Leadership and Change Management

LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE MANAGEMENT

ASSIGNMENT

Presented to

Dr. Malik

Presented by

Zeeshan Ishaq Khokhar

PGD-BM

Student ID: 6454

History Of Leadership:

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for centuries. History's greatest philosophical writings from Plato's Republic to Plutarch's Lives have explored the question "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the "trait theory of leadership".

The trait theory was explored at length in a number of works in the 19th century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton, whose works have prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. In Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869), he examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when moving from first degree to second degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the leader.

For decades, this trait-based perspective dominated empirical and theoretical work in leadership. Using early research techniques, researchers conducted over a hundred studies proposing a number of characteristics that distinguished leaders from nonleaders: intelligence, dominance, adaptability, persistence, integrity, socioeconomic status, and self-confidence, for example.

Leadership:

Leadership has been described as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task" Other in-depth definitions of leadership have also emerged.

Leadership is "organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal". The leader may or may not have any formal authority. Students of leadership have produced theories involving traits, situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values, charisma, and intelligence, among others.

Hunt demonstrates that leadership is immersed in a complex, dynamic, and interactive web, which he refers to as a "historical-contextual superstructure." He asserts that conceptions of leadership are integrally linked to various factors, including among others the nature of reality and ontological issues, stakeholder perspectives, and levels-of-analysis issues. Thus, how leadership is defined and studied will depend on one's conception of leadership. Hunt provides various examples of conceptions of leadership (e.g., leadership as cognition, leadership and culture, leadership development), which provide an organizational framework to be related to the other chapters of this book.

Hunt, James G. (Jerry)

The nature of leadership.(pp. 19-47)Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, IncAntonakis, John (Ed); Cianciolo, Anna T. (Ed); Sternberg, Robert J. (Ed), (2004). ix, 438 pp.

Trait theory of Leadership:

The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both successful and unsuccessful - and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting lists of traits are then compared to those of potential leaders to assess their likelihood of success or failure.
Scholars taking the trait approach attempted to identify physiological (appearance, height, and weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background), personality, self-confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence, decisiveness, judgment, and knowledge), task-related (achievement drive, initiative, and persistence), and social characteristics (sociability and cooperativeness) with leader emergence and leader effectiveness.
Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are different from those of the less effective leaders. Through many researches conducted in the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of core traits of
Successful leaders have been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to identify whether a person will be a successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people with leadership potential.

Among the core traits identified are:

Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energy and initiative

Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach shared goals

Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open

Self-confidence: Belief in one’s self, ideas, and ability

Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical abilities, and conceptually skilled

Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technical matters

Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severe psychological disorders.

Others: charisma, creativity and flexibility

Strengths/Advantages of Trait Theory:

It is naturally pleasing theory.

It is valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory.

It serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be assessed.

It gives a detailed knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the leadership process.

Limitations of the Trait Theory:

There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a ‘good’ or ‘successful’ leader

The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of successful leaders in various leadership positions have been identified. These descriptions are simply generalities.

There is also a disagreement over which traits are the most important for an effective leader

The model attempts to relate physical traits such as, height and weight, to effective leadership. Most of these factors relate to situational factors. For example, a minimum weight and height might be necessary to perform the tasks efficiently in a military leadership position. In business organizations, these are not the requirements to be an effective leader.

The theory is very complex

Implications of Trait Theory:

The trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people at all levels in all types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the theory to evaluate their position in the organization and to assess how their position can be made stronger in the organization. They can get an in-depth understanding of their identity and the way they will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the manager aware of their strengths and weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they can develop their leadership qualities.

Behavioral and style theories:

In response to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to research leadership as a set of behaviors, evaluating the behavior of successful leaders, determining a behavior taxonomy, and identifying broad leadership styles. David McClelland, for example, posited that leadership takes a strong personality with a well-developed positive ego. To lead, self-confidence and high self-esteem are useful, perhaps even essential.

A graphical representation of the managerial grid model

The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964 and suggests five different leadership styles, based on the leaders' concern for people and their concern for goal achievement.

