Richard L. Daft - Management. 9th ed., 2010

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

PART 5 LEADING430

leadership,  rst described by Robert Greenleaf in 1970, has gained renewed interest

in recent years as companies recover from ethical scandals and compete to attract and

retain the best human talent.

Servant leaders transcend self-interest to serve others and the organization.

They operate on two levels: for the ful llment of their subordinates’ goals and needs

and for the realization of the larger purpose or mission of their organization. Servant

leaders give things away—power, ideas, information, recognition, credit for accom-

plishments, even money. Harry Stine, founder of Stine Seed Company in Adel, Iowa,

casually announced to his employees at the company’s annual postharvest luncheon

that they would each receive $1,000 for each year they had worked at the company.

For some loyal workers, that amounted to a $20,000 bonus.

Servant leaders truly

value other people. They are trustworthy and they trust others. They encourage par-

ticipation, share power, enhance others’ self-worth, and unleash people’s creativity,

full commitment, and natural impulse to learn and contribute. Servant leaders can

bring their followers’ higher motives to the work and connect their hearts to the orga-

nizational mission and goals.

Servant leaders often work in the nonpro t world because it offers a natural way

to apply their leadership drive and skills to serve others. But servant leaders also

succeed in business. Ari Weinzweig and Paul Saginaw, co-founders of Zingerman’s

Community of Businesses, built a $30 million food, restaurant, and training company

using servant leadership principles. The leaders are continually asking employees,

What can I do for you? “People give me assignments all the time,” Weinzweig says.

“Sometimes I’m the note-taker. . . . Sometimes I’m on my hands and knees wiping

up what people spilled. We have to learn to be good followers.”

Moral Leadership

Because leadership can be used for good or evil, to help or to harm others, all leadership

has a moral component. Leaders carry a tremendous responsibility to use their power

wisely and ethically. Sadly, in recent years, too many have chosen to act from self-interest

and greed rather than behaving in ways that serve and uplift others. The dishearten-

ing ethical climate in American business has led to a renewed

interest in moral leadership. Moral leadership is about distin-

guishing right from wrong and choosing to do right. It means

seeking the just, the honest, the good, and the decent behavior

in the practice of leadership.

Moral leaders remember that

business is about values, not just economic performance.

Distinguishing the right thing to do is not always easy,

and doing it is sometimes even harder. Leaders are often

faced with right-versus-right decisions, in which several

responsibilities con ict with one another.

Commitments to

superiors, for example, may mean a leader feels the need to

hide unpleasant news about pending layoffs from followers.

Moral leaders strive to  nd the moral answer or compromise,

rather than taking the easy way out. Consider Katherine

Graham, the long-time leader of The Washington Post, when

she was confronted with a decision in 1971 about what to

do with the Pentagon Papers, a leaked Defense Department

study that showed Nixon administration deceptions about

the Vietnam War. Graham admitted she was terri ed—she

knew she was risking the whole company on the decision,

possibly inviting prosecution under the Espionage Act, and

jeopardizing thousands of employees’ jobs. She decided

to go ahead with the story, and reporters Bob Woodward

and Carl Bernstein made Watergate—and The Washington

Post—a household name.

Fifty years ago, D. J. De Pree created

environmental sustainability programs at Herman Miller, which

designs and manufactures ofﬁ ce furnishings. De Pree displayed

moral leadership by acting on his belief that businesses should be

careful stewards of natural resources. His innovative directives—such

as that all employees should be able to look out a window from

no more than 75 feet and that 50 percent of company-developed

land should be green space—are still followed. Today, the company

beneﬁ ts from lower energy expenses by harvesting natural daylight.

The Design Yard, located in Holland, Michigan, received Gold LEED

(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) recognition.

ser

eade

r A

who

wor

ful

ﬁl

ﬁ

ubo

rdi

nat

’

s as we

achieve the or

anization’s

er mission.

ora

ers

Distin

ishing right from wrong an

osin

to do ri

ht in the

pra

ctice of leadershi

CHAPTER 14 LEADERSHIP 431

Leading

Clearly, moral leadership requires courage, the ability to step forward through

fear and act on one’s values and conscience. As we discussed in Chapter 5, leaders

often behave unethically simply because they lack courage. Most people want to be

liked, and it is easy to do the wrong thing in order to  t in or impress others. One

example might be a leader who holds his tongue in order to “ t in with the guys”

when colleagues are telling sexually or racially offensive jokes. Moral leaders sum-

mon the fortitude to do the right thing even if it is unpopular. Standing up for what

is right is the primary way in which leaders create an environment of honesty, trust,

and integrity in the organization.

cou

age

The

ili

ste

war

hro

ugh

and

’

ues

nce

ch14

A MANAGER’S ESSENTIALS: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

▪ This chapter covered several important ideas about leadership. The concept of

leadership continues to evolve and change with the changing times. Of particular

interest in today’s turbulent environment is a postheroic leadership approach.

