Chapter 12: Emerging Leadership Perspectives

INTEGRATIVE LEADERSHIP

Integrative leadership is an emerging leadership approach that fosters collective

action across many types of boundaries in order to achieve the common good. It brings
together leadership concepts and practice rooted in five major sectors of society
business, government, nonprofits, media, and community. It focuses on leadership
development at all levels, from individual to global.

Levels of Analysis

Individual. The longest standing stream of popular and scholarly writing flows from
the effort to identify the essential traits that separate leaders from the herd. The effort has
been strongly criticized because so little agreement emerged from the various studies
and because until recently they tended to focus on elites (whose primary shared
characteristic seemed to be white maleness and positional power). A few traits, attributes,
and qualities do emerge consistently from these studies (Bass, 1990). They include
energy and intelligence, though the definition of intelligence has expanded considerably
in recent yearsfor example, attention to multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1993),
emotional intelligence (Goleman,1995; Goleman, Boyatzis, McKee, 2002), and cognitive
complexity (Mumford, 2000; Hooijberg, 1997).

One fairly recent stream of research has taken a different perspective on leader
traits by seeking to know what followers want in leadersfor example, Kouzes and
Posners research for their book Credibility (Kouzes & Posner, 1993; Kouzes & Posner,
2003), which emphasizes the importance of leaders being honest, future-focused,
competent, and inspirational. Another growing stream that has fairly over-flown its banks
is the attempt to probe leaders psychesfor example, exploring the narcissism and
hubris likely to accompany powerful leadership roles (Kets de Vries, 1993), illuminating
the disciplines of personal mastery and character building (Quinn, 2000; Luke, 1998;
Manz & Sims, 1989, 2001), and liberating the leader within (Cashman, 1999). Some
examples in this stream of writing are based on extensive research but many veer toward
the anecdotal and prescriptive.

Despite the move to more democratic and inclusive views, scholars such as Jean
Lipman-Blumen (1996) and Willard Drath (2001) acknowledge the persistence of interest
and even demand for the great, take-charge, savior-like leader who can protect an
organization or society from various ills and threats. Thus, scholars of business leadership
still write a lot about characteristics, styles, and practices of CEOs (or other executives);
scholars of government leadership often undertake a similar analysis of presidents,
governors, prominent judges, powerful legislators, and top administrators. Scholars
focusing on the nonprofit and community sectors write about the characteristics, styles,
and practices of executive directors and social movement leaders.

Scholars at this level sometimes explore the overlap of individual behavior and
cognition with social ethics. Jean Lipman-Blumen (2005) and Barbara Kellerman (2004)
have recently delved into the ways leaders abuse power and prescribed actions leaders
and followers can take to forestall and stop abusive leader behaviors. Robert Terry (1993,
2001) is a prime example and among those who engage another key debate in the field:
Is ethics embedded in leadership, or is leadership mainly about effectiveness?

Team. Studies of team leadership may be considered a part of organizational leadership

studies, since the teams that are dissected usually exist within organizations. The recent
growth in this research stream flowed from the realization in the business world in the
1980s that cross-functional teams were key to organizational efficiency and innovation.
This stream builds on research into small group psychology and behavior (Johnson and
Johnson, 2003) and to some extent reflects the move within leadership studies generally
from a focus on a single in-charge leader to an interest in leadership roles than can be
shared among team members (Wheelan, 1999). An important current within this stream
is research about leading high performance teams (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Some
scholars also now write about the dynamics of top teams, meaning the handful of
executives or senior managers who collaborate in the running of an organization
(Zaccaro, 2001). Research on specific team leadership skills, such as conflict
management and facilitation, abounds (Schwarz, 2002; Johnson and Johnson, 2003).
Zaccaro (2001) provides a good overview of research on team leadership.

Organizational. This well-developed research stream has focused on the leaders role in
organizational success, performance, and innovation. A very sizable number of
researchers have investigated the manager-subordinate relationship. The empirical
studies look for correlations between specific leader behaviors and variables like follower
satisfaction and unit performance; they also look for mediating and moderating factors.
One of the oldest and best-known typologies is derived from the research of a group at
Ohio State University including Ralph Stogdill, (1963, 1974). The groups work identified
two basic aspects of leader behaviortask structuring and individual consideration. Other
prominent currents within the stream are path-goal theory, leader-member exchange
theory, decision-making, substitutes for leadership, situational theory, charisma,
transformational vs. transactional behavior, attachment styles, and diversity. Well-known
researchers include Ralph Stogdill, Bernard Bass, Bruce J. Avolio, Gary Yukl, Jay
Conger, James Kouzes and Barry Posner (Bass, 1990; Avolio, 1999; Yukl, 2006; Conger,
1999; Kouzes & Posner, 2002, 2003). Peter Northouse (2004) has published a good
overview text.

