Week 2 Leadership and Interpersonal Skills

What is the core idea of traditional leadership theories?

Traditional leadership theories try to explain what makes someone an effective leader by focusing on traits, skills, behaviours, styles, and the fit between leader and situation. They move from asking “who is a leader?” to “what do leaders do?” and later “when does a leadership style work best?” This makes Week 2 useful for analysing both leaders themselves and the context they operate in.

What is Great Man Theory?

Great Man Theory argues that leaders are born, not made, and that leadership comes from natural qualities possessed by exceptional individuals. It is historically linked to monarchies, divine right, bloodlines, caste systems, and male-dominated leadership. The term “Great Man” reflects the social and gender exclusions of its time rather than a universal truth about leadership.

What are the main criticisms of Great Man Theory?

Great Man Theory is criticised because it is deterministic, elitist, and historically gendered. It ignores the fact that even hereditary leaders were trained in warfare, diplomacy, and governance, which contradicts the idea that leadership is purely innate. It also overlooks context, society, and the role of followers in producing leadership.

What is Trait Theory?

Trait Theory moved away from simply saying leaders are born and instead asked which specific traits leaders possess. Researchers identified recurring traits such as intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, sociability, and emotional stability. It focuses on the individual leader and assumes some personal characteristics are associated with leadership emergence or effectiveness.

What did Galton (1869) argue about leadership?

Galton (1869) argued that leadership runs in families, linking leadership to inherited ability. This reflects early biological and hereditary assumptions about leadership. However, later research challenged this by showing that leadership is also shaped by education, social conditions, opportunity, and institutional systems.

What did Stogdill contribute to Trait Theory?

Stogdill’s research showed that leadership traits include intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability. However, his work also suggested that traits alone do not guarantee leadership effectiveness. This helped weaken the idea that there is one fixed list of traits that produces successful leaders.

How does Judge et al. (2002) link Trait Theory to the Big Five?

Judge et al. (2002) linked leadership traits to the Big Five personality factors: openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. This gave Trait Theory a stronger psychological basis. However, personality traits still do not prove that someone will be an effective leader in every context.

What are the strengths of Trait Theory?

Trait Theory is intuitively appealing because it fits cultural ideas of strong, heroic leaders. It has a long research tradition and gives individuals a useful benchmark for self-reflection and leadership development. It also helps identify qualities that may support leadership, such as confidence, integrity, and sociability.

What are the weaknesses of Trait Theory?

Trait Theory has no definitive trait list and weak evidence linking traits directly to performance outcomes. It overemphasises the individual and often ignores context, followers, culture, and power structures. Early research was also methodologically weak and often reflected gender bias.

What is the Skills Approach to leadership?

The Skills Approach argues that leadership depends on abilities that can be learned and developed. Katz defined skills as the ability to use knowledge and competencies to accomplish objectives. This approach is important because it shifts leadership away from fixed personality and towards development, training, and practice.

What are Katz’s three leadership skills?

Katz identified three key leadership skills: technical, human, and conceptual. Technical skills involve specialist knowledge, human skills involve working effectively with people, and conceptual skills involve strategic thinking and seeing the organisation as a whole. Human skills are important at every leadership level.

How do leadership skills vary by organisational level?

At supervisory level, technical and human skills are most important, while conceptual skills are less central. At middle management level, all three skills need to be balanced. At top leadership level, technical skills become less important, while human and conceptual skills become essential for strategic leadership.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Skills Approach?

The Skills Approach makes leadership learnable, accessible, and development-focused. It is useful because it highlights the importance of interpersonal capability, especially human skills. However, it has weak predictive value, can be difficult to test, and still includes trait-like elements such as motivation and personality.

What are Behavioural and Style Theories?

Behavioural and Style Theories shift attention from who leaders are to what leaders actually do. They focus on observable behaviour, especially task behaviour and relationship behaviour. This matters because behaviour can be observed, measured, trained, and modified more easily than personality traits.

What is task behaviour in leadership?

Task behaviour focuses on getting the job done through organising work, defining roles, setting goals, clarifying expectations, and monitoring performance. It is linked to structure, productivity, and control. A leader high in task behaviour may be effective when clarity, deadlines, and coordination are needed.

