CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS ON LEADERSHIP
2.3 THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP
2.3.3 Behavioural theories
The advocates of this theory emphasise what the leader could do rather than the characteristics they have. Researchers like Blake and Mouton (in Nel et al., 2004:337–339) indicated that an effective leader should consider both people and production in order to succeed. The main contribution of Blake and Mouton (in Nel et al., 2004:339) was to indicate that employees have different needs that they need to satisfy in different organisations, and also in different departments of the same organisation. The same employees react either positively or negatively to different leadership styles, and there is no one correct leadership style or managerial style for all men every time. The Ohio and Michigan Studies (Daft, 2012:42–45) brought to light two forms of leadership behaviour, namely employee- or personality-centred and job- or task-centred behaviours.
• Employee-centred or personality-oriented leadership behaviour
The Ohio State Studies refer to this behaviour as consideration. The leader is concerned with the creation and maintenance of positive relationships among employees and seeks to minimise conflict. More attention is given to human needs and less attention is paid on production and the achievement of organisational goals. Employees subjected to this leadership behaviour are allowed to participate in every level of the organisation to the detriment
• Job-centred or task-oriented leadership behaviour
This is the so-called Initiating structure, according to the Ohio State Studies.
The leader is concerned with production, supervision, facilitation and achievement of organisational goals. Less attention is paid on the creation of positive relationships among employees. Leaders associated with this type of leadership behaviour often experience absenteeism of subordinates, labour turnover, and other negative effects associated with employee dis- satisfaction in an organisation. Leaders here are usually autocratic.
From the above leadership behaviour discussion, it is evident that the Principals should try to strike a balance between the two, instead of choosing to make use of one at the expense of the other. The adherence of the leader to the task or job-centred approach is usually associated with the autocratic style of leader- ship and the disregard of the well-being of the employees. At the same time choosing employee-centred behaviour is associated with democratic style and the disregard of the achievement of the organisational goals. Owens (2001:238) referred to this balance, as the two-factor or two-dimensional leadership theory, where leaders should neither be “follower focused” (emphasising concern for people) nor “task focused” (emphasising rules and procedures for getting the task done). It is also true that each of these leadership behaviours can be appropriately and interchangeably used, depending on a particular situation.
Daft (2012:47) also shared the same views on leaders that they can succeed in a variety of situations by showing concern for both tasks and the people.
Blake and Mouton (Swanepoel et al., 2003) developed a managerial/leadership grid or matrix to illustrate concerns for people and production.
Figure 2.2: Leadership grid Source: Daft (2012:45)
The leadership grid
The 1.1 leadership style referred to as “impoverished management” is charac- terised by a low concern for people and a low concern for the task. The Princi- pals here are neither task-oriented nor people-oriented. Daft (2012:45–46) right- fully indicated that this leadership management is characterised by the “absence of leadership philosophy”. The leadership style that is being used here is laissez-faire approach, mostly used by Principals who are about to retire and those who have, according to Nel et al. (2004:360) “emotionally withdrawn” from
is that, those Principals who no longer have the interests of the school at heart.
In this case, programmes can be drawn by the employer for those who are about to retire, to make them feel that they are still of value to the workplace. Such programmes should include safety, budgeting and physical fitness, within the curriculum to ensure that the employer has the responsibility towards the retiring workers.
The 9.1 leadership style of “authority-compliance leader” indicates maximum concern for production and minimum concern for the people. Production is achieved by means of formal authority and followers are controlled by enforcing submissiveness. Decisions are made and enforced unilaterally by the leader with minimum participation from employees. Such autocratic leadership style can be used by the Principals minimally and situationally to quell an undesirable and when things return to normal, another leadership style should be adopted.
The 1.9 leadership style referred to as “country club management” indicates maximum concern for people and minimum concern for production. The leader assumes that tasks will be automatically done once people are happy. This democratic leader avoids conflict at all costs. Employees are allowed to partici- pate in decision making and a pleasant working atmosphere is maintained. The country club Principals assume that contented staff will produce desirable results. Innovative ideas that will cause conflict among the staff are avoided, even if these ideas will improve results of the school.
The 5.5 “middle-of-the-road” Principals (also known as “go-along-to-get-along”) try to maintain the balance between achievement of results and interpersonal relationships among staff members, but are unable to succeed. The style is characterised by conflicts between the task needs and people needs, and the solution comes through a compromise. Ultimately, these Principals assume that it is not possible to successfully integrate organisational needs with interpersonal needs.
The 9.9 “team management” Principals have a highly committed team of staff members, who are highly committed to the production of results and to the well- being of all of them. This is the most effective leadership style that strives for
excellent results, through participative management and working together with all stakeholders of the school.