Organizational Change - Chapter 6.pdf

3. Using symbols and language to create energy. 4. For shaping the poli$cal dynamics of change is the need to build in stability. This is the use of power to ensure some things remain the same. It is helpful to provide sources of stability to provide ‘anchors’ for people to hold on to during the tur...

3. Using symbols and language to create energy. 4. For shaping the poli$cal dynamics of change is the need to build in stability. This is the use of power to ensure some things remain the same. It is helpful to provide sources of stability to provide ‘anchors’ for people to hold on to during the turbulence of change. Analysing the poten$al for ac$on: 1. Iden$f who holds suJcient ower to assist chan e or alterna$vel to work a ainst it that Chapter 6: Leadership styles and leading change Leadership de0ned Leadership is a process whereby an individual in8uences a group so as to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2013). More de=ni$ons on age 212. Management versus leadership Henri Fayol’s =ve func$ons of management: - planning organizing commanding coordina$ng controlling Tony Watson (1994) de=ned management as: ‘… organizing, pulling things together and along in a general direc$on to bring about long term organiza$onal survival’. 44 Mintzberg (1979) studied chief execu$ves in both large and small organiza$ons and grouped managerial roles into three sets: - three interpersonal roles of Figurehead, Leader and Liaison three informa$onal roles of Monitor, Disseminator and Spokesman four decision-making roles of Entrepreneur, Disturbance Handler, Resource Allocator and Nego$ator How leadership models have changed A brief history of leadership 1. Great Man Theories (1840s) – leaders are born, not made. Leaders are heroic and charisma$c. They have legi$mate, expert and referent power. (Examples: Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton, Steve Jobs). 2. Trait Theories (1950s) – people inherit certain quali$es and characteris$cs that make them much beCer suited for leadership. There is a perfect list of traits for leadership. 3. Behavioural Style Theories (1960s) – leadership can be learned. Leaders are made, not born; however, the focus is on leader’s ac$ons, not their thinking. 4. Conngency and Situaonal Theories (1960s) – par$cular variables in the environment or the situa$on will suggest the appropriate style of leadership. Legi$mate and coercive power is s$ll held by the leader. 5. Relaonal and Pro-Social Theories (late 1970s and onwards) – leadership is inter-rela$onal and co-created between people. It can be used to transform both individuals and organiza$ons. There is a strong ethical component to leadership. There is shi> in focus from power being the most important component to people being the most important factor to consider. Charismac-visionary leadership How charisma works: 1. Frame-breaking (unfreezing) 2. Frame-moving 3. Frame-realignment (refreezing) Trait theories of leadership Originally trait theory underpinned the idea that leaders are born, not made, so the emphasis was more about what leaders should be like than about how they lead. Six traits of successful leaders were put forward (Lord, De Vader & Alliger, 1986): - Intelligence An extrovert personality Dominance - Masculinity Conserva$sm Being beCer adjusted than non-leaders Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) also suggested six successful leadership traits: - Drive – achievement, ambi$on, energy, tenacity, ini$a$ve. Leadership movaon – personalized or socialized. Honesty and integrity – the degree to which a leader can be trusted. Self-con$dence – including emo$onal stability. Cognive ability - the ability to marshal and interpret a wide variety of informa$on. Knowledge of the business. In 1996, Dulewicz and Herbert reported on their research with a sample of 72 Anglo-American managers who, on the basis of several indicators of success, had been iden$=ed as ‘high-8yers’ or ‘low-8yers’. They found that high-8yers scored higher than low-8yers on the following six traits: - Risk-taking Asser$veness Decisiveness Achievement Mo$va$on Compe$$veness Northouse (2013) con=ned his list to those indica$ve of leaders in the West: - Intelligence Self-con=dence Determina$on Integrity Sociability Shin (1999) iden$=ed a substan$vely di:erent list of traits for South Korean CEOs compared to those proposed for Anglo-American leaders: - Management respect for employees – caring for people and developing them. Iniator a(tudes – solving problems and becoming involved to get things done. Tenacity and spirit – not wavering in the face of adversity. Network-building – developing rela$onships with people outside the organiza$on yet useful to it, such as government oJcials and =nanciers. Emphasis on competency – a ‘Kaizen’ mentality of con$nual improvement. Leadership styles and behaviour Two in8uen$al studies of leadership known respec$vely as the University of Michigan studies and the Ohio State studies, separately iden$=ed two independent dimensions of leadership style. These are considera$on and ini$a$ng structure. Consideraon is the degree to which a leader builds trust and mutual respect with