Two signi cant concepts in line with the postheroic approach are Level 5 leader-

ship and interactive leadership, which is common among women leaders. Level

5 leaders are characterized by personal humility combined with a strong deter-

mination to build a great organization that will thrive beyond the leader’s direct

in uence. Interactive leadership emphasizes relationships and helping others

develop to their highest potential and may be particularly well-suited to today’s

workplace.

▪ The early research on leadership focused on personal traits such as intelligence,

energy, and appearance. Later, research attention shifted to leadership behaviors

that are appropriate to the organizational situation. Behavioral approaches domi-

nated the early work in this area; task-oriented behavior and people-oriented

behavior were suggested as essential behaviors that lead work groups toward

high performance. The Ohio State and Michigan approaches and the mana-

gerial grid are in this category. Contingency approaches include Hersey and

Blanchard’s situational theory, Fiedler’s theory, and the substitutes-for-leadership

concept.

▪ Leadership concepts have evolved from the transactional approach to charis-

matic and transformational leadership behaviors. Charismatic leadership is the

ability to articulate a vision and motivate followers to make it a reality. Transfor-

mational leadership extends charismatic qualities to guide and foster dramatic

organizational change.

▪ Being a good follower is an important component of being a good leader, as

effective leaders and effective followers share similar characteristics. An effective

follower is both independent and active in the organization. Being an effective

follower depends on not becoming alienated, conforming, or passive.

▪ Leadership involves the use of power to in uence others. Sources of power are

both position-based (legitimate, reward, and coercive) and person-based (expert

and referent). Other important sources of power in organizations are personal

effort, a network of relationships, and access to information. Leaders rely more

on personal power than position power, and they use a variety of interpersonal

in uence tactics to implement decisions and accomplish goals.

▪ Two enduring approaches that re ect the idea of leadership as service are servant

leadership and moral leadership. Servant leaders facilitate the growth, goals, and

development of others to liberate their best qualities in pursuing the organiza-

tion’s mission. Moral leadership means seeking to do the honest and decent thing

in the practice of leadership. Leaders can make a positive difference by applying

characteristics of servant and moral leadership.

PART 5 LEADING432

1. Do you think leadership style is  xed and

unchangeable for a leader or  exible and adapt-

able? Discuss.

2. Suggest some personal traits that you believe

would be useful to a business leader today. Are

these traits more valuable in some situations than

in others? As a potential new manager, are these

the same traits you would want in a follower?

3. What is the difference between trait theories and

behavioral theories of leadership?

4. Suggest the sources of power that would be avail-

able to a leader of a student government organiza-

tion. What sources of power may not be available?

To be effective, should student leaders keep

power to themselves or delegate power to other

students?

5. What skills and abilities does a manager need to

lead effectively in a virtual environment? Do you

believe a leader with a consideration style or an

initiating-structure style would be more successful

as a virtual leader? Explain your answer.

6. What is transformational leadership? Give exam-

ples of organizational situations that would call

for transformational, transactional, or charismatic

leadership.

7. How does Level 5 leadership differ from the concept

of servant leadership? Do you believe anyone has

the potential to become a Level 5 leader? Discuss.

8. Why do you think so little attention is given to

followership compared to leadership in organiza-

tions? Discuss how the role of an effective follower

is similar to the role of a leader.

9. Do you think leadership is more important or less

important in today’s  atter, team-based organiza-

tions? Are some leadership styles better suited to

such organizations as opposed to traditional hier-

archical organizations? Explain.

10. Consider the leadership position of a senior part-

ner in a law  rm. What task, subordinate, and

organizational factors might serve as substitutes

for leadership in this situation?

11. Do you see yourself as having more leader qualities

or manager qualities? Do you think you will become

a better leader/manager by developing the charac-

teristics you already have or by trying to develop

the characteristics you don’t have? Discuss.

ch14

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

ch14

MANAGEMENT IN PRACTICE: EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISE

What Is the Impact of Leadership?

What are your beliefs and understandings about how

top leaders in uence organizational performance. To

learn about your beliefs, please answer whether each

item below is Mostly True or Mostly False based on

your personal beliefs.

Mostly

True

Mostly

False

1. The quality of leadership is the

most important in uence on the

performance of an organization.

2. People in top-level leadership

positions have the power to make

or break an organization.

3. Most activities in an organization

have little to do with the decisions

or activities of the top leaders.

4. Even in a bad economy, a good

leader can prevent a company

from doing poorly.

Mostly

True

Mostly

False

5. A company cannot do well unless

it has high quality leadership at

the top.

6. High versus low quality leader-

ship has a bigger impact on a

 rm’s performance than the busi-

ness environment.

7. Poor organizational performance

is often due to factors beyond the

control of even the best leaders.

8. Eventually, bad leadership at the

top will trigger poor organiza-

tional performance.

9. Leaders typically should not be

held responsible for a  rm’s poor

performance.

