• In the 1940’s research began to focus on behavior patterns more than traits (characteristics) concluding that leaders are made not born. Traits contribute to but can not accurately predict effective leadership.
• Such research also determined that there is no one-best leadership style (i.e., behavioral leadership pattern); various were tested for universal application.
• The third major finding is that the effectiveness of any pattern of leadership behavior depends greatly on the situation at hand. Behavioral studies focused on the behavior patterns within the situation rather than leadership traits.
• 1957 - The Ohio State studies determined that there were only two independent dimensions of leader behavior: 1) consideration of group members, and 2) initiating structures to maximize output. Further research confirmed that there is no one-best leadership style.
• 1972 - University of Michigan studies sought to identify differences in effective and ineffective leaders. Two leadership styles evolved: 1) employee-centered and 2) job-centered (similar to Ohio State studies). This became the basis of further research.

• Leaders are either task-motivated or relationship-motivated; based on this a leader has one dominant style and resists changing that dominant style; “one style fits all.”
• Leaders must influence the leadership situation in order to create a match between the situation and their leadership control; and, control is a key element.
• Three factors contribute favorably to the leader’s situational control:
  • The quality of good relationships between a leader and followers, including trust.
  • A high degree of structure for the task to be performed by the workgroup.
  • Position power referring to the leader’s direct ability to influence work.
• Although research has mixed assessment of Fiedler’s model, there has been agreement:
  • to continue examination of the contingency nature of leadership; new elements to be assessed.
  • to affirm that there is no one-best leadership style.
  • to advise leaders to match their style to the situation.
  • also other findings have been advanced:
    • that employee-centered and job-centered are distinct styles in opposition to one another;
    • that leadership behavior may be meaningfully performed by peers in a group, rather than merely by the designated leader; and,
    • that within the situation other factors influence performance, not just workers and tasks.

• Their Grid has been used by many to present the options of both leadership styles and tasks. There are two criteria plotted on their Grid with concern for production as the horizontal axis and concern for people as the vertical axis. Each is measured from 1 (low) to 9 (high) and linked to demonstrate five distinct management/leadership styles; others, of course, are possible.
• The Grid has been criticized because it is two-dimensional, measuring only those two factors. Other studies, including this Congregational Leadership Grid, seek to enlarge the concept to a third “in-depth” dimension, enrich it to other leadership findings and leadership styles, and present the CLGrid as five tools to live out servant leadership.
• The 1991 version of the New Managerial Grid is presented below because it has been enduring and catalytic in the field of contingency leadership studies. Usually it is examined in the following order: 1,1; 9,1; 1,9; 5,5 and 9,9; summarized as follows--

  1,1 Impoverished Management: Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership.

  9,1 Authority-Obedience: Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.

  1,9 Country Club Management: Thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo.

  5,5 Organization Man Management: Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work while maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level.

  9,9 Team Management: Work accomplishment is from committed people; interdependence through a “common stake” in organization purpose leads to relationship of trust and respect.

• Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
  Re-read this abstract and underline or annotate with your thoughts. Look for ways to strengthen your leadership style(s).

• creating and communicating meaning.
• external focus--purpose on the outside of the organization.
• genuine caring about people.
• awareness of the larger context-systems thinking.
• clear, honest communication.

What Is Leadership/Leaders of Systems? (pp. 372-375)
Scholtes, not so much defines as, describes leadership:

What Is Leadership?
There is no formula for leadership. Leadership consists of more than the approaches, capabilities, and attributes talked about in books such as this.

Leadership is the presence and spirit of the individual who leads and the relationship created with those who are led. Good leadership accommodates the needs and values of those who need to be led. Good leadership takes into account the skills and capabilities of those with whom the leader shares leadership. Good leadership adapts to the purpose and future needs of the organization. Leadership is an art, an inner journey, a network of relationships, a mastery of methods, and much, much more. And because we cannot expect any single heroic individual to possess all these traits, leadership, ultimately, must be a system.

• Let the awareness of systems inform the leader's every plan and direction.
• Lead with purpose; give a reason to expect with vision.
• Lead through required technology and know-how.
• Lead in the workplace with relationship skills, teamwork processes, and a community atmosphere.
• Lead the social interactions of the enterprise.
• Lead a system of leadership; see to it that leadership occurs throughout the organization.
• Lead a flat organization that attaches remuneration to leadership performance--not promotion in the hierarchy.

Healing Workplaces (pp. 378-384)
According to Scholtes, what are the policies, practices, and environmental factors that make the workplace a healing and learning place? He describes eight:

• Clear, constant ennobling purpose
• Opportunity and expectation to grow
• Continuous improvement of methods and processes
• Mutual respect and trust among trustworthy adults
• Frequent, trustworthy communication and access to information
• A sense and experience of caring community
• Healthy participation that adds value to better decisions, to inclusive involvement, and clear expectations.

The work of Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1968) is reported as a foundational study of the continuum of leadership behavior in management control:

• from bass-centered use of authority.
• to subordinate-centered areas of freedom.
• on their model, others have developed an integrated approach to teamwork and consensus building.

• The healing leader has what Scholtes calls “workable trust”--a combined balance of “high-degree of competence” and “high degree of benevolence.” Other factors already described are also noted.

Close this window 

© 2006 servantleaderstoday.com; hosted and copyrighted by Lloyd Elder & Associates, Inc.
For full citation of referenced works, see Bibliography/Links at www.servantleaderstoday.com
Adapted by Lloyd Elder, Th.D., Founding Director, Moench Center for Church Leadership