Definition of Leadership
A leader is someone who can influence others and who has a managerial authority. Leadership is what leaders do. More specifically, it’s the process of influencing a group to achieve goals. Group Leadership
Leadership is concerned with control and power in a group. Leadership can be aimed at either maintaining the interpersonal relationships in the group or prodding the group to achieve its task. Kinds of Leadership
Groups typically benefit from two kinds of leadership i.e. Instrumental leadership
This kind of leadership refers to group leadership that focuses on the completion of tasks. Members look to instrumental leadership to make plans, give orders and get things done. Characteristics of instrumental leadership
Instrumental leaders usually have formal, secondary relations with other group members. They give orders and rewards and punish members according to their contribution to the group’s efforts. Enjoy more respect from members when successful.
Their main goal is completion of task.
Expressive leadership is a group leadership that focuses on the group's well being. Example: the democratic style of leadership is an example of expressive leadership. Characteristics of Expressive leadership
Expressive leaders take less interest in achieving goals than in promoting the well-being of members, raising group morale and minimizing tensions and conflicts among the group members. Expressive leaders build more personal and primary ties. They show sympathy to their group members.
They generally receive more personal affection.
Leadership styles refer to the various patterns of behavior favored by leaders during the process of directing and influencing workers. Sociologists describe leadership in terms of decision making styles. The three major types of leadership are the following: Authoritarian or autocratic leadership.
Democratic or Participative leadership.
Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style. In the past several decades, management experts have undergone a revolution in how they define leadership and what their attitudes are toward it. They have gone from a very classical autocratic approach to a very creative, participative approach. Somewhere along the line, it was determined that not everything old was bad and not everything new was good. Rather, different styles were needed for different situations and each leader needed to know when to exhibit a particular approach. Authoritarian Leadership
This is often considered the classical approach. It is one in which the manager retains as much power and decision-making authority as possible. The manager does not consult employees, nor are they allowed to give any input. Employees are expected to obey orders without receiving any explanations. The motivation environment is produced by creating a structured set of rewards and punishments. This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it are when you have all the information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated. This leadership style has been greatly criticized during the past 30 years. Some studies say that organizations with many autocratic leaders have higher turnover and absenteeism than other organizations. These studies say that autocratic leaders: Rely on threats and punishment to influence employees.
Do not allow for employee input.
Autocratic leadership is not all bad. Sometimes it is the most effective style to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document