CHAPTER 14 LEADERSHIP 433

Leading

Interpretation: This scale is about the “romance” of

leadership, which is the romantic view that leaders

are very responsible for organizational performance,

while ignoring other factors such as economic condi-

tions. Company performance is dif cult to control

and is an outcome of complex forces. Attributing

too much responsibility to leaders is a simpli cation

shaped by our own mental construction more than

by the reality and complexity of organizational per-

formance. Top leaders are not heroes, but they are

important as one of several key factors that can shape

organizational performance.

Scoring: Give yourself one point for each item 1, 2, 4, 5,

6, and 8 marked as Mostly True and each item 3, 7, and

9 marked as Mostly False. A score of seven or higher

suggests a belief in the romance of leadership—that

leaders have more control over performance outcomes

that is actually the case. If you scored three or less,

you may underestimate the impact of top leaders, a

somewhat skeptical view. A score of four to six sug-

gests a balanced view of leadership.

In Class: Sit with a student partner and explain your

scores to each other. What are your beliefs about lead-

ership? What is the basis for your beliefs? The teacher

can ask for a show of hands concerning the number of

high, medium, and low scores on the questionnaire.

Discuss the following questions: Do you believe that

presidents, top executives, and heads of not-for-pro t

organizations act alone and hence are largely respon-

sible for performance? What is the evidence for this

belief? What other forces will affect an organization?

What is a realistic view of top leader in uence in a

large organization?

SOURCE: Adapted from Birgit Schyns, James R. Meindl, and Marcel

A. Croon, “The Romance of Leadership Scale: Cross-Cultural Testing

and Reﬁ nement,” Leadership 3, no. 1 (2007): 29–46.

Too Much of a Good Thing?

Not long ago, Jessica Armstrong, vice president of

administration for Delaware Valley Chemical Inc.,

a New Jersey-based multinational company, made

a point of stopping by department head Darius

Harris’s of ce and lavishly praising him for his vol-

unteer work with an after-school program for disad-

vantaged children in a nearby urban neighborhood.

Now she was about to summon him to her of ce so

she could take him to task for dedication to the same

volunteer work.

It was Carolyn Clark, Harris’s secretary, who’d

alerted her to the problem. “Darius told the com-

munity center he’d take responsibility for a fund-

raising mass mailing. And then he asked me to edit

the letter he’d drafted, make all the copies, stuff the

envelopes, and get it into the mail—most of this on

my own time,” she reported, still obviously indig-

nant. “When I told him, ‘I’m sorry, but that’s not

my job,’ he looked me straight in the eye and asked

when I’d like to schedule my upcoming performance

appraisal.”

Several of Harris’s subordinates also volunteered

with the program. After chatting with them, Arm-

strong concluded most were volunteering out of a

desire to stay on the boss’s good side. It was time to

talk to Harris.

“Oh, come on,” responded Harris impatiently

when Armstrong confronted him. “Yes, I asked for her

help as a personal favor to me. But I only brought up

the appraisal because I was going out of town, and we

needed to set some time aside to do the evaluation.”

Harris went on to talk about how important working

for the after-school program was to him personally. “I

grew up in that neighborhood, and if it hadn’t been

for the people at the center, I wouldn’t be here today,”

he said. Besides, even if he had pressured employees

to help out—and he wasn’t saying he had—didn’t all

the emphasis the company was putting on employee

volunteerism make it okay to use employees’ time

and company resources?

After Harris left, Armstrong thought about the

conversation. There was no question Delaware Valley

actively encouraged employee volunteerism—and

not just because it was the right thing to do. It was

a chemical company with a couple of unfortunate

accidental spills in its recent past that caused environ-

mental damage and community anger.

Volunteering had the potential to help employees

acquire new skills, create a sense of camaraderie, and

play a role in recruiting and retaining talented people.

But most of all, it gave a badly needed boost to the

company’s public image. Recently, Delaware Valley

took every opportunity to publicize its employees’

extracurricular community work on its Web site and

in company publications. And the company cre-

ated the annual Delaware Prize, which granted cash

awards ranging from $1,000 to $5,000 to outstanding

volunteers.

So now that Armstrong had talked with everyone

concerned, just what was she going to do about the

dispute between Darius Harris and Carolyn Clark?

ch14

MANAGEMENT IN PRACTICE: ETHICAL DILEMMA

PART 5 LEADING434

What Would You Do?

1. Tell Carolyn Clark that employee volunteerism

is important to the company and that while her

performance evaluation will not be affected by

her decision, she should consider helping Harris

because it is an opportunity to help a worthy com-

munity project.

2. Tell Darius Harris that the employee volunteer

program is just that: a volunteer program. Even

though the company sees volunteerism as an

important piece of its campaign to repair its tar-

nished image, employees must be free to choose

whether to volunteer. He should not ask for the

help of his direct reports with the after-school

program.

3. Discipline Darius Harris for coercing his subor-

dinates to spend their own time on his volunteer

work at the community after-school program. This

action will send a signal that coercing employees is

a clear violation of leadership authority.

ch14

CASE FOR CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Mountain West Health Plans Inc.