The classic Ohio State and Michigan studies on leadership were the prime example of and the watershed event for the development of behavior theory in leadership research. Hemphill (1950) and others proceeded to discern from factor analysis research two main elements of leadership behavior: consideration and initiation of structure. The Michigan studies verified these findings with data describing relationship building and task-focused orientations. From these studies emerged the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire which assisted researchers in their goal of understanding leader behaviour (Hemphill & Coons, 1957). From these beginnings, Stogdill and Coons (1957) edited a series of research efforts describing and measuring leader behavior. Jay (1967) popularized managerial tactics by employing the advice and wisdom of Niccolo Machiavelli. Blake and Mouton (1964) developed a behaviorally-based grid describing leadership behavior and positing an ideal leader type based on the two factors of the Ohio State studies. Gardner’s (1987) review of the tasks of leadership moves the discussion from management to leadership, but retains the focus on leader behavior. In many ways, writers on total quality management (Deming, 1986; Juran, 1989) add the behaviour approach to good managerial leadership. Gardner’s (1990) argument that most of leadership is learned reflects a behavioural approach.

Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal work on the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers evaluated the performance of groups of eleven-year-old boys under different types of work climate. In each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of group decision making, praise and criticism (feedback), and the management of the group tasks (project management) according to three styles: authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire.

Transactional and transformational theories:

Transformational leadership is a type of leadership style that leads to positive changes in those who follow. Transformational leaders are generally energetic, enthusiastic and passionate. Not only are these leaders concerned and involved in the process; they are also focused on helping every member of the group succeed as well.

The History of Transformational Leadership

The concept of transformational leadership was initially introduced by leadership expert and presidential biographer James MacGregor Burns.1 According to Burns, transformational leadership can be seen when “leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation." Through the strength of their vision and personality, transformational leaders are able to inspire followers to change expectations, perceptions and motivations to work towards common goals.

Later, researcher Bernard M. Bass expanded upon Burns original ideas to develop what is today referred to as Bass’ Transformational Leadership Theory.2 According to Bass, transformational leadership can be defined based on the impact that it has on followers. Transformational leaders, Bass suggested, garner trust, respect and admiration from their followers.

The Components of Transformational Leadership

Bass also suggested that there were four different components of transformational leadership.

Intellectual Stimulation – Transformational leaders not only challenge the status quo; they also encourage creativity among followers. The leader encourages followers to explore new ways of doing things and new opportunities to learn.

Individualized Consideration – Transformational leadership also involves offering support and encouragement to individual followers. In order to foster supportive relationships, transformational leaders keep lines of communication open so that followers feel free to share ideas and so that leaders can offer direct recognition of each followers unique contributions.

Inspirational Motivation – Transformational leaders have a clear vision that they are able to articulate to followers. These leaders are also able to help followers experience the same passion and motivation to fulfill these goals.

Idealized Influence – The transformational leaders serves as a role model for followers. Because followers trust and respect the leader, they emulate the leader and internalize his or her ideals.

Riggio, R.E. (2009, March 24). Are you a transformational leader. Psychology Today. Found online at

CONTINGENCY THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP:

Both trait and behavioral theories tried to identify the one best leader or style for all situations. By the
late 1960s, it became apparent that there is no such universal answer. Predicting leadership success involved something more complex than isolating a few traits or preferable behaviors. It was one thing
to say that leadership effectiveness depended on the situation and another to be able to isolate
situational conditions. Leadership effectiveness depends on a combination of the:
• Leader
• Followers
• Situational factors
During Last 5-6 decades, more than 65 leadership classification systems have been developed. Most
agree that leadership effectiveness depends on the leader, the followers, and situation variables. Leaders in different situations need different interests, values, and skills. A leader in a bank differs from one in a factory. Situational factors include the job performed, the workplace culture, and the overall environment.

Leadership results when… the ideas and deeds of the leader match the needs and expectations of the
follower in a particular situation e.g. Quaid-e-Azam, Nelson Mandela, Adolf Hitler, Sir Syed Ahmad
Khan. For leadership to take place, the leader, followers, and situation must match.
The Contingency Approach is based on four assumptions:
• The appropriate leadership style depends on the requirements of the situation.
• Leadership can be learned.
• Successful leadership involves understanding situational contingencies.
• The match between the leader’s style, personality or behavior, and the situation leads to
effectiveness.