subordinates, shows respect of their ideas and concern for their well-being. Iniang structure is the degree to which a leader de=nes and structures their role and the interac$ons within the group towards the aCainment of formal goals. The Michigan researchers used the terms ‘employee-centred’ and ‘produc$on-centred’ leadership for these dimensions but they were the same as the Ohio descrip$ons. The main point about these dimensions is that, because they are deemed to be independent of each other, a leader’s behaviour can be categorized in four di:erent ways: - High on considera$on and high on ini$a$ng structure High on considera$on and low on ini$a$ng structure Low on considera$on and low on ini$a$ng structure 46 - Low on considera$on and high on ini$a$ng structure Based on these studies, Blake and Mouton (1964) proposed that the most e:ec$ve management style is one which is high on both the people-oriented (considera$on and employee-centred) and task-oriented (ini$a$ng structure and produc$on-centred) dimensions. There are =ve di:erent styles based on the now called Leadership Grid (=gure 6.1, to the right). The Leadership Grid is a simpli=ed way of categorizing di:erent aspects of leadership behaviour. Based on his study Useem (1996) condenses a long list of desirable behaviours into the following =ve characteris$cs: - Being visionary; Showing strong con=dence in self and others; Communica$ng high-performance expecta$ons and standards; Personally exemplifying the =rm’s vision, values and standards; Demonstra$ng personal sacri=ce, determina$on, persistence and courage. Conngency and situaonal approaches to leadership According to these approaches to leadership, successful leadership is con$ngent upon situa$onal variables mul$ple stakeholders and mul$ple perspec$ves are important. One of the best-known theories that takes situa$onal factors into account is from Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1973) who arranged leadership behaviour along a con$nuum. At one end is boss-centred leadership: a high level of authoritarian power where leaders tell subordinates what to do. At the other end, subordinate-centred leadership: leaders and subordinates jointly make decisions in a par$cipa$ve climate. They suggest that a leader should move along the con$nuum, selec$ng the style that is most appropriate to the situa$on. They iden$fy ‘forces’ that determine the style of leadership to use: - The forces that determine the style of leadership emanate from the manager, for example, his/her personality and values, skills and knowledge. The forces in the subordinates, for example, the amount of support they need, their work experience and knowledge, commitment to organiza$onal goals. The forces in the situa$on, for example, the nature and urgency of the task or the problem, the constraints arising from the organiza$on’s structure, processes and culture and the organiza$onal environment. Fiedler’s conngency model of leadership Three situa$onal variables are assumed to determine the best style of leadership to adopt: 47 - Leader-member relaons – the quality of the rela$onship between the leader and their followers and extent to which a leader has their support. Task structure – the extent to which the task or purpose of a group is well de=ned and the work outcomes can be judged clearly as a success or failure. Posional power – the level of power, par$cularly reward power that the leader has over followers. Low posi$onal power means that the leader has liCle authority to direct and evaluate the work of others or to reward them. Hersey and Blanchard’s situaonal theory Puts the emphasis on the readiness of followers. According to their theory, a leader’s style and behaviour should depend on the maturity and readiness of followers to undertake the task and to accept responsibility and make their own decisions. Therefore, a leader’s style should fall into one of four quadrants – from telling through selling and form par$cipa$ng to delega$ng (=gure 6.3, to the right). Path-Goal theory of leadership Path-goal theory maintains that the leader should use the style of leadership that is most e:ec$ve in in8uencing followers’ percep$ons of the goals they need to achieve and the way or path they need to achieve them. The theory relates directly to expectancy theories of mo$va$on in that a leader’s success is judged by whether their followers achieve their goals. Four leader behaviours are suggested by path-goal theory: - Direcve – seLng standards, telling followers what to do and how to do it. Supporve – being open and approachable and showing concern for followers. Parcipave – invi$ng opinions and ideas from followers and involving others. Achievement-oriented – seLng challenging goals and objec$ves that stress improvements. Two dominant situa$onal factors are relevant to this theory: the characteris$cs of the followers and the nature of the task or job and the immediate context in which it takes place (=gure 6.4, to the right). What followers want from their leader: 1. What followers want from their leader; 2. Compassion – to feel that their leaders genuinely care about their well-being 3. Stability – that change is not a constant 4. Hope for the future