MPO Final Exam Cards #2 - Leadership

The extent to which a leader is likely to define and structure his or her role and those of subordinates in the search for goal attainment.

Initiating Structure is the extent to which a leader defines leader and group member roles, initiates actions, organizes group activities and defines how tasks are to be accomplished by the group.

This leadership style is task-oriented.

• Some of the statements used to measure this factor in the LBDQ are:
• -letting group members know what is expected of them
• -maintaining definite standards of performance
• -scheduling the work to be done
• -asking that group members follow standard rules and regulations

The extent to which a leader is likely to have job relationships characterized by mutual trust, respect for subordinates’ ideas, and regard for their feelings.

Consideration is the display to which a leader exhibits concern for the welfare of the members of the group.

This factor is oriented towards interpersonal relationships, mutual trust and friendship.This leadership style is people-oriented.

• Some of the statements used to measure this factor in the LBDQ are:
• -being friendly and approachable
• -treating all group members as his/her equal
• -looking out for the personal welfare of group membersmaking him/herself accessible to group members

A leader who emphasizes interpersonal relations, takes a personal interest in the needs of employees, and accepts individual differences among members.

A leader who emphasizes technical or task aspects of a job

The theory that effective groups depend on a proper match between a leader’s style of interacting with subordinates and the degree to which the situation gives control and influence to the leader.


iedler's contingency model measures the effectiveness of a group's performance based on the leadership style and the situation of the group. It is used to help management choose suitable leaders for each work group type. According to the model, there are two types of leadership styles: task-motivated and relationship-motivated. The group's situation is a technical term determined by three factors: the relationship between the group members and the leader; the task structure, or how clearly goals and procedures are defined; and the position of power, or capability of the leader to use reward and punishment to control group members.

Leader IdentificationFiedler's model gives organizations a quick method to identify the best potential leaders for a particular group. The theory includes a least preferred coworker scale, which helps management identify the human relations orientation and the task orientation of possible leaders. Leaders with a task orientation are best suited for groups in which they have a high level of control and supervise clearly defined tasks. On the other hand, leaders with a relationship orientation can use their interpersonal skills to get the job done and can deal with complex issues when making decisions.FlexibilityThis theory is designed as a contingency model and does not claim to describe all possible situations. It is precisely because the model only purports to provide ballpark results that it is flexible enough to adapt to a wide variety of groups, leaders and group-leader relationships. For instance, if a group has a leader with low human relations skills, Fiedler's model still gives management the option of creating an effective group by providing clearly defined tasks and increasing the ability of the leader to provide rewards or punishment to subordinates.

Situational leadership theory (SLT) focuses on the followers. It says successful leadership depends on selecting the right leader- ship style contingent on the followers’ readiness, or the extent to which they are willing and able to accomplish a specific task. A leader should choose one of four behaviors depending on follower readiness.If followers are unable and unwilling to do a task, the leader needs to give clear and specific directions; if they are unable and willing, the leader needs to display high task orientation to compensate for followers’ lack of ability and high relationship orientation to get them to “buy into” the leader’s desires. If followers are able and unwilling, the leader needs to use a supportive and participative style; if they are both able and willing, the leader doesn’t need to do much.SLT has intuitive appeal. It acknowledges the importance of followers and builds on the logic that leaders can compensate for their limited ability and motivation. Yet research efforts to test and support the theory have generally been disappointing.25 Why? Possible explanations include internal ambigui- ties and inconsistencies in the model itself as well as problems with research methodology in tests. So, despite its intuitive appeal and wide popularity, any endorsement must be cautious for now.

• Flexibility
• The fundamental idea of situational leadership is that there is no such thing as a single best or fixed type of leadership. Leadership changes according to the requirements of the group or organization, and successful leaders are able to be flexible and adapt their style of leadership to the level of maturity of the group that they’re trying to lead.

Changes according to the situation. The leadership style that the situational leader brings into play will be dependent on the situation at hand and the development level of the individuals involved. If the development level is low, the situational leader becomes more task-oriented. If the individuals are sufficiently developed, the leader will be more supportive.

