Background of the Study
Whether you work in a private institution, private practice, health maintenance organization, government facility or educational institution, probably you had experience the impact of leadership.
Leadership is often regarded as the single most crucial factor in the success or failure of business, schools, religious groups and of almost all organizations. (Parker, 2001) “Leadership is one of the most observed phenomena on earth... but it is one of the least understood.”
The word leadership was not known in English language until the first half of the century. Leadership has many meaning; Chapins (1924) said that leadership as a point of polarization for group cooperation. Gardner (1990) leadership as a process of moving a group or groups in some direction. Bennis (2001) says that the leader makes a vision palpable and seductive that other eagerly sign on. Bednash (2003) leadership is a vital component of change. Tourangueau (2003) leaders are those who challenge the process, inspire a shared vision, enable others to act a model the way and encourage the heart.
There is no one best concept of leadership. Books and Articles representing widely varying school of thoughts have been published on the topic of leadership. Leadership has changed considerably during the last hundred years and will continue to change in the future.
Nowadays, learning and education are major issues. It is the right of every Filipino to have an access to quality education and support services.
Describing Filipino styles of leadership could be a very difficult and serious task. Most researchers and writers term it as dynamic, not static, because the Philippine society is constantly under various pressure were changes are inevitable (Asperas, Bautista and Galang 2005). Filipino Leadership styles must had been a mixture of the east and west, since we had been under Spaniards, Japanese and Americans.
This research attains to provide readers with an understanding of leadership styles of Academic Heads and Administrators are different and diverse.
The respondents of this research are the Academic Heads and Administrators of Selected Universities and Colleges of Baguio City and Benguet.
A popular framework for thinking about a leader’s “task versus person” orientation was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in the early 1690’s. Called the managerial Grid or Leadership Grid, it plots the degree of task-centeredness versus person-centeredness and identifies five combinations as distinct leadership styles.
The Leadership Grid is based on two behavioural dimensions:
Concern for People – this is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team members, their interest, and areas of personal developments when deciding how best to accomplish a task. 2.
Concern for Production – This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes concrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a task.
Using the axis to plot leadership “concern for production” versus “concern for people.” Blake and Mouton defined the following leadership styles. Country Club Leadership – High People / Low production. This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of his/her team. These people operate under the assumption that as long as team members are happy and secure then they will work hard. What tends to result is a work environment that is very relaxed and fun but where production suffers due to lack of direction and control.
Produce or Perish Leadership – High Production/Low People. Also known as Authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, people in this category believe that employee is simply a means to an end. Employee needs are always secondary to the efficient and productive workplaces. This type of leader as very autocratic has strict work rules, policies and procedures and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document