Recent research continues to explore the traditional currents, but has added
several others including distributed leadership (related to decentralized structures, the
need for speedy adaptation, innovation), complex adaptive systems (related to distributive
leadership), framing, innovation and change, servanthood and spirituality, and culture.
Well-known theorists include Peter Senge (1994), Russ Marion and Mary Uhl-Bien
(2001), Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal (2003), Andrew Van de Ven (Van de Ven et al.,
1999), John Bryson (2004), Kim Boal (Boal and Bryson, 1987; Boal and Hooijberg, 2000);
Robert Greenleaf (1977) and disciples, Peter Vaill (1996), Andr Delbecq (1995), Russ
Moxley (2000), Edgar Schein (2004). Ron Heifetz, and his adaptive leadership approach,
is probably most associated with this level, though he has used multi-level examples (from
dyadic to national) in explicating the approach (Heifetz, 1994; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002).
Robert Terry (2001) describes organizational leadership as a developmental process
moving through zones that become increasingly imbued with uncertainty about outcomes
and direction.

Although the bulk of research in this stream has focused on the business world, some
researchers have examined the leadership of nonprofit executives and boards of directors
(Riggio and Orr, 2004; Stone, 2006) and government administrators (Van Wart, 2003).
One of the most ambitious recent studies in organizational leadership is the GLOBE
Project (House et al., 2004), which collected data in 62 countries from managers and
other sources about the relation of cultural values to effective organizational leadership.
A general finding was that charismatic/value-based leadership is universally prized, and
that team-oriented and participative leadership are widely deemed desirable. At the same
time, countries differ considerably in the value that citizens place on other types of
leadership, and even those types that are universally desirable are enacted differently in
different cultures.

Interorganizational, Community, and National. With his book Leadership, James

MacGregor Burns (1978) struck a chord with those grappling with the connection between
leadership and power and between leadership and ethics. Focusing intensely on the use
of power by presidents, premiers, social movement leaders, and dictators, he linked a
political scientists interest in heads of state, a historians interest in biography, a
sociologists interest in social movements, and a psychologists view of adult moral
development. His naming and explication of transactional vs. transformational leadership
has been vastly influential in leadership studies ever since. The transactional vs.
transformational rubric resonated somewhat with Stogdills leadership typology and with
earlier work on charisma. Bass and Avolio worked out a more operational version of
Burns approach and applied it to organizational leadership. They identified four aspects
of transformational leadership (idealized influence, individualized consideration,
inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation), two aspects of transactional
leadership (management by exception and contingent reward) and something they called
laissez-faire leadership. The instrument they developed (the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire or MLQ) has been used extensively in organizational leadership research
(Bass, 1998).
Additional important scholarship at this level includes the work of Barbara Kellerman, who
has extended Burns work on top political leaders, and more recently described the mutual
learning that can and should occur between leaders in the business and government
sectors (Kellerman, 1991, 1999). Harry Boyte and others have highlighted leadership in
connection with community organizing and civic capacity. These scholars emphasize
skills of public debate, problem solving, effective mobilization and campaigning. For
Boyte, leadership is an attribute of community residents who become active citizens
(Boyte, 2004). Other examples are catalytic leadership (Luke, 1998), collaborative
leadership (Chrislip, 1994; Bryson & Crosby, 1992; Crosby & Bryson, 2005), leadership
within collaboratives (Huxham & Vangen, 2005).

Global. Harlan Cleveland and others focus on the leadership work of building global
institutions (Cleveland, 1993, 2002). Some scholars focus on leading multinational
corporations (Shipka, 1997). Barbara Crosby and John Bryson have investigated
leadership of transnational citizen organizations and movements (Crosby & Bryson, 2005;
Crosby, 1999). In his latest book, James MacGregor Burns explores the possibilities for
people around the world to demand and develop leadership for dealing with complex,
common problems (Burns, 2003).

Cross-sector research. Some of the research at the community to global levels focuses
on cross-sector partnerships, networks, and collaboration, but the authors pay little
attention per se to how leaders bridge the sectors. Most of the research on cross-sector
collaboration focuses on structures, process, practices, and only a bit on people and
leadership (Huxham & Vangen, 2005; Provan & Milward, 1995). This research emphasis
is a priority for the Humhrey Institutes Public and Nonprofit Leadership Center (Stone,
2004; Crosby & Bryson, 2005).