Integrity.  The situational leader does not change their approach merely to take advantage of the situation. They simply adapt in a way that is most appropriate considering factors such as the maturity level of followers, the organizational structure and culture, and the goals to be achieved. They do so with integrity, and are not motivated by a desire to unfairly capitalize on the weaknesses of the team or organization.

Clear vision.  The situational leader has a clear vision of where the team is going. This is what allows a leader to identify and adopt the most effective behaviors and strategies to get to the goal.

Humility.  The situational leader does not claim to know it all. With a group of highly developed and mature followers, they have the humility to accept limitations and seek the higher wisdom of the group.

A theory that states that it is the leader’s job to assist followers in attaining their goals and to provide the necessary direction and/or support to ensure that their goals are compatible with the overall objectives of the group or organization.

Considers Environmental contingency factors and subordinate contingency factors.

The path-goal theory emphasizes the relationship between the leader’s style and the characteristics of the subordinates and work setting (Northouse, 2013).  The path-goal theory, assumes that subordinates will be motivated if they think they are capable of performing their work, if they believe their efforts will result in a certain outcome and if they believe that the payoffs for their work are worthwhile.

• Pro's
• In a situation where something needs to be done in a short time - such as emergencies and complicated situations in which there is a time constraint, this method may be preferable.The formulator of the theory, Robert House acknowledges that "all theories ....are ultimately incorrect..." and that "A theory which cannot be mortally in danger cannot be alive." [1] Hence, there is room for flexibility.The revised theory adds more with respect to group participation, making it more amenable to use in groups who are knowledgeable and intelligent.The Path-Goal Theory has a common sense ring to it and the ideas are easy to convey. The analogy to a path needing to be cleared and workers driven along it is an easy visualization.

Con's - This theory assumes that the group members do not know what is good for them. It is inherently undemocratic.If the leader has flaws the whole method stands a good chance of failure.Leaders are not always rational, and a course of action might be based on delusion, thus jeopardizing group members.The leader-led-task system could collapse, if there is too much dependence on the leader and where either something happens to the leader or he simply cannot carry out his leadership functions.Read more: http://www.leadership-central.com/path-goal-theory.html#ixzz44b67AD00

A theory that supports leaders’ creation of in-groups and out-groups;  subordinates with in-group status will have higher performance ratings, less turnover, and greater job satisfaction.



The leader-member exchange (LMX) theory is a relationship-based approach to leadership that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship between leaders and followers.[1] It suggests that leaders develop an exchange with each of their subordinates, and that the quality of these leader-member exchange relationships influences subordinates' responsibility, decisions, and access to resources and performance.[2] Relationships are based on trust and respect and are often emotional relationships that extend beyond the scope of employment.[3] Leader-member exchange may promote positive employment experiences and augment organizational effectiveness.[4] It is widely used by many managers and is replacing many of its predecessors.

A leadership theory that states that followers make attributions of heroic or extraordinary leadership abilities when they observe certain behaviors.


Charismatic leaders are essentially very skilled communicators – individuals who are both verbally eloquent, but also able to communicate to followers on a deep, emotional level. They are able to articulate a compelling or captivating vision, and are able to arouse strong emotions in followers.


Charismatic leadership is rooted in the personal and behavioural characteristics of the leader. Such leaders are able to inspire and enthuse their subordinates through their articulation of an organisational vision (House, 1977). Subordinates identify with the vision and accept the leader's values as their own. Conger and Kanungo (1987) propose an attributional approach to charisma; that is, subordinates attribute charisma to a leader, based on their perceptions of the leader's behaviour. Charismatic leaders are able to motivate subordinates to produce superior performance without the use of formal authority or power (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993). In some respect, given that charisma is conceptualised as a personal characteristic of the leader, the emergence of charismatic leadership might be viewed as a revival of the trait approach to leadership.

Vision and articulation. Has a vision—expressed as an idealized goal—that proposes a future better than the status quo; and is able to clarify the importance of the vision in terms that are understandable to others.

