Example: stock market

How to Choose a Leadership Pattern - expert2business

No. 73311by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. SchmidtHow to Choose aLeadership Pattern Since its publication in HBR s March April 1958 issue, this arti-cle has had such impact and popularity as to warrant its choice asan HBR Classic. Mr. Tannenbaum and Mr. Schmidt succeededin capturing in a few succinct pages the main ideas involved in thequestion of how managers should lead their organizations. For thispublication, the authors have written a commentary, in whichthey look at their article from a 15-year perspective (see page 10.)M I put most problems into my group s hands andleave it to them to carry the ball from there. I servemerely as a catalyst, mirroring back the people sthoughts and feelings so that they can better under-stand them. M It s foolish to make decisions oneself on mattersthat affect people. I always talk things over with mysubordinates, but I make it clear to them that I mthe one who has to have the final say. M Once I have decided on a course of action, I domy best to sell my ideas to my employees.

No. 73311 by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. Schmidt How to Choose a Leadership Pattern

Tags:

  Leadership, Choose, Patterns, To choose a leadership pattern

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of How to Choose a Leadership Pattern - expert2business

1 No. 73311by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. SchmidtHow to Choose aLeadership Pattern Since its publication in HBR s March April 1958 issue, this arti-cle has had such impact and popularity as to warrant its choice asan HBR Classic. Mr. Tannenbaum and Mr. Schmidt succeededin capturing in a few succinct pages the main ideas involved in thequestion of how managers should lead their organizations. For thispublication, the authors have written a commentary, in whichthey look at their article from a 15-year perspective (see page 10.)M I put most problems into my group s hands andleave it to them to carry the ball from there. I servemerely as a catalyst, mirroring back the people sthoughts and feelings so that they can better under-stand them. M It s foolish to make decisions oneself on mattersthat affect people. I always talk things over with mysubordinates, but I make it clear to them that I mthe one who has to have the final say. M Once I have decided on a course of action, I domy best to sell my ideas to my employees.

2 M I m being paid to lead. If I let a lot of other peo-ple make the decisions I should be making, then I mnot worth my salt. M I believe in getting things done. I can t wastetime calling meetings. Someone has to call the shotsaround here, and I think it should be me. Each of these statements represents a point ofview about good Leadership . Considerable experi-ence, factual data, and theoretical principles couldbe cited to support each statement, even thoughthey seem to be inconsistent when placed contradictions point up the dilemma in whichmodern managers frequently find ProblemThe problem of how modern managers can be democratic in their relations with subordinates andat the same time maintain the necessary authority andcontrol in the organizations for which they are respon-sible has come into focus increasingly in recent in the century this problem was not soacutely felt. The successful executive was generallypictured as possessing intelligence, imagination, ini-tiative, the capacity to make rapid (and generallywise) decisions, and the ability to inspire subordi-nates.

3 People tended to think of the world as beingdivided into leaders and followers. New focus:Gradually, however, from the socialsciences emerged the concept of group dynamics Copyright 1973 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights to Choose a Leadership PatternRobert Tannenbaum and Warren H. SchmidtMAY JUNE 1973 Mr. Tannenbaum is Professor of the Development of HumanSystems at the Graduate School of Management, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles. He is also a Consulting Editor of theJournal of Applied Behavioral Scienceand coauthor (with IrvingWeschler and Fred Massarik) of Leadership and Organization: ABehavioral Science Approach(New York, McGraw-Hill, 1961).Mr. Schmidt is also affiliated with the UCLA Graduate School ofManagement, where he is Senior Lecturer in Behavioral writing extensively in the fields of human relations andleadership and conference planning, Mr. Schmidt wrote thescreenplay for a film, Is It Always Right to be Right?

4 Whichwon an Academy Award in 1970. with its focus on membersof the group rather thansolely on the leader. Research efforts of social scien-tists underscored the importance of employeeinvolvement and participation in decision began to challenge the efficiency of highlydirective Leadership , and increasing attention waspaid to problems of motivation and human training laboratories in group develop-ment that sprang up across the country, many of thenewer notions of Leadership began to exert animpact. These training laboratories were carefullydesigned to give people a firsthand experience in fullparticipation and decision making. The designated leaders deliberately attempted to reduce theirown power and to make group members as responsi-ble as possible for setting their own goals and meth-ods within the laboratory was perhaps inevitable that some of the peoplewho attended the training laboratories regarded thiskind of Leadership as being truly democratic andwent home with the determination to build fully par-ticipative decison making into their own organiza-tions.