“Be careful what you wish for,” thought Martin

Quinn, senior vice president for service and opera-

tions for the Denver-based health insurance company,

Mountain West Health Plans, Inc. When there was an

opening for a new director of customer service last

year due to Evelyn Gustafson’s retirement, he’d seen

it as the perfect opportunity to bring someone in to

control the ever-increasing costs of the labor-intensive

department. He’d been certain he had found just the

person in Erik Rasmussen, a young man in his late

twenties with a shiny new bachelor’s degree in busi-

ness administration.

A tall, un appable woman, Evelyn Gustafson

consistently showed warmth and concern toward her

mostly female, nonunionized employees as they sat

in their noisy cubicles,  elding call after call about

Mountain West’s products, bene ts, eligibility, and

claims. Because she had worked her way up from

a customer service representative position herself,

she could look her subordinates right in the eye after

they’d  elded a string of stressful calls and tell them

she knew exactly how they felt. She did her best to

offset the low pay by accommodating the women’s

needs with  exible scheduling, giving them frequent

breaks, and offering plenty of training opportunities

that kept them up-to-date in the health company’s

changing products and in the latest problem-solving

and customer service techniques.

Her motto was: “Always put yourself in the sub-

scriber’s shoes.” She urged representatives to take

the time necessary to thoroughly understand the

subscriber’s problem and do their best to see that it

was completely resolved by the call’s completion.

Their job was important, she told them. Subscribers

counted on them to help them negotiate the often

Byzantine complexities of their coverage. Evelyn’s

subordinates adored her, as demonstrated by the

10 percent turnover rate, compared to the typical

25 to 45 percent rate for customer service represen-

tatives. Mountain West subscribers were generally

satis ed, although Quinn did hear some occasional

grumbling about the length of time customers spent

on hold.

However, whatever her virtues, Gustafson

 rmly resisted all attempts to increase ef ciency

and lower costs in a department where salaries

accounted for close to 70 percent of the budget.

That’s where Erik Rasmussen came in. Upper-level

management charged him with the task of bring-

ing costs under control. Eager to do well in his

 rst management position, the hard-working, no-

nonsense young man made increasing the number

of calls per hour each representative handled a pri-

ority. For the  rst time ever, the company measured

the representatives’ performance against statistical

standards that emphasized speed, recorded the cus-

tomer service calls, and used software that gener-

ated automated work schedules based on historical

information and projected need. Ef cient, not  ex-

ible scheduling was the goal. In addition, the com-

pany cut back on training.

The results, Martin Quinn had to admit, were

mixed. With more ef cient scheduling and clear per-

formance standards in place, calls per hour increased

dramatically, and subscribers spent far less time on

hold. The department’s costs were  nally heading

downward, but department morale was spiraling

downward as well, with the turnover rate currently

at 30 percent and climbing. And Quinn was begin-

ning to hear more complaints from subscribers

who’d received inaccurate information from inex-

perienced representatives or representatives who

sounded rushed.

CHAPTER 14 LEADERSHIP 435

Leading

It was time for Rasmussen’s  rst performance

review. Quinn knew the young manager was about

to walk into his of ce ready to proudly recite the

facts and  gures that documented the department’s

increased ef ciency. What kind of an evaluation was

he going to give Rasmussen? Should he recommend

some midcourse corrections?

Questions

1. How would you describe Evelyn Gustafson’s lead-

ership style? What were its strengths and weak-

nesses? What were the sources of her in uence?

2. How would you describe Erik Rasmussen’s leader-

ship style as he tried to effect change? What are its

strengths and weaknesses? What are the sources of

his in uence?

3. If you were Martin Quinn, would you recommend

modi cations in Erik Rasmussen’s leadership style

that you would like him to adopt? Do you think

it will be possible for Rasmussen to make the nec-

essary changes? If not, why not? If you do think

change is possible, how would you recommend the

desired changes be facilitated?

SOURCES: Based on Gary Yukl, Leadership in Organizations, 4th ed.

(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998), pp. 66–67; and “Telephone

Call Centers: The Factory Floors of the 21st Century,” Knowledge @

Wharton (April 10, 2002): http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index

.cfm?fa=viewArticle&ID=540.

ch14

ON THE JOB VIDEO CASE

City of Greensburg, Kansas:

Leadership

After working in Oklahoma City as a parks director,

Steve Hewitt wanted to run an entire town. A smaller

community seemed the perfect place to get hands-on

leadership experience before tackling a bigger city,

so Hewitt took the city administrator position in his

hometown, Greensburg, Kansas (population: 1,500).

Standing in the remains of his kitchen, looking up at

the dark sky on May 4, 2007, he realized that he got

more than he’d bargained for.

Across town, Mayor Lonnie McCollum and his

wife clung to a mattress as their dream home was

ravaged. McCollum, beloved long-time resident, had

been the write-in candidate for mayor in the last elec-

tion and won unanimously. Midwesterners value

humility, and as traits go, McCollum was as humble

as they come. His quiet, referent power, bestowed on

him by the residents, had little to do with formal posi-

tion. In McCollum’s mind, he’d been drafted to serve,

and his job was to revive the dying town.

