10TH COURSE

LEADERSHIP

COORDINATOR :
DRA SITI RAHMAWATI M.PD

TEACHING TEAM :
DR. ANGGRAINI SUKMAWATI MM
LINDAWATI KARTIKA SE M.SI
ANDITA SAYEKTI STP M.SC
We define leadership as the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of a vision or
set of goals. The source of this influence may be formal, such as that provided by managerial
rank in an organization. But not all leaders are managers, nor, for that matter, are all managers
leaders. Just because an organization provides its managers with certain formal rights is no
assurance they will lead effectively. Nonsanctioned leadership— the ability to influence that
arises outside the formal structure of the organization—is often as important or more
important than formal influence. In other words, leaders can emerge from within a group as well
as by formal appointment.

Organizations need strong leadership and strong management for optimal effectiveness. We
need leaders today to challenge the status quo, create visions of the future, and inspire
organizational members to want to achieve the visions. We also need managers to formulate
detailed plans, create efficient organizational structures, and oversee day-to-day operations.
WHY GOOD LEADER MAKE YOU FEEL SAFE?
A comprehensive review of the leadership literature, when organized around the Big Five, has
found extraversion to be the most important trait of effective leaders, but it is more strongly

related to the way leaders emerge than to their effectiveness. Sociable and dominant people
are more likely to assert themselves in group situations, but leaders need to make sure they’re
not too assertive one study found leaders who scored very high on assertiveness were less
effective than those who were moderately high. Unlike agreeableness and emotional stability,
conscientiousness and open-ness to experience also showed strong relationships to
leadership, though not quite as strong as extraversion. Overall, the trait approach does have
something to offer. Leaders who like being around people and are able to assert themselves
(extraverted), who are disciplined and able to keep commitments they make (conscientious),
and who are creative and flexible (open) do have an apparent advantage when it comes to
leadership, suggesting good leaders do have key traits in common. One reason is that
conscientiousness and extraversion are positively related to leaders’ self-efficacy, which
explained most of the variance in subordinates’ ratings of leader performance. People are

more likely to follow someone who is confident she’s going in the right direction. Another trait
that may indicate effective leadership is emotional intelligence (EI).
Behavioral theories of leadership is a theories proposing that specific
behaviors differentiate leaders from nonleaders. Beginning with more than a
thousand dimensions, the studies narrowed the list to two that substantially
accounted for most of the leadership behavior described by employees:
initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure is the extent to
which a leader is likely to define and structure his or her role and those of
employees in the search for goal attainment. It includes behavior that
attempts to organize work, work relationships, and goals. Consideration is
the extent to which a person’s job relationships are characterized by mutual
trust, respect for employees’ ideas, and regard for their feelings. A leader
high in consideration helps employees with personal problems, is friendly
and approachable, treats all employees as equals, and expresses appreciation
and support. In a recent survey, when asked to indicate what most motivated
them at work, 66 percent of employees mentioned appreciation.
1) The Fiedler Model
Fred Fiedler developed the first comprehensive contingency
model for leadership. The Fiedler contingency model
proposes that effective group performance depends on the
proper match between the leader’s style and the degree to
which the situation gives the leader control. Fiedler has
identified three contingency or situational dimensions:
• Leader–member relations is the degree of confidence, trust,
and respect members have in their leader.
• Task structure is the degree to which the job assignments
are procedurized (that is, structured or unstructured).
• Position power is the degree of influence a leader has over
power variables such as hiring, firing, discipline,
promotions, and salary increases.
Combining the three contingency dimensions yields eight
possible situations in which leaders can find themselves
(Exhibit 12-1). Fiedler concluded that task-oriented
leaders perform better in situations very favorable to
them and very unfavorable. So, when faced with a

category I, II, III, VII, or VIII situation, task-oriented leaders

perform better. Relationship-oriented leaders, however,
perform better in moderately favorable situations—

categories IV, V, and VI. In recent years, Fiedler has

condensed these eight situations down to three. He now
says task-oriented leaders perform best in situations of
high and low control, while relationship-oriented leaders
perform best in moderate control situations.
2) Situational leadership theory (SLT) focuses on the
followers. It says successful leadership depends on selecting
the right leader-ship style contingent on the followers’
readiness, or the extent to which they are willing and able to
accomplish a specific task. A leader should choose one of four
behaviors depending on follower readiness.
3) Path–goal theory is a theory that states that it is the leader’s
job to assist followers in attaining their goals and to provide
the necessary direction and/or support to ensure that their
goals are compatible with the overall objectives of the group
or organization.
4) Leader-participation model is a leadership theory that
provides a set of rules to determine the form and amount of
participative decision making in different situations. Like
path–goal theory, it says leader behavior must adjust to
reflect the task structure.
Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory argues that, because of time

