determined by whether the situation is
favorable or unfavorable to the leader. The favorability of a leadership situation can be
analyzed in terms of three elements: the quality of relationships between leader and
followers, the degree of task structure, and the extent to which the leader has formal
authority over followers.49
As illustrated in the lower portion of Exhibit 15.8, a situation would be considered
highly favorable to the leader when leader-member relationships are positive, tasks are
highly structured, and the leader has formal authority over followers. In this situation,
followers trust, respect, and have confidence in the leader. The group’s tasks are clearly
defined, involve specific procedures, and have clear, explicit goals. In addition, the leader
has formal authority to direct and evaluate followers, along with the power to reward or
punish. In a highly unfavorable situation, followers have little respect for or confidence
and trust in the leader. Tasks are vague and ill-defined and lack clear-cut procedures and
guidelines. The leader has little formal authority to direct subordinates and does not have
the power to issue rewards or punishments.
Matching Leader Style to the Situation
When Fiedler examined the relationships among leadership style and situational favorability,
he found the pattern shown in the upper portion of Exhibit 15.8. Task-oriented
leaders are more effective when the situation is either highly favorable or highly unfavorable.
Relationship-oriented leaders are more effective in situations of moderate favorability.
The task-oriented leader excels in the favorable situation because everyone gets along,
the task is clear, and the leader has power; all that is needed is for someone to lead the charge
and provide direction. Similarly, if the situation is highly unfavorable to the leader, a great
deal of structure and task direction is needed. A strong leader will define task structure and
establish strong authority. Because leader-member relations are poor anyway, a strong task
orientation will make no difference in the leader’s popularity.Researchers at the University of Chicago who looked at CEOs in turnaround situations—
where companies typically have high debt loads and a need to improve results in a hurry—
found that tough-minded, task-focused characteristics such as analytical skills, a focus on
efficiency, and setting high standards were more valuable leader qualities than were relationship
skills such as good communication, listening, and teamwork.52
The relationship-oriented leader performs better in situations of intermediate favorability
because human relations skills are important in achieving high group performance. In these
situations, the leader may be moderately well liked, have some power, and supervise jobs that
contain some ambiguity. A leader with good interpersonal skills can create a positive group
atmosphere that will improve relationships, clarify task structure, and establish position power.
A leader, then, needs to know two things to use Fiedler’s contingency theory. First, the
leader should know whether he or she has a relationship- or task-oriented style. Second,
the leader should diagnose the situation and determine whether leader-member relations,
task structure, and position power are favorable or unfavorable.
Fiedler believed fitting leader style to the situation can yield big dividends in profits and
efficiency.53 On the other hand, the model has also been criticized.54 For one thing, some
researchers have challenged the idea that leaders cannot adjust their styles as situational
characteristics change. Despite criticisms, Fiedler’s model has continued to influence leadership
studies. Fiedler’s research called attention to the importance of finding the correct
fit between leadership style and situation.

Denise Morrison and Pamela Forbes Lieberman represent two vastly different leadership styles, yet both have been effective in their respective roles. This can be attributed to the concept of contingency approaches to leadership, which emphasize that the effectiveness of a leader depends on the specific circumstances they are facing within the organization.

In the case of Denise Morrison, her approach aligns with the situational model of leadership developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard. This model suggests that effective leadership is contingent upon the readiness level of followers. Morrison's ability to empower and engage employees while also making tough decisions demonstrates her adaptability in matching her leadership style to the readiness level of her team members. She likely adjusts her approach based on the confidence, commitment, ability, and willingness demonstrated by her employees, as outlined in the situational model.

On the other hand, Pamela Forbes Lieberman's leadership style, described as more authoritarian and uncompromising, may also be effective in certain contexts. While her approach may not align with Morrison's emphasis on empowerment and employee engagement, Lieberman's direct and assertive style could be suitable for situations where followers exhibit low readiness levels and require clear direction and control. Lieberman's approach might align more with the telling style (S1) in the situational model, which is effective for low-readiness followers who need explicit direction.

The situational model provides a framework for understanding how leaders can adapt their styles based on the readiness level of their followers. Leaders like Jo Newton, who use a primarily participating style, demonstrate flexibility in guiding moderately to highly ready team members, allowing them autonomy while providing support and guidance as needed. Conversely, leaders like Warren Buffett, who primarily adopt a delegating style, entrust highly skilled professionals with decision-making authority, suitable for followers with high readiness levels.