Matching organizaonal models and leadership roles Quinn (1988) proposed four organiza$onal models dis$nguished on the basis of two bipolar dimensions: 1. Adaptability and 8exibility versus the desire for stability and control 48 2. Whether organiza$ons are outward looking (towards the environment and the compe$$on) or internally focused towards the maintenance of systems and procedures. Quinn proposes that di:erent leadership-styles and behaviour ‘=t’ the di:erent organiza$onal models. Problems with conngency and situaonal theory - There are simply too many con$ngent variables that the theory has to account for Disagreement regarding why some variables should be included and others excluded Leadership behaviours in prac$ce were not always situa$onally con$ngent Raonal & Pro-Social theories of leadership In the late 1970s, pro-social theories began to emerge that recognized that leaders and organiza$ons had social responsibili$es to their followers and that engagement is cri$cal to employee mo$va$on, reten$on, e:ort, crea$vity and produc$vity. Cunli:e (2009), describes the philosopher leader, advocates a ‘rela$onal’ and re8exive approach to leadership and management where leadership is con$nually ‘co-created’ between the leader and their followers and where the leader is always seen in rela$on to, and ethically responsible for, others. Emoonal intelligence Emo$onal intelligence (EI) concerns the ability to recognize di:ering emo$onal states within one-self and others and to respond appropriately. There are three slightly di:erent models of EI: According to Goleman ‘Emo$onal Intelligence is the sine qua non of leadership’, meaning that it is an absolutely essen$al trait of a good leader. According to Goleman the =ve competencies of emo$onal intelligence are: - Self-awareness Self-regula$on Mo$va$on Empathy Social skills Higgs and Dulewicz (2004) suggest that EI is concerned with achieving one’s goals through the capabili$es of: - Managing one’s own feelings and emo$ons. Being sensi$ve to the needs of others and being able to in8uence key people. Balancing one’s own mo$ves and drives with conscien$ous and ethical behaviour. Transaconal and transformaonal leadership Three dimensions of transac$onal leadership - - Con$ngent reward – to what extent are meaningful reward exchanges set up: exchange of rewards for e:ort, promise of rewards for good performance and recogni$on of accomplishments. Management by excep$on (ac$ve) – to what extent do leaders an$cipate problems and intervene with correc$ve ac$on before problems arise? 49 - Management by excep$on (passive) – to what extent do leaders wait for problems to arise before intervening? Four dimensions of transforma$onal leadership: - Charisma – provides vision and sense of mission for followers to follow, ins$ls pride, gains respect and trust. Inspiraon – communicates high expecta$ons and standards, uses symbols to focus e:orts, expresses important purposes in simple ways, op$mis$c about the future. Intellectual smulaon – challenges assump$ons with fresh ideas and solicits ideas from followers. Individualized consideraon – showing interest in individual followers and their development, helping them to develop. Treats employees individually, coaches, advises. Transac$onal leadership is based on giving people rewards for doing what the leader wants. Transforma$onal leadership relies on giving followers a purpose, a vision of something to aim for and on crea$ng follower iden$=ca$on with the leader. Servant-leadership The term refers to a form of leadership that places service to others as its core. Servant-leadership is an integra$ve model of leadership. It can be characterized as post-heroic as it de-roman$cizes the image of leader as hero and =gurehead while recognizing the distribu$on of power, the rela$onal nature of in8uence throughout an organiza$on, as well as the social and collec$ve learning process involved in leadership. The servant-leader is concerned with the needs of others, the desire to serve =rst and to build the leadership capacity of others. Servant-leadership may support change in organiza$ons because it presupposes contemporary designs such as the network or distributed teams forms, which encourages increased empowerment at all levels and 8exible communica$on. Authenc leadership Authen$c leadership theories o:er some an$dote to the ‘dark side’ of leadership, such as an$-social traits and styles, as authen$c leadership is predicated on the idea that leaders know themselves in$mately, and therefore also have a greater understanding of how others are similar or di:erent to them. Four themes: - A ‘natural’ leadership development process. Development from struggle or hardship. Leadership development from a purpose or cause. Development as an ac$ve learning process. The authen$c leader does not try to imitate or mimic some other person or model. They are true to themselves, are acutely aware of their values and beliefs and they understand the implica$ons of how their leadership a:ects the organiza$on and their followers. ACributes of authen$c leaders include: - - Being true to themselves. Humility and modesty. This does not mean being weak; on the contrary, it means being aware of