What is relationship behaviour in leadership?

Relationship behaviour focuses on supporting followers, showing empathy, building trust, encouraging participation, and creating psychological safety. It is linked to morale, commitment, and positive human relationships. A leader high in relationship behaviour may be effective where motivation, collaboration, and trust are needed.

What did the Ohio State Studies find?

The Ohio State Studies identified two independent leadership dimensions: initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure refers to task-focused behaviours such as defining roles and setting deadlines. Consideration refers to relationship-focused behaviours such as listening, approachability, and concern for employee welfare.

What did the University of Michigan Studies find?

The University of Michigan Studies identified product orientation and employee orientation. Product orientation focuses on output, technical tasks, and completion, while employee orientation focuses on people, individual needs, and relationship quality. The studies suggested employee orientation often produced better outcomes, although findings were not universally consistent.

What are authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles?

Authoritarian leadership centralises power and uses clear hierarchy, one-way communication, and strong control. Democratic leadership shares power, encourages participation, and involves groups in decision-making. Laissez-faire leadership is low-control and non-interventionist, giving followers minimal guidance or direction.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of authoritarian leadership?

Authoritarian leadership can be effective in crisis, emergency, military, or high-risk settings because it enables speed, decisiveness, clarity, and accountability. However, it can suppress dissent, reduce feedback, create fear, and increase blind spots. Without challenge mechanisms, mistakes may persist and escalate.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of democratic leadership?

Democratic leadership can improve decision quality, morale, innovation, commitment, and buy-in because it uses multiple perspectives. However, it can be slower, blur accountability, create diffusion of responsibility, and become inefficient in crisis. It can also create only an illusion of involvement if employee input does not genuinely affect outcomes.

What does the “You said, we did” board example show?

The blank “You said, we did” board shows that democratic leadership must be real, not just symbolic. A leader may claim to involve employees, but if staff do not trust the system or believe input matters, participation will not happen. This shows that trust and psychological safety are essential for democratic leadership.

What is Vroom’s Decision Continuum?

Vroom’s Decision Continuum argues that leadership is not simply autocratic or democratic. Leaders can decide alone, consult individuals, consult groups, facilitate discussion, or delegate decisions. This shows that leadership style can be graded depending on the decision, context, urgency, and competence of followers.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Behavioural Theory?

Behavioural Theory is useful because it expands leadership beyond traits and focuses on observable task and relationship behaviours. It gives a practical framework for analysing leadership style. However, research findings are inconsistent, there is no universal best style, and the theory does not fully explain context.

What is Contingency Theory?

Contingency Theory argues that leadership effectiveness depends on the match between a leader’s natural style and the situation. Fiedler sees leadership as a leader–match theory, meaning leaders should be placed in contexts that suit their style. It differs from behavioural theory because it asks which style works best in this specific situation.

What is the LPC scale in Fiedler’s Contingency Theory?

The LPC scale asks leaders to rate their least preferred co-worker. A low LPC score suggests a task-oriented leader who rates the difficult co-worker very negatively. A high LPC score suggests a relationship-oriented leader who can still see positive qualities in a difficult co-worker.

What are Fiedler’s three situational variables?

Fiedler argues that situations should be analysed through leader–member relations, task structure, and position power. Leader–member relations ask whether followers trust and respect the leader. Task structure asks whether the task is clear or ambiguous, while position power asks whether the leader has strong formal authority.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Contingency Theory?

Contingency Theory is strong because it introduces context and rejects the idea of one best leadership style. It has some empirical support and offers a predictive structure. However, the LPC scale is controversial, the model is rigid, and it assumes leaders cannot easily adapt their style.

What is Situational Leadership?

Situational Leadership argues that leaders should adapt their style to the competence and commitment of followers. Unlike Contingency Theory, which assumes leader style is stable, Situational Leadership assumes leaders can be flexible. It combines directive behaviour and supportive behaviour depending on follower development level.

What are the four development levels in Situational Leadership?

D1 is low competence and high commitment, requiring directing. D2 is some competence but low commitment, requiring coaching. D3 is moderate to high competence but low confidence or commitment, requiring supporting. D4 is high competence and high commitment, requiring delegating.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Situational Leadership?