pressures, leaders establish a special relationship with a small group of

their followers. These individuals make up the ingroup they are trusted,

get a disproportionate amount of the leader’s attention, and are more

likely to receive special privileges. Other followers fall into the toutgroup.

The theory proposes that early in the history of the interaction between a

leader and a given follower, the leader implicitly categorizes the follower

as an “in” or an “out” and that relationship is relatively stable over time.

Leaders in-duce LMX by rewarding those employees with whom they want

a closer linkage and punishing those with whom they do not. But for the

LMX relationship to remain intact, the leader and the follower must invest

in the relationship. Leaders and followers of the same gender tend to

have closer (higher LMX) relationships than those of different genders.

Even though the leader does the choosing, the follower’s character-istics

drive the categorizing decision.

Charismatic leadership theory is a leadership theory that
states that followers make attributions of heroic or extraordinary
leadership abilities when they observe certain behaviors. Key
Characteristics of a Charismatic Leader :
1. Vision and articulation. Has a vision—expressed as an
idealized goal—that proposes a future better than the status
quo; and is able to clarify the importance of the vision in
terms that are understandable to others.
2. Personal risk. Willing to take on high personal risk, incur high
costs, and engage in self sacrifice to achieve the vision.
3. Sensitivity to follower needs. Perceptive of others’ abilities
and responsive to their needs and feelings.
4. Unconventional behavior. Engages in behaviors that are
perceived as novel and counter to norms.
Individuals are born with traits that make them charismatic. In fact, studies of identical
twins have found they score similarly on charismatic leadership measures, even if they
were raised in different households and had never met. Personality is also related to
charismatic leadership; charismatic leaders are likely to be extraverted, self-confident,
and achievement oriented. Most experts believe individuals can be trained to exhibit
charismatic behaviors. After all, just because we inherit certain tendencies doesn’t mean
we can’t learn to change. One set of authors proposes a three-step process.
1. Develop an aura of charisma by maintaining an optimistic view; using passion as a
catalyst for generating enthusiasm; and communicating with the whole body, not just
with words.
2. Draw others in by creating a bond that inspires them to follow.
3. Bring out the potential in followers by tapping into their emotions.
Evidence suggests a four-step process.
1. Begins with articulating an appealing vision, a long-term strategy for attaining a
goal by linking the present with a better future for the organization. Desirable
visions fit the times and circumstances and reflect the uniqueness of the
organization.
2. A vision is incomplete without an accompanying vision statement, a formal
articulation of an organization’s vision or mission. Charismatic leaders may use
vision statements to imprint on followers an overarching goal and purpose. They
build followers’ self-esteem and confidence with high performance expectations
and belief that followers can attain them.
3. Through words and actions the leader conveys a new set of values and sets.
Charismatic leaders also set a tone of cooperation and mutual support.
4. The charismatic leader engages in emotion-inducing and often un-conventional
behavior to demonstrate courage and conviction about the vision. Followers
“catch” the emotions their leader is conveying.
The Ohio State studies, Fiedler’s model, and path–goal theory
describe transactional leaders, who guide their followers toward
established goals by clarifying role and task requirements.
Transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend their self-
interests for the good of the organization and can have an

extraordinary effect on their followers. Exhibit 12-4 briefly identifies

and defines the characteristics that differentiate these two types of
leaders. Transactional and transformational leadership complement
each other; they aren’t opposing approaches to getting things done.
Transformational leadership builds on transactional leadership and
produces levels of follower effort and performance beyond what
transactional leadership alone can do. But the reverse isn’t true. So if
you are a good transactional leader but do not have transformational
qualities, you’ll likely only be a mediocre leader. The best leaders are
transactional and transformational.
FULL RANGE OF LEADERSHIP MODEL
Exhibit 12-5 shows the full range of leader-ship model. Laissez-faire is the most

passive and therefore least effective of leader behaviors. Management by

exception active or passive slightly better, but it’s still considered ineffective.