Personal risk. Willing to take on high personal risk, incur high costs, and engage in self- sacrifice to achieve the vision.

Sensitivity to follower needs. Perceptive of others’ abilities and responsive to their needs and feelings.

Unconventional behavior. Engages in behaviors that are perceived as novel and counter to norms.

Leaders who inspire followers to transcend their own self-interests and who are capable of having a profound and extraordinary effect on followers.


Transformational leadership is a style of leadership where the leader works with employees to identify the needed change, creating a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members of the group.[1] It also serves to enhance the motivation, morale, and job performance of followers through a variety of mechanisms; these include connecting the follower's sense of identity and self to the project and the collective identity of the organization; being a role model for followers in order to inspire them and raise their interest in the project; challenging followers to take greater ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of followers, allowing the leader to align followers with tasks that enhance their performance.

Idealized influence: provides vision and a sense of mission, instills pride, gains respect and trust

Inspirational Motivation: communicates high expectations, uses symbols to focus on efforts, expresses important purposes in simple ways.

Intellectual Stimulation: Promotes intelligence, rationality and careful problem solving

Leaders who guide or motivate their followers in the direction of established goals by clarifying role and task requirements.


Transactional Leadership, also known as managerial leadership, focuses on the role of supervision, organization, and group performance;transactional leadership is a style of leadership in which the leader promotes compliance of his/her followers through both rewards and punishments.


Within the context of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, transactional leadership works at the basic levels of need satisfaction, where transactional leaders focus on the lower levels of the hierarchy. Transactional leaders use an exchange model, with rewards being given for good work or positive outcomes. Conversely, people with this leadership style also can punish poor work or negative outcomes, until the problem is corrected.[1] One way that transactional leadership focuses on lower level needs is by stressing specific task performance.[2] Transactional leaders are effective in getting specific tasks completed by managing each portion individually.

Contingent Reward: Contracts exchange of rewards for effort, promises rewards for good performance, recognizes accomplishments.

Management by Exception (active): Watches and searches for deviations from rules and standards, takes correct action.

Management by Exception (passive): Intervenes only if standards are not met.

Laissez-Faire: Abdicates responsibilities, avoids making decisions.

leaders who know who they are, what they believe in and value and act on those values and beliefs openly and candidly.  Their followers would consider them to be ethical people.

Authentic leadership is an approach to leadership that emphasizes building the leader's legitimacy through honest relationships with followers which value their input and are built on an ethical foundation. Generally, authentic leaders are positive people with truthful self-concepts who promote openness.

A leadership concept that states that leaders convey values that are other centered versus self centered and who role-model ethical conduct.

Socialized charismatic leadership (SCL) is a type of leadership characterized by a leader's altruistic intent and helping others internalize his or her values.

A leadership style marked by going beyond the leader’s own self-interest and instead focusing on opportunities to help followers grow and develop.

1. Values diverse opinions.A servant leader values everyone’s contributions and regularly seeks out opinions.  If you must parrot back the leader’s opinion, you are not in a servant-led organization.

3.  Develops other leaders. The replication factor is so important.  It means teaching others to lead, providing opportunities for growth and demonstrating by example.  That means the leader is not always leading, but instead giving up power and deputizing others to lead.

4.  Helps people with life issues (not just work issues).It’s important to offer opportunities for personal development beyond the job.  Let’s say you run a company program to lose weight, or lower personal debt, or a class on etiquette.  None of these may help an immediate corporate need, but each may be important.

1: Values diverse opinions

2: Cultivates a culture of trust

3: Develops other leaders

4: Helps people with life issues

5: Encourages

6: Sells instead of tells

7: Thinks you, not me

8: Thinks long-term

9: Acts with humility

A leadership theory that says that leadership is merely an attribution that people make about other individuals.


a model of leadership that assumes that individuals make inferences about leadership ability by observing and interpreting different types of environmental and behavioral cues. Like leader-categorization theory, attribution theory assumes that subordinates respond more positively to a leader who displays the qualities and behaviors that match their implicit leadership theories or schemas held by a person. 