McCollum’s visionary idea was to transform

Greensburg into a city run on wind and solar

power. He convinced the city it needed a full-time

administrator to make big changes. Intense and fast-

talking, Hewitt provided the perfect complement to

McCollum’s slow, measured demeanor. Hewitt was

excited to help McCollum improve the town. Neither

could foresee how these plans would come into play

after the tornado.

Hewitt headed straight for command central that

ominous night to begin coordinating search and res-

cue efforts. McCollum knew Hewitt could lead in this

crisis, so he stayed with his injured wife.

By morning, everyone knew Greensburg was

gone. At a press conference, McCollum announced

that the town would rebuild as a model green com-

munity. Although the world cheered him on, residents

had mixed feelings. McCollum explained, “It’s a real

feeling to not have a place to keep you warm and

dry…they were impatient and they were afraid.”

Ultimately, the stress of the tornado took its toll on

McCollum, and he decided to resign. “They didn’t

need me; they had good leadership,” said McCollum,

referring to younger, tougher-skinned Hewitt.

Daniel Wallach, executive director of Greensburg

GreenTown, described Hewitt as the kind of guy

“you want taking the last shot in a basketball game…

He has incredible capacity and endurance and that’s

what has suited him perfectly for the role in this

community… to help bring it back.” While McCollum

provided the vision for rebuilding Greensburg,

Hewitt’s charismatic and transformational leadership

ensured that the former mayor’s vision became a

reality.

Three different mayors have held of ce since

McCallum resigned. To ensure no one impedes the

PART 5 LEADING436

ch14

BIZ FLIX VIDEO CASE

Doomsday

The Reaper Virus strikes Glasgow, Scotland, on

April 3, 2008. It spreads and devastates the population

throughout Scotland. Authorities seal off the borders,

not allowing anyone to enter or leave the country. No

aircraft  yovers are permitted. Social decay spreads,

and cannibalistic behavior develops among the few

remaining survivors. Eventually, no one is left alive in

the quarantined area. The Reaper Virus reemerges in

2032, this time in London, England. Classi ed satellite

images show life in Glasgow and Edinburgh. Prime

Minister John Hatcher (Alexander Siddig) and his

assistant Michael Canaris (David O’Hara) assign the

task of  nding the cure to Security Chief Bill Nelson

(Bob Hoskins).

Leadership

This sequence starts at the beginning of DVD Chap-

ter 4, “NO RULES, NO BACKUP” with a shot of the

Department of Domestic Security emblem. The  lm

cuts to Major Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra) standing in

the rain smoking a cigarette while waiting for Chief

Nelson. The sequence ends after Michael Canaris

leaves the helicopter while saying to Sinclair, “Then

you needn’t bother coming back.” He closes the heli-

copter’s door. Major Sinclair blows her hair from her

face while pondering his last statement. The  lm cuts

to the helicopter lifting off the tarmac.

What to Watch for and Ask Yourself

▪ Assess the behavior of both Major Sinclair and

Michael Canaris. Which leadership traits discussed

earlier and shown in Exhibit 14.3 does their behav-

ior show?

▪ Apply the behavioral approaches to leadership

discussed earlier in this chapter. Which parts apply

to Sinclair and Canaris’s behavior? Draw speci c

examples from the  lm sequence.

▪ Does this  lm sequence show any aspects of charis-

matic and transformational leadership? Draw some

examples from the sequence.

town’s progress, Hewitt found himself taking a crash

course on interpersonal in uence tactics and rational

persuasion. “It is what it is, but I have to work with

these people and we’re gonna get it done,” he said.

And he has done just that. Hewitt increased his staff

from 20 to 35 people and established full-time  re,

planning, and community development departments.

To keep Greensburg on the map, he spent hours

doing weekly interviews with media from all over the

world. At quitting time, he would go to the Federal

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) trailer he

shared with his wife and young son. “You know you

gotta not just be that team leader, you gotta be that

counselor, that friend, and you also gotta be the boss,”

said Hewitt, a true servant leader, underlining the

importance of simultaneously being people- and task-

oriented.

“He’s has been very open as far as information,”

said recovery coordinator Kim Alderfer. “He’s very

good about delegating authority. He gives you the

authority to do your job. He doesn’t have time to

micromanage.”

Hewitt wasn’t afraid to ruf e feathers. When peo-

ple opposed the new building codes, Hewitt found

the courage, through moral leadership, to say, “No.

You’re going to build it right and you’re going to do

it to code.” He claimed, “I’m dumb enough not to

care what people say, and young enough to have the

energy to get through it.”

Discussion Questions

1. Would Steve Hewitt be considered a Level 5

leader? Explain.

How does having two distinct leadership roles,

mayor and city administrator, create a challenging

environment for effective leadership?

3. Is Hewitt a high or low dominance leader? Why?

CHAPTER 14 LEADERSHIP 437

Leading

Leigh Buchanan, “Pat McGovern . . . 1.

