Too simplistic

This Theory is reflective of the negative controlling parent which brings out the negative adaptive child who is withdrawn rebellious etc. McGregor suggested that Theory Y would empower employees and would increase motivation 

Limitations:

Although the theory was written nearly 60 years ago, it fits well with the empowering and post-heroic leadership that we will discuss in Topic 5

The grid is based on two aspects of leadership behaviour:

1.Concern for production: task-oriented behaviours such as clarifying roles, scheduling work, measuring outputs

2.Concern for people: people-centred behaviour such as building trust, camaraderie, a friendly atmosphere

Blake and Mouton assumed that people and production are complementary rather than mutually exclusive.

Leaders must integrate these concerns if they want to achieve better performance

In theory there are 81 positions in the grid but the main focus is on 1.1, 1.9, 9.1, 9.9 and 5.5

1.1 

This is an impoverished management laissez faire this is a manager and leader who doesn't care and is happy with the bare minimum.

1.9 

An imbalance where the concern of people is overtaken called country club management the focus here is us being liked and people being happy but since there is no concern about production it is unsustainable.

9.1 

An authoritarian environment similar to theory x it is all about task efficiency and has no regard for the people it is unstainable 

5.5 

Equal concerns this is tried and tested techniques and there is no risk that is not maximum efficiency it is playing it safe.

9.9 

This is the ideal as it has otium concern for people and priorities production as well and can openly explore new routes and alternatives not playing safe like 5.5 which is why this is the ideal solution.

 Limitations:

These studies suggest that leadership is accessible for all people and is therefore a matter of learning. Therefore many leadership courses have been based around this model. However, as Northouse (2006) argues, there is an assumption that the team management style (9.9) is the best, and yet:

1.This claim is not substantiated by the research

2.It doesn’t take into account the characteristics of the situation and the nature of the followers

Also, when a manager goes on a course and starts adopting a completely new behaviour/style, this can be perceived as artificial/unauthentic by their team members and actually erode the trust or credibility of the leader. Give my own example after I attended a training on Non-Violent Communication (Marshall Rosenberg). Same with coaching skills.

However, as we will see with Goleman in this coming section, unlike IQ (largely genetic and changes little from childhood), the skills of emotional intelligence can be learnt at any age. It’s not easy, it takes practice and commitment (if people don’t see the value of the change, they won’t make the effort), but it is possible to grow your emotional intelligence. 

•A model developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard in 1969

•No single best style of leadership: effective leadership varies not only with the person or group that is being influenced, it also depends on the task that needs to be accomplished

•The model rests on two fundamental concepts: the leadership style and the individual or group’s Performance Readiness level

•Telling (or Directing): this is the most direct form of leadership. The leader of the group simply tells each member what to do, and how they would like them to do it. This approach is less collaborative, and more directive in nature. There is very little working together between the leader and the team members, instead the leader simply provides specific instructions for the team members to follow through with.

 

•Selling (or Coaching): this is one with a little more room for collaboration. While the team members are still directed by the leader, the leader is more likely to engage with the team members along the way. The 'Selling' title comes from the idea that the leader may need to convince some of the team members to follow his or her lead and do things in a specific way.

 

•Participating (or Supporting): this is a process where the leader tries to build relationships with those on the team - really becoming part of the team. This is quite a departure from the Telling style, as the leader will blend in more fully with those who are working as part of the team. In fact, the leader might not even make all of the decisions in this style, perhaps deferring at certain points to members of the team with more experience or knowledge in a given area. 

 

•Delegating: this represents the leader passing on most of the responsibilities for a given project or task to various members of the team. This style is something that leaders of experienced teams will often use, since the employees that are being led may not need much in the way of direction at this point in their careers.

 

 

4 corresponding maturity levels
The maturity levels describe those who are making up the team. To identify these levels, the abbreviations M1, M2, M3, and M4 are used. Below is a quick description of each of these four levels.

 

• M1: These are the least experienced of workers. They will need to be instructed on how to do just about everything in the task they are responsible for. While this usually means a leader is dealing with younger and less experienced employees, it could also be that the employees simply don't have much knowledge or background in the task at hand for a specific project. This maturity level matches up with the Telling leadership style, as the employees at this point will require complete direction for almost every task.

 

• M2: Moving up a step, these are still inexperienced people who possess only slightly more knowledge and skill than those at the M1 level. Maturity is not only a measure of the ability to deal with a task, but the willingness to take on the task in the first place. M2 team members are those who are more eager to work on a job, even if they aren't yet ready to do it correctly without the help of the leader of the group. The Selling leadership style is the proper match when dealing with M2 level team members. 

 

• M3: Getting close to the top of the scale, this group would include employees who are excited to work on a job and have most of the skill they need to get it done right. While they might not be able to quite get all of the job done without some help (that’s why H&B calls them “unwilling” i.e. they don’t take full responsibility perhaps due to aa lack of confidence) they can get most of the way their on their own. The Participating style is the one that matches with M3 individuals, because they don't need full direction and are more able to engage with the leader for positive collaboration.

 

• M4: At the top of the scale, those that are rated as M4 are completely capable of handling a task - and they know that they can get the job done without the help of the leader. Delegating is the leadership style of choice at this point simply because there is no need to be more involved than that. The team members have confidence, and expect to work independently.

 

The Hersey and Blanchard model stresses the flexibility of the leaders: they need to learn to lead in differently with different employees depending on their needs. Therefore, the leaders need to learn (through development initiatives) many styles and learn to diagnose the needs of their employees. 

John Adair is considered an authority in the UK on leadership and leadership development in organisations. 

Believes that leadership can be taught and that it is a transferable skill (his work was instrumental in overturning Great Men theories)

It is a model that contrasts management (all about control and systems) and leadership

For leaders to be effective, they must: 

1.Achieve the task

2.Build and maintain the team

3.Develop individuals

This model is very widely-taught and used globally, particularly in the United Kingdom. 

Leaders need to be attentive to task needs, group needs and individual needs. The most effective leaders balance all three areas but they may need to vary the degree of emphasis given to each of the three components in response to the situation at any point in time. 

Task: Achieving the objectives of the work group; Defining group tasks; Organising the work, duties and responsibilities; Controlling quality and checking performance => achieving the task builds the teams and gives satisfaction to individuals

Team: Maintaining morale and building team spirit; Maintaining standards and discipline;

Training the group; Systems of communication within the group => when the team needs are met, the team is cohesive, performance is high and individuals are satisfied

Individual: Meeting the needs of the individual members of the group; Attending to personal problems; Giving praise and status; Reconciling conflicts between group needs and needs of the individual => if individual needs are met, the team is cohesive and performance is high

A model developed by Fiedler (1964, 1967) 

The theory states that a leader's success is contingent on two factors:

-               the leadership style, which is the leader's typical way of interacting with members of the group

-               the situational control, which is the degree to which the leader has control over the group, the task, and the outcome.

 It has become an effective tool to match leaders and situations

(He) Created the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) score

Fred Fiedler studied leadership styles of many leaders who worked in different environments, mainly in military organizations. He studied hundreds of leaders and collected data on their leadership style, the situations in which they worked, and whether they were effective in their work. His theory shows which leadership styles works best or worst under a given situation. It has become an effective tool to match leaders and situations.

•Leaders want close interpersonal relationships

•If the relationships need to improve, they will act in a supportive manner

•Accomplishing the task is less important than developing and maintaining good relationships

•Leaders want to accomplish the objectives of the task

•They show task-oriented behaviours whenever there are task problems

•Establishing good relationships is secondary, and only becomes important when there are no serious task problems