ATTRIBUTION THEORY OF LEADERSHIP: "The attribution theory of leadership suggests that people are more likely to follow an individual who fits their idea of a leader - for example, strength.

Trust based on a mutual understanding of each other’s intentions and appreciation of each other’s wants and desires.

Trust is a primary attribute associated with leadership; breaking it can have serious adverse effects on a group’s performance.105 As one author noted, “Part of the leader’s task has been, and continues to be, working with people to find and solve problems, but whether leaders gain access to the knowledge and cre- ative thinking they need to solve problems depends on how much people trust them. Trust and trust-worthiness modulate the leader’s access to knowledge and cooperation.”106Followers who trust a leader are confident their rights and interests will not be abused.107 Transformational leaders create support for their ideas in part by arguing that their direction will be in everyone’s best interests. People are unlikely to look up to or follow someone they perceive as dishonest or likely to take advantage of them. Thus, as you might expect, transformational leaders do generate higher levels of trust from their followers, which in turn is related to higher levels of team confidence and, ultimately, higher levels of team performance.108In a simple contractual exchange of goods and services, your employer is legally bound to pay you for fulfilling your job description. But today’s rapid reorganizations, diffusion of responsibility, and collaborative team-based work style mean employment relationships are not stable long-term contracts with explicit terms. Rather, they are more fundamentally based on trusting relation- ships than ever before. You have to trust that if you show your supervisor a creative project you’ve been working on, she won’t steal the credit behind your back. You have to trust that extra work you’ve been doing will be recognized in your performance appraisal. In contemporary organizations, where less work is closely documented and specified, voluntary employee contribution based on trust is absolutely necessary. And only a trusted leader will be able to encourage employees to reach beyond themselves to a transformational goal.

Trust isn’t just about the leader; the characteristics of followers also influence its development. What key characteristics lead us to believe a leader is trustworthy? Evidence has identified three: integrity, benevolence, and ability (see Exhibit 12-6).109

Integrity refers to honesty and truthfulness. It seems the most critical charac- teristic in assessing another’s trustworthiness.110 When 570 white-collar employ- ees were given a list of 28 attributes related to leadership, they rated honesty the most important by far.111 Integrity also means having consistency between what you do and say. “Nothing is noticed more quickly . . . than a discrepancy between what executives preach and what they expect their associates to practice.”112

Benevolence means the trusted person has your interests at heart, even if yours aren’t necessarily in line with theirs. Caring and supportive behavior is part of the emotional bond between leaders and followers.


Ability encompasses an individual’s technical and interpersonal knowledge and skills. Even a highly principled person with the best intentions in the world won’t be trusted to accomplish a positive outcome for you if you don’t have faith in his or her ability to get the job done. Does the person know what he or she is talking about? You’re unlikely to listen to or depend on someone whose abilities you don’t respect.

Trust between supervisors and employees has a number of important advan- tages. Here are just a few that research has shown:

●  Trust encourages taking risks. Whenever employees decide to deviate from the usual way of doing things, or to take their supervisors’ word on a new direction, they are taking a risk. In both cases, a trusting relationship can facilitate that leap.


●  Trust facilitates information sharing. One big reason employees fail to express concerns at work is that they don’t feel psychologically safe reveal- ing their views. When managers demonstrate they will give employees’ ideas a fair hearing and actively make changes, employees are more will- ing to speak out.120

●  Trusting groups are more effective. When a leader sets a trusting tone in a group, members are more willing to help each other and exert ex- tra effort, which further increases trust. Conversely, members of mistrust- ing groups tend to be suspicious of each other, constantly guard against exploitation, and restrict communication with others in the group. These actions tend to undermine and eventually destroy the group.

●  Trust enhances productivity. The bottom-line interest of companies also appears positively influenced by trust. Employees who trust their supervisors tend to receive higher performance ratings.121 People re- spond to mistrust by concealing information and secretly pursuing their own interests.