Content area
Full Text
Keywords
Leadership, Individual behaviour, Measurement
Abstract
Leadership behaviors, as described by several authors, werE factor analyzed. This resulted in four different types of behaviors demonstrated by leaders who were rated by their "followers". The four types of behaviors are reviewed and discussed in light o the factor analysis study. Importantly, the four factors seem to bear only little relationship to previous studies. It is suggested that previous works focused on factors related to managing and not leading, while the factors under discussion here are more related to the dynamic of leading Additionally, the lack of correspondence may be due. in part, to definition problems and a lack of clarity of terms. An attempt is made to sort out the confusion.
It appears that through most of the twentieth century authors and researchers used the concepts of management and leadership virtually interchangeably (see Kent, 1999).
More recently, though, clarity has evolved and authors have converged on the notion that management has to do with creating organization, order and stability while leadership has to do with creating energy, thrust, alignment, focus, and commitment (Kotter, 1990; Kouzes and Posner, 1995; Van Eron, 1995). Tracey and Hinkin (1998) reported on a set of behaviors which are differentiated from managerial practices and which account for much of the variance in ratings of leader effectiveness. It seems that the idea that management and leadership are different dynamics may be confirmed by these authors' findings. Still, as Kent and others have stated (Kent, 1999; Kent et al., 1996), the need for a clear and differentiating definition of leadership remains. As we shall see, while there has been a convergence of ideas regarding the dynamic of leadership since the mid-1980s, much room remains for clarity and precision. Confusion has been created by different levels of analysis (Yammarino and Dubinsky, 1994) and by a wide divergence in definitions.
The need for definition: managing vs leading
Fleishman was an early innovator in the study of leadership because he attempted to look at specific leader behaviors as opposed to leader styles or traits (see Stodgill and Coons, 1957; Halpin and Winer, 1957; Fleishman, 1953; Fleishman et al., 1955). These "Ohio State" studies, and similar studies conducted in Japan leading to the "performance-maintenance" theory of...