Ultimately, effective leadership involves understanding the specific needs and readiness levels of followers within a given context and adapting one's leadership approach accordingly. Whether it's through empowerment and support, clear direction, or delegation of authority, effective leaders recognize and respond to the contingencies present in their organizational environment.

Behavioral Approaches
The inability to define effective leadership based solely on traits led to an interest in looking
at the behavior of leaders and how it might contribute to leadership success or failure. Two
basic leadership behaviors identified as important for leadership are attention to tasks and
attention to people.
Task Versus People
Two types of behavior that have been identified as applicable to effective leadership in
a variety of situations and time periods are task-oriented behavior and people-oriented
behavior.39 Although they are not the only important leadership behaviors, concern
for tasks and concern for people must be shown at some reasonable level. Thus, many
approaches to understanding leadership use these metacategories, or broadly defined
behavior categories, as a basis for study and comparison.
Important early research programs on leadership were conducted at The
Ohio State University and the University of Michigan.40 Ohio State researchers
identified two major behaviors they called consideration and initiating structure.
Consideration falls in the category of people-oriented behavior and is the extent
to which the leader is mindful of subordinates, respects their ideas and feelings,
and establishes mutual trust. Initiating structure is the degree of task behavior;
that is, the extent to which the leader is task-oriented and directs subordinate
work activities toward goal attainment. Studies suggest that effective leaders may
be high on consideration and low on initiating structure or low on consideration
and high on initiating structure, depending on the situation.41
Research at the University of Michigan at about the same time also considered taskand
people-oriented behaviors by comparing the behavior of effective and ineffectivesupervisors.42 The most effective supervisors
were those who established high performance
goals and displayed supportive
behavior toward subordinates. These were
referred to as employee-centered leaders. The
less effective leaders were called job-centered
leaders; they tended to be less concerned
with goal achievement and human needs in
favor of meeting schedules, keeping costs
low, and achieving production efficiency.
The Leadership Grid
Building on the work of the Ohio
State and Michigan studies, Robert
R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton of the
University of Texas proposed a twodimensional
theory called the Managerial
Grid®, which was later restated
by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams
McCanse as the Leadership Grid®.43
The model and five of its major management
styles are depicted in Exhibit 15.6.
Each axis on the grid is a nine-point
scale, with 1 meaning low concern and
9 meaning high concern.Team management (9, 9) often is considered the most effective style and is recommended
for leaders because organization members work together to accomplish tasks. Country club
management (1, 9) occurs when the primary emphasis is given to people rather than to work
outputs. Authority-compliance management (9, 1) occurs when efficiency in operations is the
dominant orientation. Middle-of-the-road management (5, 5) reflects a moderate amount of
concern for both people and production. Impoverished management (1, 1) means the absence
of a management philosophy; managers exert little effort toward interpersonal relationships
or work accomplishment

Leadership Traits
Early efforts to understand leadership success focused on the leader’s
traits. Traits are the distinguishing personal characteristics of a leader,
such as intelligence, honesty, self-confidence, and even appearance. The
early research looked at leaders who had achieved a level of greatness,
and hence was referred to as the “Great Man” approach. The idea was
relatively simple: Find out what made these people great, and select
future leaders who already exhibited the same traits or could learn to
develop them. Generally, early research found only a weak relationship
between personal traits and leader success.33
In recent years, interest in examining leadership traits has reemerged.
In addition to personality traits, physical, social, and work-related characteristics
of leaders have been studied.34 Exhibit 15.5 summarizes the
physical, social, and personal leadership characteristics that have received
the greatest research support. However, these characteristics do not stand
alone. The appropriateness of a trait or set of traits depends on the leadership
situation.
Effective leaders typically possess varied traits, and no single leader
can have a complete set of characteristics that is appropriate for handling
any problem, challenge, or opportunity that comes along. In addition,consequences, and traits sometimes considered negative can have positive consequences.
For example, optimism is a highly desirable trait for a leader. Studies have shown that
optimism is the single characteristic most common to top executives.35 Leaders need to
be able to see possibilities where others see problems and to instill in others a sense of
hope for a better future. However, optimism can also lull leaders into laziness and overconfidence,
causing them to miss danger signals and underestimate risks. The 2007–2008
crisis in the financial services industry can be blamed partly on leaders who grew overconfident
and led their organizations astray. Optimism has to be paired with “reality testing” and
conscientiousness, another trait common to successful leaders, as shown in Exhibit 15.5.36
Therefore, rather than just understanding their traits, the best leaders recognize and
hone their strengths.37 Strengths are natural talents and abilities that have been supported
and reinforced with learned knowledge and skills and provide each individual with his or
her best tools for accomplishment and satisfaction.38 Every manager has a limited capacity;
those who become good leaders are the ones who tap into their key strengths that can
make a difference. Effective leadership isn’t about having the “right” traits, but rather about
finding the strengths that one can best exemplify and apply as a leader.
traits that are typically considered positive can sometimes have negative