Full-Range Leadership Theory (FRLT)

- Involves nine dimensions covering both transformational and transactional

leadership, especially emphasizing contextual variables.
- Designed to recognize contextual variables that link observations to a set of
relevant facts, events, or points of view.
Shared Leadership

A dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the
objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or
both.

Leadership in self-managing work teams

Leaders provide resources or act as liaisons with other units but without the
trappings of authority associated with traditional first-line supervisors.

Conditions for creating and maintaining team performance

Efficient, goal-directed effort- The key here is to coordinate the effort both inside
and outside the team.

Adequate resources- Team rely on their leaders to obtain enough equipment

supplies, and so on to carry out the team goals

Competent, motivated performance- Team members also need the appropriate

knowledge, skills, abilities and motivation to perform collective tasks well

A productive, supportive climate- High level of cohesiveness, mutual trust, and

cooperation among team members.

Commitment to continuous improvement and adaptation- Team should be able

to adapt to changing conditions.

Self-Leadership Activities

- Represent a portfolio of self-influence strategies that are believed to positively

influence individual behavior, thought processes, and related activities.
- Behavior-focused, natural-reward, and constructive-thought-pattern.

Behavior focused strategies

self-observation- Involves examining your own behavior to increase awareness

of when and why you engage in certain behaviors.
 self-goal setting-
self-reward- In conjunction with the above, can be quite useful in moving
behaviors toward goal attainment
self-correcting feedback-
practice

Cross-Cultural Leadership: Project GLOBE

GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research

Program)

Attributes and entities that differentiate a specified culture predict

organizational practices, leader attributes, behaviors that are most often
carried out and are most effective in that culture.

Culture dimensions

Assertiveness- Assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in relationship

Future orientation- Future oriented behaviors such as delaying gratification and

investing in the future

Gender egalitarianism- The collective minimizes gender inequality

Uncertainty avoidance- Reliance on social norms, rules, etc., to alleviate future

unpredictability

Power distance- Expectation that power is equally distributed

Institutional emphasis- Organization/society rewards collective

resources/action.

In-group collectivism- Individual express pride, loyalty, and similar altitudes in

organization/families.

Performance orientation- The collective encourages/rewards group for

performance improvement.
 Humane orientation- The collective encourages/rewards individuals for being
fair, generous, kind and the like.

Leadership dimensions

Charismatic/value based- Inspire, motivate, expect high performance

outcomes.

Team-oriented- Team building and implementation of a common goal among

team member

Participative- Degree to which others are managed in making an

implementation

Humane-oriented- Support, consideration, compassion, and generosity

Autonomous- Independent and individualistic leadership

Self-protective- Insuring safety and security of the individual, self centered, and
face saving.

Strategic leadership

It is refers to a managers potential to express a strategic vision for the

organization, or a part of the organization, and to motivate and persuade others to acquire
that vision. Strategic leadership can also be defined as utilizing strategy in the
management of employees. It is the potential to influence organizational members and to
execute organizational change. Strategic leaders create organizational structure, allocate
resources and express strategic vision. Strategic leaders work in an ambiguous
environment on very difficult issues that influence and are influenced by occasions and
organizations external to their own.

The main objective of strategic leadership is strategic productivity. Another aim of

strategic leadership is to develop an environment in which employees forecast the
organizations needs in context of their own job. Strategic leaders encourage the
employees in an organization to follow their own ideas. Strategic leaders make greater
use of reward and incentive system for encouraging productive and quality employees to
show much better performance for their organization. Functional strategic leadership is
about inventiveness, perception, and planning to assist an individual in realizing his
objectives and goals.

Strategic leadership requires the potential to foresee and comprehend the work
environment. It requires objectivity and potential to look at the broader picture.

MORAL LEADERSHIP

Ethical Leadership

- Ethical Leadership is leadership that is directed by respect for ethical beliefs and
values and for dignity and right of others. It is thus related to concepts such as
trust, honesty, consideration, charisma and fairness.

Authentic Leadership

- It is an approach to leadership tha emphasizes building the leaders legitimacy

through honest relationship with followers which value their input and are built on
an ethical foundation. Generally, Authentic leaders are positive people with truthful
self-concepts who promote openness.

Servant Leadership

- Developed by Robert Greenleaf (1964)

- Servant leadership is not a special case of leadership but rather a special kind of
"service".
- It is a set of practices that enriches the lives of individuals , builds better
organizations and ultimately creates a more just and caring world.

