As shown above, both universities identified two main leadership behaviours each. The researchers from Ohio state found out that initiating structure and consideration. The initiating structure behaviour establishes the formal line of communication as well as to determine how the tasks are to be performed.
The consideration behaviour shows that the leader tries to establish a warm and friendly environment. On the other hand, the researchers from the Michigan found out the main leadership behaviours are employee-centred and production-centred.The employee-centred behaviour is where the leader shows pleasure in ensuring an employee is satisfied with their job. The production-centred behaviour is where the leader shows great interest in performance as well as explaining work procedures.
As shown above, the Ohio state showed the characteristics of both leadership behaviours. The consideration behaviour shows that leaders with high morale and leaders of groups with lower productivity are the two characteristics which form the consideration behaviour.The Initiating structure behaviour shows that leaders of high producing groups, leaders rated highly by superiors and a high turnover are the three characteristics which form the initiating structure behaviour. To test managers for their preferred leadership behaviour, the Ohio State Studies developed two measures: (1) the LBDQ (Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire) and (2) the LOQ (Leader Opinion Questionnaire).
As shown above, two questionnaires were given out to managers to find the preferred leadership behaviour. The Leadership Behaviour Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) and the Leader Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ).The LBDQ measured the perception of the leaders behaviour and the LOQ measured the perception of the leaders own style.
The results from both universities partially showed that leaders are made, but are they ? According to Professor Adrian Furnham 2005, the behavioural approach formed two types of typologies: the autocratic leader and the democratic leader. An autocratic leader is where a leader has as much power and decision-making authority as possible, employees are not consulted nor do they have right to give any input.On the other hand, an democratic leader is the complete opposite of the autocratic leader. An democratic leader would prefer his employees giving as much input as possible even though the leader would have the final say. However, these two types of typologies, according to Professor Adrian Furnham 2005, were formed by personality and ability.
‘A certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader’ (Max Weber 1922) The definition of charismatic leadership, given by Max Weber 1922, describes a charismatic leader as some with ‘a certain quality of personality’ and the he goes on to say that ‘these are not accessible to the ordinary person’; the two phrases mean that charismatic leadership comes from the inside, it is beyond the reach of someone who is trying to learn the skill.Therefore, through Max Weber’s definition, he has made it clear that leaders are born with this type of leadership skill and it can not be learnt in any way possible. An example of someone who possessed the charismatic leadership skill is, Muhammad Ali. Muhammad Ali is not charismatic from his fights or the number of world titles he has held but to the fact that he was an excellent speaker. Muhammad Ali had was untouchable, no one could touch when he spoke, the whole world be shook up when he spoke.His body language, the way he used to move around made him an charismatic leader and I doubt even if someone said the exact same words he said, they wouldn’t have gotten a response like him, since it was from inside.
Nearly every leader will have faced a variety of different emotions from its employees, but handling them is another matter. A successful leader will most definitely have to handle conflicts and other behaviours during work. Any leader who has such skills listed above will have gained a higher revenue of growth, achieved a high efficiency level and would also have achieved profitability within their team.But, how can someone achieve the skills listed above and are there any obstacles in achieving these skills. The only obstacle in achieving these skills is yourself, nobody can tell you how successful or smart you can be except you.
Achieving these skills take up a lot of time, since you will need to practise these skills regularly. Self confidence is very important when trying to learn these skills, if you are not confident, you will not achieve these skills and wouldn’t become a successful leader.The same with motivation, motivation will be needed because since learning the skills to become a successful leader is ever lasting, every leader will have to improve as they go along therefore motivation will be highly regarded.
A plan is also needed, planning on learning the key skills each step at a time is proven to be better than jumping straight into the deep end. A goal and a target will also achieve the key skills, working to a specific regime where you complete each skill at a time while improving that new skill which you’ve just completed. (Paul Brewerton 2005)Some famous leaders who fit into this theory are: Richard Branson, Sir Alan Sugar and George W. Bush. George W. Bush is known for not being the smarted person on the block, even though he’s the President of the United State of America (USA). George W.
Bush has a team of people advising him constantly throughout various obstacles that he faced, from these obstacles thrown at him he is still the President, but how? This is because he has learnt a lot of leadership skills throughout the time he was being advised and used them to his advantage to gain a huge portion of the United States of America in his favour.