Leadership Models
Leadership models help
us to understand what makes leaders act the way they do
in certain situations. The ideal is not to lock yourself in to a type of behavior
discussed in the model, but to realize that every situation calls for a different
approach or behavior to be taken. Two models will be discussed, the Four
Framework Approach and the Managerial Grid.
In the Four Framework
Approach, Bolman and Deal (3)
suggest that leaders display
leadership behaviors in one of four types of frameworks: Structural, Human Resource,
Political, or Symbolic. The style can either be effective or ineffective, depending upon the
chosen behavior in certain situations.
|
|
Structural Framework -
In an effective
leadership situation the leader is a social
architect whose leadership style is analysis
and design. In an ineffective leadership
situation the leader is a petty tyrant whose
leadership style is details. Structural
Leaders focus on structure, strategy,
environment, implementation,
experimentation, and adaptation.
|
|
|
Human Resource Framework -
In an
effective leadership situation the leader is
a catalyst and servant whose leadership
style is support, advocate, and
empowerment. In an ineffective leadership
situation the leader is a pushover, whose
leadership style is abdication and fraud.
Human Resource Leaders believe in
people and communicate that belief; they
are visible and accessible; they empower,
increase participation, support, share
information, and move decision making
down into the organization.
|
|
|
Political Framework -
In an effective
leadership situation the leader is an
advocate, whose leadership style is
coalition and building. In an ineffective
leadership situation the leader is a hustler,
whose leadership style is manipulation.
Political leaders clarify what they want and
what they can get; they assess the
distribution of power and interests; they
build linkages to other stakeholders; use
persuasion first, then use negotiation and
coercion only if necessary.
|
|
|
Symbolic Framework -
In an effective
leadership situation the leader is a
prophet, whose leadership style is
inspiration. In an ineffective leadership
situation the leader is a fanatic or fool,
whose leadership style is smoke and
mirrors. Symbolic leaders view
organizations as a stage or theater to play
certain roles and give impressions; these
leaders use symbols to capture attention;
they try to frame experience by providing
plausible interpretations of experiences;
they discover and communicate a vision.
|
This model suggests that
leaders can be put into one of these four categories and
there are times when one approach is appropriate and times when it would not be.
Any one of these approaches alone would be inadequate. We should be conscious
of all four approaches and not just rely on one. For example, during a major
organization change, a structural leadership style may be more effective than a
visionary leadership style; while during a period when strong growth is needed, the
visionary approach may be better. We also need to understand ourselves as each
of us tends to have a preferred approach. We need to be conscious of this at all
times and be aware of the limitations of our favored approach.
The Blake and Mouton Managerial
Grid (4)
uses two axis. "Concern for people" is
plotted using the vertical axis and "Concern for task" is along the horizontal axis. They
both have a range of 1 to 9. The notion that just two dimensions can describe a
managerial behavior has the attraction of simplicity. These two dimensions can be
drawn as a graph or grid:
Distribution of rôles
McCann's and Margerison's work has produced the following data on a population of
3730
managers from the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South-east Asia:
|
Team rôle
|
Proportion(%)
|
|
Creator-innovator
|
9.2
|
|
Explorer-promoter
|
8.7
|
|
Assessor-developer
|
17.5
|
|
Thruster-organizer
|
26.5
|
|
Concluder-producer
|
26.7
|
|
Controller-inspector
|
7.5
|
|
Upholder-maintainer
|
1.7
|
|
Reporter-adviser
|
2.1
|
71% of the sample falls on the right of the Wheel since they have a common preference
for
organizing. However, as McCann points out, these people do not always have a natural capacity for
listening and their general weakness in communication is responsible for failing to achieve a truly
high performance. Further, a company which fails to listen to the creators and innovators can find
itself in trouble in the long run.
Finally, it's well worth taking a look through the characteristics of the people on
the Wheel, if you
haven't done so already. See if you can recognize yourself and people you know.
1. Dialogue This!