The most effective leadership style for my personality:

“I feel that the most effective leadership style for almost every personality is Contingency style of leadership”

Because, To predict the leadership success involved something more complex than isolating a few traits or preferable behaviors. It was one thing to say that leadership effectiveness depended on the situation and another to be able to isolate situational conditions.

Both trait and behavioral theories tried to identify the one best leader or style for all situations. By the
late 1960s, it became apparent that there is no such universal answer. Leadership effectiveness depends on a combination of the:
• Leader
• Followers
• Situational factors
During Last 5-6 decades, more than 65 leadership classification systems have been developed. Most
agree that leadership effectiveness depends on the leader, the followers, and situation variables. Leaders in different situations need different interests, values, and skills. A leader in a bank differs from one in a factory. Situational factors include the job performed, the workplace culture, and the overall environment.

Change management:

Change management is a structured approach to shifting/transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations from a current state to a desired future state. It is an organizational process aimed at helping employees to accept and embrace changes in their current business environment. In project management, change management refers to a project management process where changes to a project are formally introduced and approved.

Kotter defines change management as the utilization of basic structures and tools to control any organizational change effort. Change management's goal is to minimize the change impacts on workers and avoid distractions.

History of Change Management

Linda Ackerman Anderson, co-author of Beyond Change Management, described how in the late 1980s and early 1990s top leaders were growing dissatisfied with the failures of creating and implementing changes in a top-down fashion. They created the role of the change leader to take responsibility for the people side of the change. February of 1994 is the unofficial beginning of the Change Management Industry, with the publication of the first "State of the Change Management Industry" report in the Consulting News.

McKinsey consultant Julien Phillips first published a change management model in 1982 in the journal Human Resource Management, though it took a decade for his change management peers to catch up with him.

Marshak credits the big 6 accounting firms and management consulting firms with creating the change management industry when they branded their reengineering services groups as change management services in the late 1980s.

Examples of Organizational Change

Mission changes,
Strategic changes,
Operational changes (including Structural changes),
Technological changes,
Changing the attitudes and behaviors of personnel

As a multidisciplinary practice that has evolved as a result of scholarly research, Organizational Change Management should begin with a systematic diagnosis of the current situation in order to determine both the need for change and the capability to change. The objectives, content, and process of change should all be specified as part of a Change Management plan.

Change Management processes may include creative marketing to enable communication between change audiences, but also deep social understanding about leadership’s styles and group dynamics. As a visible track on transformation projects, Organizational Change Management aligns groups’ expectations, communicates, integrates teams and manages people training. It makes use of performance metrics, such as financial results, operational efficiency, leadership commitment, communication effectiveness, and the perceived need for change to design appropriate strategies, in order to avoid change failures or solve troubled change projects.

Successful change management is more likely to occur if the following are included.

Benefits management and realization to define measurable stakeholder aims, create a business case for their achievement (which should be continuously updated), and monitor assumptions, risks, dependencies, costs, return on investment, dis-benefits and cultural issues affecting the progress of the associated work.
Effective Communications that informs various stakeholders of the reasons for the change (why?), the benefits of successful implementation (what is in it for us, and you) as well as the details of the change (when? where? who is involved? how much will it cost? etc.).
Devise an effective education, training and/or skills upgrading scheme for the organization.
Counter resistance from the employees of companies and align them to overall strategic direction of the organization.
Provide personal counseling (if required) to alleviate any change related fears.
Monitoring of the implementation and fine-tuning as required.

Change management and business development tips

Here are some rules for effective management of change. Managing organizational change will be more successful if you apply these simple principles. Achieving personal change will be more successful too if you use the same approach where relevant. Change management entails thoughtful planning and sensitive implementation, and above all, consultation with, and involvement of, the people affected by the changes. If you force change on people normally problems arise. Change must be realistic, achievable and measurable. These aspects are especially relevant to managing personal change. Before starting organizational change, ask yourself: What do we want to achieve with this change, why, and how will we know that the change has been achieved? Who is affected by this change, and how will they react to it? How much of this change can we achieve ourselves, and what parts of the change do we need help with? These aspects also relate strongly to the management of personal as well as organizational change.