one’s limita$ons and mistakes, being willing to learn from them, seeing the value that others bring to situa$ons and not being an arrogant glory seeker. Seeing situa$ons from a range of perspec$ves, bringing out into the open the tensions and moral dilemmas exis$ng within them. 50 - Knowing one’s own sense of right and wrong and adhering to personal standers display the moral courage to act consistently and not sacri=ce deeply held beliefs. Being able to manage themselves and their emo$ons, and being a role model to others. Having pa$ence, resilience and 8exibility. Three pillars of authen$c leadership: - Self-awareness (rela$onships, strengths, weaknesses, empathy, in8uence, impact). Ethics (integrity, honour, courage, honesty, transparency, fairness). Self-regula$on (discipline, energy, 8exibility, emo$onal control, pa$ence, resistance). Critical approaches to leadership When posi$ve elements become over-played and the manager lacks the 8exibility to adapt their behaviour appropriately, the manager can ‘derail’. Hogan and Kaiser (2009) argued that derailed leaders are essen$ally de=cient in one or more of four key skill areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. Intrapersonal – self-awareness and empathy. Interpersonal – social skills and emo$onal intelligence. Business – planning, organizing and monitoring. Leadership – team building and role modelling. They also iden$fy =ve ‘early warning signs’ of management derailment: 1. Poor results – customer complaints, cover-ups, inaccurate =nancial repor$ng, missed objec$ves. 2. Narrow perspec$ves – out-of-date, over-reliance on technical skills, too detail-oriented. 3. Poor team building – autocra$c decision making, micromanagement, high turnover sta:. 4. Poor working rela$onships – insensi$vity, being abrasive or abusive. 5. Inappropriate/immature behaviour – gossiping, poor at coping, refusal to accept responsibility. Gender and leadership Eagly and Carli (2007) suggest that there are both similari$es and di:erences in style between men and women leaders, but that the di:erences, while sta$s$cally signi=cant, are quite small. Some studies indicate that women generally tend to adopt more rela$onal, par$cipa$ve and transforma$onal styles, whilst men are more likely to take more transac$onal, direc$ve style. This perspec$ve is echoed by Gibson (1995) who suggests that an approach that is task/goal orientated and is one of asser$veness and control is most o>en exhibited by men; whilst women tend to take a more communal approach which is characterized by a more nurturing, caring approach with the wellbeing and welfare of others at its core. Studies suggest that men are more transac$onal and rely more on posi$on power to get results whereas women are more likely to be transforma$onal and use rela$onships rather than power to mo$vate. Leadership and change Leadership and the organizaonal life cycle Greiner and Quinn proposed that di:erent organiza$onal life cycle stages need di:erent leadership styles to take the organiza$on forward. When markets and structures are evolving quickly, for 51 example, a crea$ve and entrepreneurial style =ts best. As the organiza$on matures, top management styles are said to have to change. Leadership and the nature of change Dunphy and Stace modelled approaches to change on two dimensions; the level of environmental readjustment needed to restore environmental =t and the style of leadership needed to realign it. Their readjustment categories are: - Corporate transformaon – changes across the organiza$on to business strategy, e.g. revised mission, organiza$on-wide restructuring, new top management. Modular transformaon – a major realignment of part of an organiza$on, e.g. a major restructuring, expansion or contrac$on. Incremental adjustment – dis$nct changes but not on a radical scale, e.g. changing structure, using new produc$on methods. Fine-tuning – typically at lower levels, e.g. clarifying goals, re=ning methods and procedures. Their categories of leadership are: - Collaborave – wide par$cipa$on of employees. Communicave – involving people in goal seLng. Direcve – managerial authority is the driving force. Coercive – change is forced and imposed. Combining the environmental re=Lng and leadership categories above, Dunphy and Stace proposed the following approaches to managing change. - When employees are in favour and support change then parcipave evoluon is used when the amount of change needed is small. When environmental =t is low and when employees support radical change then charismac transformaon is appropriate. When employees oppose change then forced evoluon applies when small adjustments are needed. Whereas dictatorial transformaon is needed when environmental =t is low. Obstrucng and facilitang change processes Any organiza$onal change will face forces that facilitate it or obstruct it. Force =eld analysis is a frequently used technique for iden$fying the range and the strength for and against change. Developed by Kurt Lewin (1951), force =eld analysis is a way of iden$fying the forces that are impac$ng on a situa$on. It iden$=es power interests of actors involved and should lead to ideas about how to in8uence the actors to reduce