For Knowing the Power of Respect,”

segment in “25 Entrepreneurs We

Love,” Inc Magazine (April 2004):

110–147; Melanie Warner, “Confes-

sions of a Control Freak,” Fortune

(September 4, 2000): 130–140.

Greg Jaffe, “Change of Command; A 2.

Marine Captain Trains Iraqi Colonel

to Take Over Fight,” The Wall Street

Journal, February 24, 2005; and

Jackie Spinner, “Training a New

Army from the Top Down; U.S. Mili-

tary Struggles to ëBuild Leaders,’”

Washington Post, November 1, 2005.

Kevin Kelleher, “How To . . . Spot 3.

Great Chief Executives,” Business 2.0

(April 2005): 42.

Gary Yukl, “Managerial Leadership: 4.

A Review of Theory and Research,”

Journal of Management 15 (1989):

251–289.

James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. 5.

Posner, “The Credibility Factor:

What Followers Expect from Their

Leaders,” Management Review

(January 1990): 29–33.

Joseph L. Badaracco, Jr. “A Lesson 6.

for the Times: Learning From Quiet

Leaders,” Ivey Business Journal

(January–February 2003): 1–6; and

Matthew Gwyther, “Back to the

Wall,” Management Today (February

2003): 58–61.

See J. Andrew Morris, Céleste M. 7.

Brotheridge, and John C. Urbanski,

“Bringing Humility to Leadership:

Antecedents and Consequences of

Leader Humility,” Human Relations

58, no. 10 (2005): 1323–1350; Linda

Tischler, “The CEO’s New Clothes,”

Fast Company (September 2005):

27–28; James C. Collins, From Good

to Great: Why Some Companies Make

the Leap . . . And Others Don’t (New

York: HarperCollins 2001); Charles

A. O’Reilly III and Jeffrey Pfeffer,

Hidden Value: How Great Companies

Achieve Extraordinary Results with

Ordinary People (Boston, MA:

Harvard Business School Press,

2000); Rakesh Khurana, “The Curse

of the Superstar CEO,” Harvard

Business Review (September 2002):

60–66, excerpted from his book,

Searching for a Corporate Savior:

The Irrational Quest for Charismatic

CEOs (Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press, 2002); and Joseph

Badaracco, Leading Quietly (Boston,

MA: Harvard Business School Press,

2002).

Center for Creative Leadership 8.

study, reported in Andre Martin,

“What Is Effective Leadership To-

day?” Chief Executive (July–August

2006): 24; and “The Demise of the

Heroic Leader,” Leader to Leader (Fall

2006): 55–56.

Jim Collins, “Level 5 Leadership: 9.

The Triumph of Humility and Fierce

Resolve,” Harvard Business Review

(January 2001): 67–76; Jim Collins,

“Good to Great,” Fast Company

(October 2001): 90–104; A. J. Vogl,

“Onward and Upward” (an inter-

view with Jim Collins), Across the

Board (September–October 2001):

29–34; and Jerry Useem, “Conquer-

ing Vertical Limits,” Fortune (Febru-

ary 19, 2001): 84–96.

Collins, “Level 5 Leadership.”10.

Judy B. Rosener, 11. America’s Com-

petitive Secret: Utilizing Women as

a Management Strategy (New York:

Oxford University Press, 1995),

pp. 129–135.

Rochelle Sharpe, “As Leaders, Wom-12.

en Rule,” BusinessWeek (November

20, 2000): 75–84.

Alice H. Eagly and Linda L. Carli, 13.

“The Female Leadership Advan-

tage: An Evaluation of the Evi-

dence,” The Leadership Quarterly 14

(2003): 807–834; Rosener, America’s

Competitive Secret; Judy B. Rosener,

“Ways Women Lead,” Harvard Busi-

ness Review (November–December

1990): 119–125; Sally Helgesen, The

Female Advantage: Women’s Ways

of Leadership (New York: Currency/

Doubleday, 1990); and Bernard M.

Bass and Bruce J. Avolio, “Shatter

the Glass Ceiling: Women May

Make Better Managers,” Human Re-

source Management 33, no. 4 (Winter

1994): 549–560.

Sharpe, “As Leaders, Women Rule,” 14.

75–84.

Kevin S. Groves, “Gender Differ-15.

ences in Social and Emotional Skills

and Charismatic Leadership,” Jour-

nal of Leadership and Organizational

Studies 11, no. 3 (2005): 30ff.

Gary Yukl and Richard Lepsinger, 16.

“Why Integrating the Leading and

Managing Roles Is Essential for

Organizational Effectiveness,” Orga-

nizational Dynamics 34, no. 4 (2005):

361–375.

Miguel Helft, “Can She Turn Yahoo 17.

Into, Well, Google?” The New York

Times, July 1, 2007; and Miguel

Helft, “Industry Insiders Praise

Yahoo Choice for Key Post,” The

New York Times, December 7, 2006.

G. A. Yukl,18. Leadership in Organiza-

tions (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall, 1981); and S. C. Kohs and K.