Spiritual Leadership

- A casual leadership includes values attitudes and behavior to create motivated and
learning organization.
- It is a holistic approach to leadership in which the leader strives to encourage a
sense of significance and interconnectedness among employees.
 - This work is termed Spiritual Leadership theory.
- These kind of leadership includes values attitudes and behaviors to motivate self
and others.

Qualities of Spiritual Leadership

Vision - The destination and the journey , reflect high deals , encourages hope/faith.
Allustric Love- loyalty as well as acceptance , gratitude , honesty , courage , humility
from organization and followers.
Hope/Faith -endurance , perseverance , have stretch goals.

CHANGE LEADERSHIP

- A finals emerging leadership perpective,joining integrative leadership and moral

leadership.
- Helps deal with an idea of organization that masters the challenges of change while stil
creating a satisfying, healthy and effective workplace for its employees.

Leaders as Change Agents

A. Transformational Change (Frame-breaking Change)

Results in a major overhaul of the organization or its component systems.
Organization experiencing transformational change undergo significant
shifts in basic characteristics including the overall purpose/mission,
underlying values/beliefs and supporting strategies and actions.

B. Incremental Change (Frame-bending Change)

Frequent and less traumatic.

Includes the introduction of new products, new technologies and new
systems and processes.

C. Unplanned Change

Occurs spontaneously and randomly

May be disruptive or beneficial
 D. Planned Change

Result of specific effort by an agent.

A direct response to someones perception of a performance gap
Performance Gap- a discrepancy between the desired and the
actual state of affairs.

Forces and Targets for Change

A. Organization-Environment Relationship
Attempts to redefine their relationships with challenging social and
political environments.
B. Organizational Life Cycle
.Organizations must adapt as they evolve from birth through growth
and toward maturity.
C. Political Nature of Organization
Changes in internal control structure, including benefits and reward
systems that attempt to deal with shifting political returns.

Fig 1. Organizational Targets for planned change.

Phases of Planned Change

A. Unfreezing
The menageries responsibility of preparing a situation for change.
Involves disconfirming current attitudes and behaviors to create a felt
need for something new.
B. Changing
Involves taking action to modify a situation by changing things, such as
people, tasks, structure or technology of the organization.
C. Freezing
Designed to maintain the momentum of a change and eventually
institutionalize it as a part of a normal routine.
Involves positively reinforcing desired outcomes and providing extra
support when difficulties are encountered; evaluating progress and results
and assessing the costs and benefits of the change.

Planned Change Strategies

Strategies Planned Change (SPC)

- Is an international consultancy specializing in enabling individuals and

organizations to deal strategically and creatively with the challenge of change.

Forces-Coercion Strategy

- Uses authority, rewards, or punishment as primary inducement to change.

Rational Persuasion Strategy

- Uses facts, special knowledge, and rational argument to create change

Attempt to bring about change through the use of special knowledge, empirical support,
or rational arguments.

- It is sometimes referred to as Empirical-Rational Strategy of plan change.

Shared Power Strategy

 - Actively and sincerely involves the people who will be affected by a change in
planning and making key decisions relating to this change.
- Sometimes called Normative-reeducative Approach.

Normative-reductive Approach

- This strategy tries to develop directions and support for change through
involvement and empowerment. It builds essential foundations such as;
o Personal values
o Group norms
o Shared goals

Resistance to Change

- Is any attitudes or behaviors that indicates unwillingness to make or support a

desired change.

Why people resist to change

o Fear of unknown
o Insecurity
o Lack of a felt need to change
o Threat to rested interest
o Contrasting interpretation
o Lack of resources and among other possibilities

Resistance to Change Itself

To minimize resistance in such cases, the change agent should make sure that
everyone who may be affected CRITERIA

1. Benefit - The change should have a clear relative advantage for the people being
ask to change; it should be perceived as better way
2. Compatibility
 - The change should be compatible as possible with existing values and
experience of the people being asked to change.
3. Complexity
- The change should be no more complex than necessary;
- It must be easy as possible for people to understand and use.
4. Triability
- The change should be something that people can try on a step by step basis
and make adjustments as things progress.

Resistance to the Change Strategy

- Someone who attempt to bring about change via force coercion.

Resistance to the Change Agent

- Is directed at the person implementing the change and often involves in

personality and other differences.

How to Deal with Resistance

An informed changed agent has many options available for dealing positively with
resistance to change, in any forms.

o Education and Communication

o Participation and Involvement
o Facilitation and Support
o Negotiation and Agreement
o Manipulation and Co-optation
o Explicit and Implicit coercion