Behavioural theories begin to consider the effect of the leaders behaviour on performance and try to identify what behaviours effective leaders show. The behavioural approach was developed in the late 1950’s.
The Ohio State studies (Haplin et al 1957) carried out detailed observations and self reports from leaders and subordinates of leadership behaviour. They accumulated hundreds of lists and found that these could be condensed into 2 main categories of behaviour, initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure refers to those leadership behaviours that define and organise the structure of the work situation. Consideration refers to showing concern for feelings attitudes and needs of subordinates by developing rapport, self respect and trust, asking subordinates for opinions and encouraging communication to build up self confidence, implement suggestions. Some leaders can only passes consideration, others possess initiating structure, and others possess both.
The Michigan studies (Kahn and Katz 1960) were also looking at behaviour that effective leaders possess in a large insurance organisation. They found two main categories of behaviour, task orientated and relationship. Task orientated leader concentrates on performing jobs, focusing on tasks, standards and supervising jobs. Relationship orientated leaders are concerned with the employees well being and involve them in making suggestions. The main difference between the Michigan studies and the Ohio studies is the Michigan ones believes the relationship behaviours are made more effective than the task ones.
The contingency theories of leadership examine the interaction of the characteristics of the leader and the situation, stating that effective leadership depends on the proper match between the two. The contingency theories build on the behavioural theories, as the style of leadership has to be identified first. They are different because they recognise no one best style of leadership. Rather leader effectiveness depends, or is contingent upon, the interaction of leader behaviour and the situation. Fieldler 1967 contigency model of leadership states the effective leadership depends upon a match between behavioural style and the degree to which the work situation gives control and influence to the leader.
Evaluate psychological theories of leadership
The theories that I have looked at seem to only be theories and show very little evidence to support them. For example the Trait approach was finally concluded that there is no difference solid trait that is found in all leaders (Hollander 1985). Although Stogdill’s identification of a number of leadership tendencies, they still conclude that no reliable or coherent pattern of characteristics can be identified. Also the Great Man- Woman theory failed to produce any solid evidence to support the theory.
A great deal of research has been done on the two types of leadership style put forward and they are in agreement that leadership behaviours do fall into two categories Fieshman and Harris). These studies have also found that initiating structure is correlated to work performance, but is negatively correlated to job satisfaction, and leads to an increase in staff turnover. Consideration leaders tend to be positively correlated to job satisfaction, and negatively correlated to work performance.
The contingency theory worked in practice in the laboratory but when put into practice didn’t seem to have the same results. The reasons why they carried out the experiment in a laboratory is because it is very easy to manipulate the independent variable. Also it increases control over the external variables. Also it is very easy to replicate the experiments. Problems are that it lack ecological validity and this is why the results found in the lab were not replicated in the true situation. Also the results can be biased by demand characteristics.
Self-reports were used in the contingency theory to gather evidence. This is an easy way to collect a large amount of data. People usually feel that they can answer truthfully because they are not under pressure from the interviewer. They are also not under the influence of demand characteristics. However people do not always fill them in, and if the subject is to do with their boss they may lie incase they are not completely confidential.
Questionnaires were used in the trait approach, questionnaires are useful because they are highly replicable and easy to score- unless open ended questions. Problems are that they can be biased to socially desirable answers, acquiescence and response set.
The Ohio/ Michigan studies were very useful because they did stimulate a lot of research into leadership behaviour. This is important for psychological research because it shows that it is showing something new that people are interested in and that they want to find more out about. Another thing that supports these studies is that they are in agreement and so they support each other. However they are too simplistic in their approach. They cannot make firm predictions about relationships between leaders behaviours and specific work outcomes in all types of work situations.
An issue in the contingency theory is reliability. The LPC score does not show great reliability since it is liable to change over time. This may be due to the fact the leadership style is determined by self-report measures. It is also unclear what the LPC score is a measure of since it only infers a leaders orientation from feelings about a co-worker rather than directly assessing the task and relationship orientation (Ashour 1973). The model does try to improve the model, and inspire the formulation of alternative contingency theories.
Based on the evidence you have presented outline a training program which could improve leadership.
Leadership needs to be improved to increase productivity of companies and also decrease staff turnover.
Fiedler and Chemers 1984 developed a leadership program that consisted of a workbook containing an LPC measure, leadership problems that the leader must analyse and solve, directions of how to assess elements of the leader’s situation, and suggestions for helping subordinates improve performance. It teaches managers to recognise their own leadership orientation using the LPC score and then trains them to recognise those situations in which they are most likely to succeed. If a mismatch occurs suggestions are made for changing the situation to provide more appropriate fit.
In the training program I would also teach them about the uses of the Vroom and Yetton decision model. I think this would help leaders who only tended to use one type of decision-making strategy. I think this would help them decide the correct way to make decisions, and show them more effective ways. This model is said to consider how to maximise the potential benefits and minimise the potential costs. The leader selects the best approach by answering some questions about the situation. These relate from the quality of the decision to the acceptance of the decision.
Using the trait approach the participant could be asked to list the qualities they believe are essential for their job, e.g. nursery teacher active, quick, skilful etc. Using these traits they could look at how to improve these traits and use them more in their work. I think once they are aware of the necessary traits they can try to use them more effectively. Also in job interviews if the interviewer knew what traits to look for in the applicant they could find a more effective employee.
The behavioural theories could be used to educate people into the types of leadership categories of behaviour, initiating structure and consideration. If they were shown the benefits and flaws of each style and how there is a need for a mix of each style of behaviour, they could become more effective leaders.
I think that leadership is something that people presume can't be taught it is something that is innate or that is learnt at a very young age. If people understand that there is ways of making their leadership a lot more productive I think they would try to learn. If they are shown the research done by psychologists they can at least think for themselves how to improve their own personal behaviour.