W. Irle, “Prophesying Army Promo-

tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 4

(1920): 73–87.

R. Albanese and D. D. Van Fleet,19. Or-

ganizational Behavior: A Managerial

Viewpoint (Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden

Press, 1983).

Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom 20.

Taber, “A Hierarchical Taxonomy of

Leadership Behavior: Integrating a

Half Century of Behavior Research,”

Journal of Leadership and Organiza-

tional Studies 9, no. 1 (2002): 13–32.

C. A. Schriesheim and B. J. Bird, 21.

“Contributions of the Ohio State

Studies to the Field of Leadership,”

Journal of Management 5 (1979):

135–145; and C. L. Shartle, “Early

Years of the Ohio State University

Leadership Studies,” Journal of Man-

agement 5 (1979): 126–134.

Don Wallace, “The Soul of a Sports 22.

Machine,” Fast Company (October

2003): 100–102; and Neil Hayes,

When the Game Stands Tall. The

Story of the De La Salle Spartans and

Football’s Longest Winning Streak

(Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd./North

Atlantic Books, 2005).

P. C. Nystrom, “Managers and the 23.

High-High Leader Myth,” Academy

of Management Journal 21 (1978):

325–331; and L. L. Larson, J. G.

Hunt, and Richard N. Osborn, “The

Great High-High Leader Behav-

ior Myth: A Lesson from Occam’s

Razor,” Academy of Management

Journal 19 (1976): 628–641.

R. Likert, “From Production- and 24.

Employee-Centeredness to Systems

1–4,” Journal of Management 5

(1979): 147–156.

Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton,25.

The Managerial Grid III (Houston,

TX: Gulf, 1985).

ch14

ENDNOTES

PART 5 LEADING438

Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. 26.

Blanchard, Management of Organi-

zational Behavior: Utilizing Human

Resources, 4th ed. (Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice Hall, 1982).

Robert Tomsho and John Hechinger, 27.

“Crimson Blues; Harvard Clash Pits

Brusque Leader Against Faculty,”

The Wall Street Journal, February

18, 2005; and Ruth R. Wisse, “Cross

Country; Coup d’ Ecole,” The Wall

Street Journal, February 23, 2006.

Fred E. Fiedler, “Assumed Similar-28.

ity Measures as Predictors of Team

Effectiveness,” Journal of Abnormal

and Social Psychology 49 (1954):

381–388; F. E. Fiedler, Leader At-

titudes and Group Effectiveness

(Urbana, IL: University of Illinois

Press, 1958); and F. E. Fiedler, A

Theory of Leadership Effectiveness

(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967).

Fred E. Fiedler and M. M. Chemers,29.

Leadership and Effective Management

(Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman,

1974).

Reported in George Anders, “The-30.

ory & Practice: Tough CEOs Often

Most Successful, a Study Finds,” The

Wall Street Journal, November 19,

2007.

Fred E. Fiedler, “Engineer the Job to 31.

Fit the Manager,” Harvard Business

Review 43 (1965): 115–122; and F.

E. Fiedler, M. M. Chemers, and L.

Mahar, Improving Leadership Effec-

tiveness: The Leader Match Concept

(New York: Wiley, 1976).

R. Singh, “Leadership Style and 32.

Reward Allocation: Does Least

Preferred Coworker Scale Measure

Tasks and Relation Orientation?”

Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance 27 (1983): 178–197; and

D. Hosking, “A Critical Evaluation of

Fiedler’s Contingency Hypotheses,”

Progress in Applied Psychology 1

(1981): 103–154.

S. Kerr and J. M. Jermier, “Substi-33.

tutes for Leadership: Their Meaning

and Measurement,” Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance 22

(1978): 375–403; and Jon P. Howell

and Peter W. Dorfman, “Leader-

ship and Substitutes for Leadership

among Professional and Nonprofes-

sional Workers,” Journal of Applied

Behavioral Science 22 (1986): 29–46.

Katherine J. Klein and Robert 34.

J. House, “On Fire: Charismatic

Leadership and Levels of Analysis,”

Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 2 (1995):

183–198.

Jay A. Conger and Rabindra N. 35.

Kanungo, “Toward a Behavioral

Theory of Charismatic Leader-

ship in Organizational Settings,”

Academy of Management Review

12 (1987): 637–647; Jaepil Choi, “A

Motivational Theory of Charismatic

Leadership: Envisioning, Empa-

thy, and Empowerment,” Journal

of Leadership and Organizational

Studies 13, no. 1 (2006): 24ff; and

William L. Gardner and Bruce J.

Avolio, “The Charismatic Relation-

ship: A Dramaturgical Perspective,”

Academy of Management Review 23,

no. 1 (1998): 32–58.

Robert J. House and Jane M. 36.

Howell, “Personality and Charisma-

tic Leadership,” Leadership Quarterly

3, no. 2 (1992): 81–108; and Jennifer

O’Connor, Michael D. Mumford,

Timothy C. Clifton, Theodore L.