From Management to Leadership
Hundreds of books and articles have been written in recent years about the differences
between management and leadership. Good management is essential in organizations, yet
managers have to be leaders too, because distinctive qualities are associated with management
and leadership that provide different strengths for the organization. A good way to
think of the distinction between management and leadership is that management organizes
the production and supply of fish to people, whereas leadership teaches and motivates
people to fish. Organizations need both types of skills.29
As shown in Exhibit 15.4, management and leadership reflect two different sets of
qualities and skills that frequently overlap within a single individual. A person might have
more of one set of qualities than the other, but ideally, a manager develops a balance of both
manager and leader qualities.30 A primary distinction between management and leadership
is that management promotes stability and order within the existing organizational structure
and systems. This ensures that suppliers are paid, customers invoiced, products and
services produced on time, and so forth. Leadership, on the other hand, promotes vision
and change. Leadership means questioning the status quo and being willing to take reasonable
risks so that outdated, unproductive, or socially irresponsible norms can be replaced
to meet new challenges.
For example, when Google’s founders needed more structured management at their
growing company, they hired Eric Schmidt as CEO in 2001 to provide operational
expertise and oversight. Schmidt was not a heavy take-charge manager, which suited
the founders just fine, but coming from a corporate background, Schmidt knew how
to plan and organize and keep things focused. More important, it turned out that
Schmidt also had leadership qualities that fit well with Google’s need for innovation
and change to keep the company thriving. His leadership principles can be summarized
in the following five precepts:
1. Get to know your employees.
2. Create new ways to reward and promote high performers.
3. Let employees own the problems that you want them to solve.
4. Allow people to function outside the hierarchy.
5. Have employees’ performance reviewed by someone whom they respect for their
objectivity.31
When he was CEO, Schmidt used to make a list of his best employees so that
he could interact with them personally and encourage them to implement their
innovative ideas and to protect them from unwanted interference by other managers.
He made employees the owners of their work by allowing them a great deal of latitude
in how they accomplished goals. He believed in structure, but he also allowed people to
work outside the company hierarchy when necessary to solve problems and be creative.32
Schmidt used a combination of skillful management and good leadership to take
Google to the next stage of growth.
Leadership cannot replace management; it should be in addition to management. Good
management is needed to help the organization meet current commitments, while good
leadership is needed to move the organization into the future. Leadership’s power comes
from being built on the foundation of a well-managed organization.

Gender Differences
Some of the general characteristics associated with Level 5 leaders
and authentic leaders are also hallmarks of interactive leadership,
which has been found to be associated with female leaders.
Interactive leadership means that the leader favors a consensual
and collaborative process, and influence derives from relationships
rather than position power and formal authority.20
Although both men and women can practice interactive leadership, research
indicates that women’s style of leadership is typically different from that of most men
and is particularly suited to today’s organizations.21 When leadership development
firm Zenger Folkman surveyed more than 7,200 businesspeople in 2011 about leaders
in their organizations, women were rated as better overall leaders.22 Using data from
actual performance evaluations, one study found that when rated by peers, subordinates,
and bosses, female managers scored significantly higher than men on abilities such as
motivating others, fostering communication, and listening.23 Another study of leaders
and their followers inwomen were rated higher on social and
emotional skills, which are crucial for
interactive leadership.24 Indeed, a review of
more than 7,000 360-degree performance
evaluations discovered that women outshone
men in almost every leadership dimension
measured, even some considered typically
masculine qualities, such as driving for
results. The exception was that women
were typically rated lower on developing a
strategic perspective, which some researchers
believe hinders female managers’ career
advancement despite their exceptional
ratings in other leadership dimensions.25
Exhibit 15.3 shows results for 6 of the 16
dimensions measured by the study.
One good example of an interactive
leader is Cindy Szadokierski, who started
as a reservations agent for United Airlines
and today is vice president in charge of operations
for United’s largest hub at O’Hare
International Airport. As she oversees 4,000
employees and 600 flights a day, her favorite times are her weekly afternoon walkabouts
on the O’Hare ramp and weekly morning strolls through the terminal, where she can
connect with employees and customers. Pete McDonald, chief operating officer of
United’s parent, UAL Corporation, says that there were serious operations problemsat O’Hare, so they put “the most communicative person” in the job. Szadokierski’s approach
to leadership is more about collaboration than command and control.26
Men can be interactive leaders as well, as illustrated by the example of Pat McGovern,
founder and chairman of IDG, a technology publishing and research firm that owns magazines
such as CIO, PC World, and Computerworld. McGovern believes that having personal
contact with employees and letting them know that they’re appreciated is a primary
responsibility of leaders.27 The characteristics associated with interactive leadership are
emerging as valuable qualities for both male and female leaders in today’s workplace. John
Gerzema, author of The Athena Doctrine and executive chairman of Young & Rubicam’s
BAV Consulting division, asked 32,000 people to classify 125 traits as masculine, feminine,
or neutral, and another 125 to rate the importance of the traits to effective leadership.
The results showed that traits considered feminine and often associated with interactive
leadership, such as empathy, personal humility, inclusiveness, vulnerability, generosity, patience,
and flexibility, topped the list of qualities most desirable for leaders.
#3 #4 #2 #1