Situational Leadership is practical, easy to understand, flexible, and widely used in leadership training. However, it assumes leaders can accurately diagnose follower competence and commitment, and that they can adapt their behaviour in real time. It also focuses mainly on one-to-one hierarchical leadership.

How do Contingency Theory and Situational Leadership differ?

Contingency Theory assumes leadership style is fixed and the leader should be matched to the context. Situational Leadership assumes leaders are adaptable and should change their style according to follower development. Contingency is selection-focused, while Situational Leadership is development-focused.

Master: What are the key Week 2 readings and authors?

Ferguson (2013 approx.) – Ferguson’s Formula; Burns (2011 approx.) – Ursula Burns: From the Projects to the Boardroom; Northouse (2019) – Leadership Trait Questionnaire; Northouse (2019) – Leadership Self-Assessment Profile; Judge, Bono, Ilies & Gerhardt (2002) – Personality and Leadership (“Two Cheers for the Big Five”).

What is Ferguson’s Formula’s core idea?

Ferguson’s Formula argues that high-performance leadership combines discipline, high standards, and continuous renewal to sustain long-term success. Ferguson focused on long-term team building, preventing complacency, and maintaining strict control and accountability. This shows how consistent standards and authority can drive sustained elite performance.

What are the strengths and limitations of Ferguson’s Formula?

The approach is effective because it builds discipline, consistency, and a strong performance culture. However, it relies heavily on authority and pressure, which may reduce autonomy and not suit all individuals. This suggests its effectiveness depends on context, such as elite sport or high-performance environments.

What is the core idea of Ursula Burns’ leadership?

Ursula Burns’ leadership demonstrates transformational leadership through strategic change, resilience, and strong execution. She led Xerox’s shift from hardware to services, showing how vision and decisive leadership can reposition an organisation. Her approach highlights accountability, direct communication, and operational discipline.

What are the strengths and limitations of Burns’ leadership?

Burns’ leadership was effective in driving strategic repositioning and organisational change. However, challenges such as integrating acquisitions and external market decline limited outcomes. This shows leadership effectiveness is constrained by external factors and not solely determined by leader capability.

What is Northouse’s Leadership Trait Questionnaire’s core idea?

The Leadership Trait Questionnaire argues that leadership can be assessed through traits such as intelligence, confidence, and sociability. However, it reflects perceptions of leadership rather than actual effectiveness. This shows that leadership is often judged subjectively rather than objectively.

What are the strengths and limitations of the Leadership Trait Questionnaire?

It is useful for identifying desirable traits and supporting self-awareness. However, it is highly subjective and does not guarantee leadership effectiveness. It also ignores context, behaviour, and actual performance outcomes.

What is Northouse’s Leadership Self-Assessment Profile’s core idea?

The Self-Assessment Profile argues that leadership effectiveness can be explored through self-evaluation and reflection. It helps individuals identify strengths, weaknesses, and development areas. Its main value lies in increasing self-awareness rather than measuring performance.

What are the strengths and limitations of the Self-Assessment Profile?

It promotes reflection and development, helping leaders understand their behaviour. However, it is prone to bias and overestimation, especially without external feedback. It does not provide objective evidence of leadership effectiveness.

What is Judge et al. (2002) core argument on personality and leadership?

Judge et al. argue that the Big Five personality traits have some relevance to leadership, particularly for leadership emergence. Traits like extraversion and conscientiousness are linked to leadership tendencies. However, personality alone is insufficient to explain leadership effectiveness.

What are the strengths and limitations of Judge et al. (2002)?

The study provides empirical support linking personality to leadership and helps explain individual differences. However, it is limited because traits are weak predictors of performance and ignore situational and behavioural factors. This supports the shift towards contingency and behavioural theories.

How can these Week 2 readings be used in an exam?

These readings can be used to show the progression from trait-based explanations (Northouse, Judge et al.) to behavioural and contextual leadership (Ferguson, Burns). They support arguments about leadership effectiveness, development, and context. Evaluation should highlight that no single theory fully explains leadership, reinforcing the need for multiple perspectives.