The “Leadership Grid’ renamed in 1991 is a two-dimensional theory with two criteria: orientation for people and an orientation for production. (Daft, 2008: 29) The theory conceptualizes management styles and relations by using two axis named s follow: “Concern for People” and “Concern for Task”, these are important dimensions used to examine leadership behavior and characteristics. The grid consists of two axes – Y-axis representing concern for production whiles the X- axis representing concern for people on a scale of nine points.
It must be noted that according to Blake and Mouton there is also a third axis of motivation, measured from negative (driven by fear) to positive (driven by desire). The concept distinguishes between 5 different leadership styles based on the concern for people and concern for production. 2. 3. 2 Five different leadership Tyler Impoverished leadership style (Low production/ Low People This style can be described as “the delegate and disappear management style” (manage. Com, 2010). Leaders in this category are generally those who arrived there due to their position, and are simply viewed as going through the motions of being a leader.
These leaders show little concern for both people and production. They are characterized as indifferent, non-committal, UN- involved and withdrawn. The result of these actions for the organizations is disorientation, dissatisfaction and disharmony within the departments where hose leaders operate. Impoverished leaders are in-effective leaders. Country club leadership style (Low production/ High People) This leadership style can be described as the “one-sided, thoughtful attention to the needs of employees” (manage. Mom, 2010). Leaders in this category are those who are concerned more with the welfare and personal needs of people and lack the focus of task accomplishment. People comfort and security receives a lot of attention in the hope that it will increase people’s performance. These leaders are almost in capable of stamping down their authority. The result is that cause he fears that using his power will jeopardize relationships. These leaders are seen as democratic leaders, but are ineffective in driving people towards achievement.
The result of this leadership style is usually a friendly atmosphere, but not necessarily very productive. Authority or also named the Produce or Perish leadership style (High production low people). This leadership style can be described as the “Authoritarian or compliance leaded’ (manage. Com, 2010) This task orientated leader is autocratic and has a high concern for production and a low concern for people. These leaders are result driven and see people s merely a tool to achieved desired results.
There is little or no cooperation or collaboration present in this leadership style. These leaders pressure and punish subordinates to achieve goals. There is a major focus on scheduling of work and completing within the scope of the schedule. Authoritarian leaders are characterized as being controlling, overpowering over driving and coercive. The result of this leadership style for the organization is high output associated with high staff turnover. The authoritarian style can be applied with good results in crisis management.
Middle of the road leadership style (medium production/ tedium people) This leadership style tries to balance between achieving goals and the needs of people (manage. Com, 2010) These leaders compromise on conviction to make some progress and as a result performance in achieving goals suffers and the efforts to build an effective team culture suffers. (Lease, 2010). This leadership style is characterized by avoiding conflict and by balancing people and production hopes for acceptable performance. The result is neither production or people needs are fully met.
Team style leadership (High on production/high on people) According to Blake and Mouton this is the ultimate leadership style. The leader pays high concern for production but also a high concern for people motivation is high in this leadership environment. These leaders consider people relation, commitment and empowerment as means of achieving goals (Lease, 2010). These leaders are open to learning, view conflict as an opportunity for growth and development. Goals are clearly defined and high expectations are set by the leader.
An environment is created where people can learn in completing their tasks. This leadership style is characterized by driving trust and learning in teams, team involvement is high. The result is an effective team environment eased on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation with high production as result. 2. 3. 3 Strengths and weaknesses of the Leadership Grid 2. 3. 3. 1 Strengths a) Marked a big shift on the focus of management work. B) Several studies give credibility to this model. C) Encourages leaders to think about their own balance between production and people. ) Using the model makes the various leadership styles measurable. E) The model opens the opportunity for discussion for behavior improvement. (Lasses, 201 0) 2. 3. 3. 2 Weaknesses a) The Leadership grid tries to identify the most effective leadership style for al situations which are not supported by evidence in real organizations. B) No adequate relationship between behavior and performance outcomes. C) The leadership grid implies that team management is the ultimate style ignoring flexibility in circumstances. ) All situations may not call for team management as the ultimate leadership style. (Doyle and Smith. 2001) 2. 4 Further analyses As the Managerial Grid forms part of the people-centered leadership theories literature suggest that the only real assumption that can be made is that leaders high in people orientation will end up with satisfied employees. Due o inconsistencies in research in these theories other theories should also be investigated that might provide answers in terms of leadership behavior in different context and setting. 2. Overview of other leadership theories Due to the fact that people-centered leadership theories is to mixed and do not offer investigation into context and setting other theories will be briefly investigated. Fiddler contingency model described how leadership style and the degree to which the situation give the leader control and influence. Three concepts were important a) the relationship between leader and followers, b) the Truckee of the task and c) position power. Hershey and Blanchard situational leadership were straightforward in recognizing the subordinates ability and motivation as crucial to a leader’s success.