the opposing forces and strengthen the driven forces. A fresh view of resistance: resistance as feedback Ford and Ford (2009) suggest =ve ways of using resistance construc$vely: 52 - - - - Boost awareness – top managers, having convinced themselves of the bene=ts, are mostly immune to how changes a:ect the jobs of people far below them so they should talk to those who are being a:ected. Return to purpose – communicate what needs to change and why. Middle managers need to be able to explain to their sta: what needs to happen and they cannot do this unless the purpose is clear. Change the change – resistors can iden$fy serious points about what is being proposed so do not be afraid to ‘change the change’ to take these points on board. Build engagement – if communica$on channels are e:ec$ve then worries and ideas can come to the surface. These can be managed so that individuals and groups can get involved in dealing with them. In other words: engage people in the changes. Complete the past – past failures need to be acknowledged. Many people have good memories of what happened the last $me change was aCempted. This means that today’s resistance may not be much to do with today’s change but with past change. Contrasng paths to change Figure 6.8 depicts Strebel’s model of ‘change paths’ to show the di:erent approaches to change depending on the levels of resistance to change and their strength. He o:ers the following advice: 1. Look for closed aLtudes by examining what processes are in place for bringing new ideas into the sector, company or business unit. 2. Look for an entrenched culture by examining what processes are in place for re8ec$ng on values and improving behaviour and skills. 3. Look for rigid structures and systems, by examining when the organiza$on and industry last changed signi=cantly; ‘To what extent are the structures and systems are capable of accommoda$ng forces of change?’ 4. Examine whether historical forces of change are driving the business and by ask to what extent these have become the new force of resistance. 5. Assess the strength of the overall resistance to change. Resistance to change Piderit (2000) iden$=es three di:erent kinds of resistance: behavioural, a:ec$ve and cogni$ve. Behavioural resistance could manifest as non-compliance or disrup$on to planned changes. Alterna$vely, others might resist by using logic to defend and argue for the preserva$on of their preferred rou$nes. Other people may stay silent and comply with change but with their feelings and their emo$onal state not conducive to genuine acceptance of the change ini$a$ve. Cynicism and scepcism Stanley, Meyer and Topolnytsky (2005) consider that scep$cism towards change is: ‘doubt about the viability of a change for the aCainment of this stated objec$ve’. Cynicism towards change di:ers in that it is a: ‘disbelief about a management’s stated mo$ves for a speci=c organiza$onal change’. In other words, cynicism indicates a lack of trust. 53 Readiness for change Readiness for change helps facilitate change. Readiness involves shaping and condi$oning aLtudes and beliefs to be favourable for change. As such, communica$on strategies need to emphasize two key messages: - - Urgency – the need for change, i.e. explaining what the organiza$on needs to be doing in the future compared to what it is currently doing, and the cri$cal $me available before the change must occur. Readiness – employees’ ability to change and their ability to do it well. This is important because if employee think they cannot achieve the required changes, then they will avoid any e:ort into achieving it. Combining the two concepts of urgency and readiness generates four states, along with ideas for how best to cope with these four stages. These are: - - Low readiness/low urgency – calls for a communica$on strategy to enhance readiness. This could involve opinion forming and ac$ve par$cipa$on of employees in events that raise readiness. This might be the least problema$c state of change. Low readiness/high urgency – this is a crisis situa$on which may need a rapid injec$on of new personnel and reassignment of people to new tasks. High readiness/low urgency – the priority here is to keep messages about the discrepancy current with frequent communica$ons about progress. High readiness/high urgency – a quick response scenario exists in which high energy for change needs to be maintained. The change here could happen smoothly, but vigilance for unexpected ‘glitches’ is needed. Leader-member exchange The aLtudes of leaders and the way they behave are interpreted by di:erent followers in di:erent ways. Leaders also behave di:erently with di:erent people. This observable feature of organiza$onal life led Graen to develop the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory. Graen dis$nguished two types of leader-member rela$onships: in-group and out-group. People in the in-group are involved in decision making. Their opinions will be sought and the leader may share plans with them. People in the out-group are kept at a distance and are only given the informa$on needed to do their job. Their ideas are not sought and if they volunteer ideas, they may struggle to be taken seriously. 54