Management-by-exception leaders tend to be available only when there is a

problem, which is often too late. Contingent reward leadership can be an effective

style of leadership but will not get employees to go above and beyond the call of

duty. Only with the four remaining style all aspects of transformational leadership

are leaders able to motivate followers to perform above expectations and

transcend their self-interest for the sake of the organization. Individualized

consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and idealized

influence all result in extra effort from workers, higher productivity, higher morale

and satisfaction, higher organizational effectiveness, lower turnover, lower

absenteeism, and greater organizational adaptability. Based on this model, leaders

are generally most effective when they regularly use each of the four

transformational behaviors.
How Transformational Leadership Works

Transformational leaders are more effective because they are more creative,
but also because they encourage those who follow them to be creative, too.
Companies with transformational leaders have greater decentralization of
responsibility, managers have more propensity to take risks, and
compensation plans are geared toward long-term results all of which facilitate
corporate entrepreneurship. Just as vision helps explain how charismatic
leadership works, it also explains part of the effect of transformational
leadership. One study found vision was even more important than a
charismatic (effusive, dynamic, lively) communication style in explaining the
success of entrepreneurial firms. Finally, trans-formational leadership
engenders commitment on the part of followers and instills greater trust in
the leader.
Authentic leaders know who they are, know what they believe in and value, and act
on those values and beliefs openly and candidly. Their followers consider them
ethical people. The primary quality produced by authentic leadership, therefore, is
trust. Authentic leaders share information, encourage open communication, and stick
to their ideals. The result: people come to have faith in them.

Socialized charismatic leadership is a leadership that conveys other-centered (not

self-centered) values by leaders who model ethical conduct. Socialized charismatic
leaders are able to bring employee values in line with their own values through their
words and actions.
Servant leaders go beyond their own self-interest and focus on
opportunities to help followers grow and develop. They don’t use
power to achieve ends; they emphasize persuasion. Characteristic
behaviors include listening, empathizing, persuading, accepting
stewardship, and actively developing followers’ potential. Because
servant leadership focuses on serving the needs of others, research
has focused on its outcomes for the well-being of followers. The
effects of servant leadership :
1. Resulted in higher levels of commitment to the supervisor, self-
efficacy, and perceptions of justice, which all were related to
organizational citizenship behavior.
2. Servant leadership increases team potency (a belief that one’s
team has above-average skills and abilities), which in turn leads
to higher levels of group performance.
Higher levels of citizenship associated with a focus on growth and
advancement, which in turn was associated with higher levels of
creative performance.
TRUST AND LEADERSHIP
Trust is a psychological state that exists when you agree to make yourself
vulnerable to another because you have positive expectations about how

things are going to turn out. Even though you aren’t completely in control of
the situation, you are willing to take a chance that the other person will
come through for you. Trust is a primary attribute associated with

leadership; breaking it can have serious adverse effects on a group’s

performance. Trust isn’t just about the leader; the characteristics of followers
also influence its development. Evidence has identified three:

1. Integrity refers to honesty and truthfulness. It seems the most critical

characteristic in assessing another’s trustworthiness. Integrity also
means having consistency between what you do and say.

2. Benevolence means the trusted person has your interests at heart, even
if yours aren’t necessarily in line with theirs.
3. Ability encompasses an individual’s technical and interpersonal
knowledge and skills.
Trust propensity refers to how likely a particular employee is to trust a leader. Some people are simply
more likely to believe others can be trusted. Trust propensity is closely linked to the personality trait of
agreeableness, while people with lower self-esteem are less likely to trust others.
Time is the final ingredient in the recipe for trust. Leaders need to demonstrate they have integrity,
benevolence, and ability in situations where trust is important. Leaders who break the psychological
contract with workers, demonstrating they aren’t trustworthy, will find employees are less satisfied and
less committed, have a higher intent toward turnover, engage in less citizenship behavior, and have
lower task performance. Leaders who betray trust are especially likely to be evaluated negatively by
followers if there is already a low level of leader member exchange. Trust between supervisors and
employees has a number of important advantages. Here are just a few that research has shown:
• Trust encourages taking risks.
• Trust facilitates information sharing.
• Trusting groups are more effective.
• Trust enhances productivity.
MENTORING