Leader-member-exchange theories focused on the in-group, out-group. Giving the impression that the in-group those subordinates with a close relationship with the leader performed better and enjoyed more satisfaction. (Robbins, 1998: 367) Further investigation into other theories can be conducted but an element of people and task will always surface in some degree. It is important that leaders are aware of all the factors hat influence leadership in an effort in working towards effectively committing people to task, converting followers to leaders and transforming leaders to change agents to meet business objectives. . METHODOLOGY 3. 1 Population and Sample The study was conducted in a Medical Imaging Services Organization operating in the southern and eastern parts of Sautéing. The total population includes 220 staff members working in different Branches and Departments. A sample which included me and five of my direct subordinates within my department were selected for the study. The five subordinates included 1 black male, 1 colored male, two white females and 1 white male. 3. 2 Data Collection Methodology A questionnaire was obtained from an internet source. (http://WV. Unlink. Mom ‘-Download/leader/bum_model. HTML) The questionnaire written in English with 18 standard statements asked to rate statements on leadership behavior on scale from O to 5, O, being least applicable to the participant and 5, being the most relevant behavior portrayed by the participant. The same questionnaire written in English was adapted with the same 18 standard statements as was used in the self assessment. It required participants to rate the statement on adhering behavior on a scale from O to 5. O being behavior never experienced by subordinates and 5, behavior always experienced.
The questionnaire was completed by me and the chosen subordinates were asked to complete the questionnaire without having to add their names. The participants were given two days to complete the questionnaire allowing them enough time to consider the statements carefully. Statement 1, 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17 were placed under the heading of people Statement 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 18 were placed under the heading of task The ratings of each of the statements were then allocated to ACH of the statements as described above.
The scores were tabled and a grand total was obtained by adding the ratings under each heading up. Each score was then multiplied by 0. 2 to obtain a final score for each participant out of a possible 1 to 9. Averages of each participants score in terms of people and task were then calculated and plotted on the leadership matrix. Connecting lines were drawn from each score to determine a placement on the leadership matrix. 4.
FINDINGS EXHIBIT 1 People (P)Questions I Task (T) Questions I Participant 1 (Self assessment) I Participant 2 (Subordinate assessment) I Participant 3 (Subordinate assessment) I Participant 4 (Subordinate assessment) I Participant 5 (Subordinate assessment) I Participant 6 (Subordinate assessment) I No I No I p T 1 p T 1 p T 1 p T 1 p T I p T 11 1 2 | 4 4 | 4 314 415 5 14 5 | 4 4 15 5141315 313 516 5 4 3 15 4 14 514 515 312 414 413 513 514 313 415 51 141 1314 51 161 1513 41 4 4 14 215 41 4 4 13 414 51101813 5 1711815 415 415 32138 37 142 41 138 34 | 33 37 | 45 44 6. 1 7. 6 74 18. 4 8. 2 17. 6 6. 8 16. 6 7. 419 8. 8 | EXHIBIT 2 Participant I Score People I Score Task I 511 37 I ox. 2 1 ox. 2 | 7. 4 1 Self 1 7. 41 6. 41 2 Subordinate I 3 Subordinate I 4 Subordinate I Subordinate I 7. 61 7. 41 8. 41 8. 21 7. 61 6. 81 6. 61 7. 41 6 Subordinate 1 81 8. 81 Average subordinate | 7. 64 | 7. 72 | Average Self+ subordinates | 7. 52 | 7. 06 | EXHIBIT 3 Source: (www. Unlink. Com/?download/leader/bum_model. HTML) 5. DISCUSSION 5. 1 Analysis of findings The score obtained on self assessment was a 7. For people and a 6. 4 for task. Subordinate average score indicated a 7. 64 for people and 7. 72 for task. The total average for both self and subordinate assessment showed a 7. 62 for people and 7. 06 for task. There is balance in my leadership behavior with a slight tendency awards being more people orientated. In my current role as Human Resources Manager subordinates might perceive me as being people oriented just because am the “People’s” manager, but on the contrary the difference is so small that it might not even be relevant.