5 Whenever their bosses made a decision withoutconvening a staff meeting, they tended to perceive thisas authoritarian behavior. The true symbol of democ-ratic Leadership to some was the meeting and theless directed from the top, the more democratic it of the more enthusiastic alumni of thesetraining laboratories began to get the habit of cate-gorizing leader behavior as democratic or author-itarian. Bosses who made too many decisionsthemselves were thought of as authoritarian, andtheir directive behavior was often attributed solelyto their need:The net result of the research findingsand of the human relations training based upon themhas been to call into question the stereotype of an effec-tive leader. Consequently, modern managers often findthemselves in an uncomfortable state of they are not quite sure how to behave; thereare times when they are torn between exerting strong Leadership and permissive new knowledge pushes them in one direc-tion ( I should really get the group to help make thisdecision ), but at the same time their experiencepushes them in another direction ( I really under-stand the problem better than the group and thereforeI should make the decision ).

6 They are not sure whena group decision is really appropriate or when holdinga staff meeting serves merely as a device for avoidingtheir own decision-making purpose of our article is to suggest a frameworkwhich managers may find useful in grappling withthis dilemma. First, we shall look at the different pat-terns of Leadership behavior that managers can choosefrom in relating to their subordinates. Then, we shallturn to some of the questions suggested by this rangeof patterns . For instance, how important is it for man-agers subordinates to know what type of leadershipthey are using in a situation? What factors shouldthey consider in deciding on a Leadership Pattern ?What difference do their long-run objectives make ascompared to their immediate objectives?Range of BehaviorExhibit Ipresents the continuum or range of pos-sible Leadership behavior available to BUSINESS REVIEW May June 1973 EXHIBITI Continuum of Leadership Behavior HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW May June 19735 Each type of action is related to the degree of author-ity used by the boss and to the amount of freedomavailable to subordinates in reaching decisions.

7 Theactions seen on the extreme left characterize man-agers who maintain a high degree of control whilethose seen on the extreme right characterize man-agers who release a high degree of control. Neitherextreme is absolute; authority and freedom are neverwithout their let us look more closely at each of the behav-ior points occurring along this manager makes the decision and this case the boss identifies a problem, consid-ers alternative solutions, chooses one of them, andthen reports this decision to the subordinates forimplementation. The boss may or may not give con-sideration to what he or she believes the subordi-nates will think or feel about the decision; in anycase, no opportunity is provided for them to partici-pate directly in the decision-making may or may not be used or manager sells the the man-ager, as before, takes responsibility for identifyingthe problem and arriving at a decision.

8 However,rather than simply announcing it, he or she takesthe additional step of persuading the subordinates toaccept it. In doing so, the boss recognizes the possi-bility of some resistance among those who will befaced with the decision, and seeks to reduce thisresistance by indicating, for example, what theemployees have to gain from the manager presents ideas, invites boss who has arrived at a decision and whoseeks acceptance of his or her ideas provides anopportunity for subordinates to get a fuller explana-tion of his or her thinking and intentions. After pre-senting the ideas, the manager invites questions sothat the associates can better understand what he orshe is trying to accomplish. This give and take also enables the manager and the subordinates toexplore more fully the implications of the manager presents a tentative decision sub-ject to kind of behavior permits thesubordinates to exert some influence on the deci-sion.

9 The initiative for identifying and diagnosingthe problem remains with the boss. Before meetingwith the staff, the manager has thought the problemthrough and arrived at a decision but only a tenta-tive one. Before finalizing it, he or she presents theproposed solution for the reaction of those who willbe affected by it. He or she says in effect, I d like tohear what you have to say about this plan that I havedeveloped. I ll appreciate your frank reactions butwill reserve for myself the final decision. The manager presents the problem, gets sugges-tions, and then makes the to thispoint the boss has come before the group with asolution of his or her own. Not so in this case. Thesubordinates now get the first chance to suggestsolutions. The manager s initial role involves iden-tifying the problem. He or she might, for example,say something of this sort: We are faced with anumber of complaints from newspapers and thegeneral public on our service policy.

10 What is wronghere? What ideas do you have for coming to gripswith this problem? The function of the group becomes one of increas-ing the manager s repertory of possible solutions tothe problem. The purpose is to capitalize on theknowledge and experience of those who are on the firing line. From the expanded list of alternativesdeveloped by the manager and the subordinates, themanager then selects the solution that he or sheregards as most manager defines the limits and requests thegroup to make a this point the man-ager passes to the group (possibly taking part as amember) the right to make decisions. Before doingso, however, he or she defines the problem to besolved and the boundaries within which the deci-sion must be example might be the handling of a parkingproblem at a plant. The boss decides that this issomething that should be worked on by the peopleinvolved, so they are called together.


Related search queries