A mentor is a senior employee who sponsors and supports

a less-experienced employee, a protégé. Successful
mentors are good teachers. They present ideas clearly,
listen well, and empathize with protégés’ problems.
Mentoring relationships serve both career functions and
psychosocial functions. Traditional informal mentoring
relationships develop when leaders identify a less
experienced, lower-level employee who appears to have
potential for future development. 123 The protégé will
often be tested with a particularly challenging assignment.
If he or she performs acceptably, the mentor will develop
the relationship, informally showing the protégé how the
organization reallyworks outside its formal structures and
procedures.
The attribution theory of leadership says leadership is merely an attribution people make about
other individuals. Thus we attribute to leaders intelligence, outgoing personality, strong verbal
skills, aggressiveness, understanding, and industriousness. At the organizational level, we tend to
see leaders, rightly or wrongly, as responsible for extremely negative or extremely positive
performance.

Today’s managers and employees are increasingly linked by networks rather than geographic proximity. They confront
unique challenges, the greatest of which appears to be developing and maintaining trust. Identification-based trust, based
on a mutual understanding of each other’s intentions and appreciation of the other’s wants and desires, is particularly
difficult to achieve without face-to-face interaction. And online negotiations can also be hindered because parties
express lower levels of trust.
Good leadership skills will soon include the abilities to communicate support, trust, and inspiration through keyboarded
words and accurately read emotions in others’ messages. In electronic communication, writing skills are likely to
become an extension of interpersonal skills.
SUBSTITUTES FOR AND NEUTRALIZERS OF LEADERSHIP

Experience and training are among the

substitutes that can replace the need for a
leader’s support or ability to create structure.
Organizational characteristics such as explicit
formalized goals, rigid rules and procedures,
and cohesive work groups can also replace
formal leadership, while indifference to
organizational rewards can neutralize its effects.
Neutralizers make it impossible for leader
behavior to make any difference to follower
outcomes.
➢ Selecting Leaders Begin by reviewing the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to do the job effectively.
Personality tests can identify traits associated with leadership extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness
to experience. High self-monitors are better at reading situations and adjusting their behavior accordingly.
Candidates with high emotional intelligence should have an advantage, especially in situations requiring
transformational leadership. 149 Experience is a poor predictor of leader effectiveness, but situation-specific
experience is relevant. Because nothing lasts forever, the most important event an organization needs to plan
for is a change in leadership.
➢ Training Leaders Leadership training of any kind is likely to be more successful with high self-monitors. Such
individuals have the flexibility to change their behavior. Second, what can organizations teach that might be
related to higher leader effectiveness, probably not “vision creation” but, likely, implementation skills. Train
people to develop “an understanding about content themes critical to effective visions.” Also teach skills such
as trust building and mentoring. And leaders can be taught situational skills. They can learn how to evaluate
situations, modify them to better fit their style, and assess which leader behaviors might be most effective in
given situations. Behavioral training through modeling exercises can increase an individual’s ability to exhibit
charismatic leadership qualities.
CASE 1

Instruction.
Open your book and discuss
with your partners in group!
 CASE 2
Instruction.
Open your book and discuss
with your partners in group!
 CASE 3
Instruction.
Open your book and discuss
with your partners in group!
 Instruction.
Open the journal, read carefully and discuss with your
partners in group!

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6
Leadership plays a central part in understanding group behavior, because it’s the leader who usually
directs us toward our goals. Knowing what makes a good leader should thus be valuable in improving
group performance.

❖ The early search for a set of universal leadership traits failed. However, recent efforts using the Big
Five personality framework show strong and consistent relationships between leadership and
extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience.
❖ The behavioral approach’s major contribution was narrowing leadership into task-oriented
(initiating structure) and people-oriented (consideration) styles. By considering the situation in
which the leader operates, contingency theories promised to improve on the behavioral approach,
but only LPC theory has fared well in leadership research.
❖ Research on charismatic and transformational leadership has made major contributions to our
understanding of leadership effectiveness. Organizations want managers who can exhibit
transformational leadership qualities and who have vision and the charisma to carry it out.
❖ Effective managers must develop trusting relationships with followers because, as organizations
have become less stable and predictable, strong bonds of trust are replacing bureaucratic rules in
defining expectations and relationships.
❖ Tests and interviews help identify people with leadership qualities. Managers should also consider
investing in leadership training such as formal courses, workshops, rotating job responsibilities,
coaching, and mentoring.