Admiral Vernon E. Clark, who retired in July 2005 after a 37-year career in the U.S. Navy, was
the second-longest-serving U.S. Chief of Naval Operations (CNO). The job of the CNO is to
advise the president on the conduct of war.
When Clark was named CNO in July 2000, the Navy was losing too many good sailors
who didn’t want to reenlist. For Clark, getting and keeping good sailors who could protect
the national security was a top priority, and all his decisions were based on connecting with
and valuing the people on the front lines. When Navy officials proposed budget cuts in
training and development, Clark rebelled. Instead he increased the training budget, strongly
supported an increase in pay for sailors, and established the Naval Education and Training
Command to increase training. Clark also revised the performance appraisal system to provide
constructive feedback for people at all levels. Clark made it a priority to blur the lines
between enlisted sailors and officers and revised the job assignment process so that people
didn’t get forced into jobs and locations they didn’t want. Always more concerned about
doing things right than being right, Clark encouraged everyone to challenge assumptions, ask
questions, and express conflicting views.
Thanks to Admiral Clark’s emphasis on treating sailors right, first term reenlistment
soared from 38 percent to 56.7 percent within his first 18 months as CNO. Moreover, as
the Navy retained more sailors, its ability to respond more quickly to protect the nation
increased

Authentic Leadership
Another popular concept in leadership today is the idea of authentic leadership, which
refers to individuals who know and understand themselves, who espouse and act consistent
with higher-order ethical values, and who empower and inspire others with their openness
and authenticity.16 To be authentic means being real, staying true to one’s values and beliefs,
and acting based on one’s true self rather than emulating what others do. Authentic leaders
inspire trust and commitment because they respect diverse viewpoints, encourage collaboration,
and help others learn, grow, and develop as leaders.
Exhibit 15.2 outlines the key characteristics of authentic leaders, and each is discussed
below.17
●● Authentic leaders pursue their purpose with passion. Leaders who lead without a purpose
can fall prey to greed and the desires of the ego. When leaders demonstrate a high
level of passion and commitment to a purpose, they inspire commitment from followers.
●● Authentic leaders practice solid values. Authentic leaders have values that are shaped by
their personal beliefs, and they stay true to them even under pressure. People come to
know what the leader stands for, which inspires trust.
●● Authentic leaders lead with their hearts as well as their heads. All leaders sometimes
have to make tough choices, but authentic leaders maintain a compassion for others as
well as the courage to make difficult decisions.
●● Authentic leaders establish connected relationships. Authentic leaders build positive
and enduring relationships, which makes followers want to do their best. In addition,
authentic leaders surround themselves with good people and work to help others
grow and develop.
●● Authentic leaders demonstrate self-discipline. A high degree of self-control and selfdiscipline
keeps leaders from taking excessive or unethical risks that could harm
others and the organization. When authentic leaders make mistakes, they openly
admit them.One leader who demonstrates many of the characteristics of authentic leadership is
Vernon Clark, who served as U.S. Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) from 2000 until
his retirement in 2005.An authentic leader like Vernon Clark places high value on
personal relationships, supporting followers, being courageous,
and standing up for what one believes. Thus, this type of leader
is much more likely to make decisions that may not always be
popular, but that he believes are right. Clark also engaged people
by emphasizing each individual’s personal role. “What we
do matters,” he told them. “We do it because it’s important and
we are people of service. We are committed to something larger
than ourselves: the protection of America’s interests around
the world and democracy.”