Gessner, and Mary Shane Connelly,

“Charismatic Leaders and Destruc-

tiveness: A Historiometric Study,”

Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 4 (1995):

529–555.

Robert J. House, “Research Con-37.

trasting the Behavior and Effects of

Reputed Charismatic vs. Reputed

Non-Charismatic Leaders,” paper

presented as part of a symposium,

“Charismatic Leadership: Theory

and Evidence,” Academy of Man-

agement, San Diego, 1985.

Bernard M. Bass, “Theory of Trans-38.

formational Leadership Redux,”

Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 4 (1995):

463–478; Noel M. Tichy and Mary

Anne Devanna, The Transforma-

tional Leader (New York: John Wiley

& Sons, 1986); and Badrinarayan

Shankar Pawar and Kenneth K.

Eastman, “The Nature and Implica-

tions of Contextual Inﬂ uences on

Transformational Leadership: A

Conceptual Examination,” Academy

of Management Review 22, no. 1

(1997) 80–109.

The terms 39.

transactional and trans-

formational come fr

om James M.

Burns, Leadership (New York: Harper

& Row, 1978); and Bernard M. Bass,

“Leadership: Good, Better, Best,”

Organizational Dynamics 13 (Winter

1985): 26–40.

Richard L. Daft and Robert H. 40.

Lengel, Fusion Leadership: Unlocking

the Subtle Forces that Change People

and Organizations (San Francisco:

Berrett-Koehler, 1998).

Taly Dvir, Dov Eden, Bruce J. Avolio, 41.

and Boas Shamir, “Impact of Trans-

formational Leadership on Follower

Development and Performance: A

Field Experiment,” Academy of Man-

agement Journal 45, no. 4 (2002):

735–744.

Robert S. Rubin, David C. Munz, 42.

and William H. Bommer, “Leading

From Within: The Effects of Emotion

Recognition and Personality on

Transformational Leadership Behav-

ior,” Academy of Management Journal

48, no. 5 (2005): 845–858; and

Timothy A. Judge and Joyce E. Bono,

“Five-Factor Model of Personality

and Transformational Leadership,”

Journal of Applied Psychology 85,

no. 5 (October 2000): 751ff.

Rubin et al., “Leading from Within.”43.

Barbara Kellerman, “What Every 44.

Leader Needs to Know About Fol-

lowers,” Harvard Business Review

(December 2007): 84–91.

Robert E. Kelley, 45. The Power of Fol-

lowership (New York: Doubleday,

1992).

Ibid., 117–118.46.

Henry Mintzberg,47. Power In and

Around Organizations (Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1983); and

Jeffrey Pfeffer, Power in Organiza-

tions (Marshﬁ eld, MA: Pitman,

1981).

Jay A. Conger, “The Necessary Art 48.

of Persuasion,” Harvard Business

Review (May–June 1998): 84–95.

D. Kipnis, S. M. Schmidt, C. 49.

Swafﬁ n-Smith, and I. Wilkinson,

“Patterns of Managerial Inﬂ uence:

Shotgun Managers, Tacticians, and

Politicians,” Organizational Dynam-

ics (Winter 1984): 58–67.

These tactics are based on Kipnis et 50.

al., “Patterns of Managerial Inﬂ u-

ence”; and Robert B. Cialdini, “Har-

nessing the Science of Persuasion,”

Harvard Business Review (October

2001): 72–79.

Kipnis et al., “Patterns of Manage-51.

rial Inﬂ uence”; and Jeffrey Pfeffer,

Managing with Power: Politics and

In uence in Organizations (Boston:

Harvard Business School Press,

1992), chapter 13.

Ibid.52.

V. Dallas Merrell,53. Huddling: The In-

formal Way to Management Success

(New York: AMACOM, 1979).

CHAPTER 14 LEADERSHIP 439

Leading

Robert B. Cialdini,54. In uence: Science

and Practice, 4th ed. (Boston:

Pearson Allyn & Bacon, 2000).

Harvey G. Enns and Dean B. 55.

McFarlin, “When Executives Inﬂ u-

ence Peers, Does Function Matter?”

Human Resource Management 4,

no. 2 (Summer 2003): 125–142.

Daft and Lengel,56. Fusion Leadership.

Leigh Buchanan, “In Praise of 57.

Selﬂ essness: Why the Best Leaders

Are Servants,” Inc. Magazine (May

2007): 33–35.

Robert K. Greenleaf,58. Servant Leader-

ship: A Journey into the Nature of

Legitimate Power and Greatness

(Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1977).

Anne Fitzgerald, “Christmas Bonus 59.

Stuns Employees,” The Des Moines

www.desmoinesregister.com.

Buchanan, “In Praise of Selﬂ essness.”60.

Richard L. Daft,61. The Leadership

Experience, 3rd ed. (Cincinnati, OH:

South-Western, 2005), chapter 6.

Badaracco, “A Lesson for the Times: 62.

Learning From Quiet Leaders.”

Jim Collins, “The 10 Greatest CEOs 63.

of All Time,” Fortune (July 21, 2003):

54–68.