My leadership style can be described as that of being a team leader which is characterized by the following behavior: a) Commitment and empowerment to achieve goals b) Conflict is an opportunity for growth and development c) Creating a learning environment d) Trust and Respect e) Clear goals The question remains whether I will be able to produce the same kind of espouse on a larger scale. As the leadership grid neglects the significance of the internal and external constraints, context, circumstances and situation further investigation should be conducted.
The tendency to be more people oriented can create a culture of entitlement amongst subordinates which should be monitored and manage through effective performance measures. 5. 2 Strengths and weaknesses identified Strengths and weaknesses identified from analyzing the feedback of the questionnaires. Strengths I Areas for development I Building commitment amongst subordinates. I Build commitment amongst a eider group better making use of influence.
I Creating an environment for growth and development I Investigate the probabilities of the in-group and out- group ELM theory, as the in-group out-group theory might be currently presents Effective motivation of subordinates I Continually monitor the situation to not move down the grid to becoming a middle of the road I Building trust and respect I Communication and building effective manager. Relationships with wider groups I Clarifying clear goals I Spend more time on scheduling and monitoring of projects. I Employees enjoy high satisfaction working under me.
Equip myself with more knowledge to handle the demands of being a leader more effectively in all situations. I The tabled strengths and weaknesses will be used to create a Two year action- oriented leadership self development plan. 5. 3 Self development leadership plan Two year action orientated leadership self development plan My self- development plan will be based on four considerations: a) Individualized Consideration Actions b) Intellectual Consideration Actions c) Task Considerations d) Relationship building and inspirational considerations (Binghamton university, 2002:8) a) Individualized considerations
Action area I Action steps I Time frame I Provide development opportunities for the wider group I Involve wider groups in offering solutions to solve problems. Seek continual feedback from the wider group on how to improve current environment. Ensure everybody understand where they fit in and the importance of their contribution in organization success. | 1 yearly Build individualized relationships through better communication I Ensure you know the names of subordinates in the wider group.
Source information on special skills subordinates might have that can contribute to an environment of innovation. Regularly invite authentic invitations with members of the wider group. | 1 yearly Investigate if evidence of the in-group, out group exists. I Conduct studies and surveys to determine manager subordinate relationship behaviors continually evaluate the environment. | 6 months I Use influence to build commitment with the wider group. I Always act with the best interest of the wider group.
Consciously build respect and trust through integrity and ensuring subordinates know their best interested aligned with organization objectives are considered I Continuous b) Knowledge considerations Build knowledge through further studies I Master of Business Administration tidies | 2 year I Addressing weaknesses in scheduling I Thorough study of project management and applying careful attention to task activities to ensure projects keep to deadlines | 1 yearly Wider knowledge of business process I To obtain a working knowledge of all business processes by getting involved in areas out of functional area and to apply knowledge obtained through my MBA studies | 2 years I Building a learning environment I By establishing forums for conversation on organizational topics of mutual interest. Not only build general knowledge base but also serves as an opportunity for subordinates to interact.
I Continuous I ) Task considerations Focus on doing the right things I Consciously strive to align all effort toward organization success I Continuous I Goal setting and time frames I Ensure goals are set clearly and schedule tasks according to time frames ensure effective project management. Ensure goals are clearly defined and all subordinates are clear on the objectives. | 6 months I Performance Management I Effectively apply performance measures and ensure rewards are consistent with goal attainment. Ensure fair and consistent measurement tools are utilizes. 1 Yearly Build commitment in goal attainment I Set the example by portraying omitted behavior towards achieving goals.