What are the theories?
trait/ personality, situation, behaviour, contingency, transactional & translational
1 of 170
What is leadership?
persuading & directing group members towards attainment of a common goal
2 of 170
who said it?
Hogan et al., 1994 in Hogg & Vaughan 2014
3 of 170
why are they leading?
great ideas, people follow, able to translate ideas into action & manage groups
4 of 170
critical thinking point 1?
is persuasion different from domination?
5 of 170
point 2?
are leaders only leaders if we define them to be and share their visions/ goals as a collective?
6 of 170
point 3?
does power = leader?
7 of 170
Bad/ good is different to
effective/ ineffective
8 of 170
an effective leader doesn't always...
represent a safe or ethical one
9 of 170
an effective leader is
successful in setting realistic goals and influencing others
10 of 170
a good leader has
integrity, competency (Hogan & Kaiser, 2005), morality with outcomes directed towards welfare (Hogan, Curphy & Hogan, 1994)
11 of 170
a bad/ dangerous leader...
devalues others, intolerant to criticism, grandiose sense of entitlement (Mayer,1993), poor interpersonal skills, lack of care
12 of 170
An example of a good leader?
13 of 170
competent, integrity, and directed towards welfare, outward thinking towards community
14 of 170
example of a bad leader?
Trump, inward thinking and sense of entitlement
15 of 170
arguably is an effective leader (trump) why?
not in a way we think is good but is successful in setting realistic goals and getting people to follow
16 of 170
So what roles are involved in making an effective leader?
role of traits, individual differences and personality
17 of 170
what does personality/ traits question
are we born leaders? do certain personality characteristics deem us more effective?
18 of 170
what about behaviour?
does our behaviour determine whether we will be a leader? if so, does this mean it can be learnt?
19 of 170
situation/ contingency says that effective leadership depends on
both situation and leadership style - are some styles more suited to specific situations? therefore is effectiveness contingent on the situation?
20 of 170
What theory is mentioned for personality/ trait theories?
Great person theory
21 of 170
what is the belief in the GPT?
born leaders, belief that leaders have distinct characteristic deeming them to be more capable leaders - born not made
22 of 170
according to GPT why are leadership programmes pointless?
if you're not a born leader then you won't be effective
23 of 170
what attributes are there in the GPT?
tall, attractive, charismatic, healthy, intelligent, talkative
24 of 170
However each attribute can be critiqued, why?
e.g. healthy, intelligent may be developed and not innate
25 of 170
why attractive and tall?
a lot of research says we like someone more when they are attractive - however this could be changing
26 of 170
Where does the born leader idea come from?
Stogdill, 1948 and his characteristics of a leader
27 of 170
how many characteristics?
28 of 170
number 1?
capacity: intelligence, alertness, verbal facility, originality, judgement
29 of 170
number 2?
achievement: scholarship, knowledge, athletic accomplishments
30 of 170
number 3?
responsibility: dependability, initiative, persistence, aggressiveness, self-confidence, desire to excel
31 of 170
number 4?
participation: activity, sociability, cooperation, adaptability, humour
32 of 170
number 5?
status: socio-economic position, popularity
33 of 170
however there is said to be an indirect...
correlation e.g. some argued to not always be born with it
34 of 170
what's the opposing argument to that?
you have to be born with the ability to develop it
35 of 170
why is popularity critiqued?
based on situation or something that changes over time
36 of 170
it is all about personality but...
do they all support the idea that it's what we are born with? (critique)
37 of 170
however the review of the research also found
a relationship with situation
38 of 170
what can be classed as situation? i.e. what can influence effectiveness of leadership in relation to situation and trait?
mental level, status, skills, need & interest of followers, objectives to be achieved
39 of 170
according to this it isn't just a case of what we are born with but also
about situation and this is whether the person is ineffective or not
40 of 170
who's review and meta-analysis showed support for personality/ trait theories in 2002?
Judge et al.,
41 of 170
Support for the trait theory?
specifically FFM of leadership
42 of 170
FFM had multiple correlation of
.48 with leadership
43 of 170
why do we need to be careful with correlation with the FFM?
it doesn't equal causation
44 of 170
what does this mean?
meta-analyses gives support to TT, and TT suggests these traits = good and effective leader, but FFM doesn't actually show the causation
45 of 170
although research has shown P to be stable, what has opposing research shown?
once people are in charge it may be the case that their personality changes, also a lot to say P changes over time
46 of 170
we are still unsure if personality effects leadership
or leadership affects personality
47 of 170
there are also correlations with...
lower order personality traits e.g. LOC and self-esteem, Judge et al., 2002
48 of 170
Do traits reliably predict an effective leader? every time?
traits predict imagine and good/ bad leader but not necessarily effective/ ineffective
49 of 170
what is imbedded in research?
we look at people more positively when they are more attractive
50 of 170
if traits are not group or rank ordered
how do they relate?
51 of 170
causal direction? e.g.
personality -> leadership or leadership -> personality - don't know which effects which
52 of 170
Personality traits do not take...
situation/ context into account
53 of 170
why is it important to do this in leadership?
because we need to think about smaller leadership positions e.g. supervisors etc.
54 of 170
but why?
because it is important in some situations that people take control and some it is vital not to be controlling, have to be flexible/ adaptable
55 of 170
what did Stogdill 1948 say?
leadership is a relationship that exists between people in social situation, and people who lead in one situation may not be good leader in other
56 of 170
what does situation say?
anybody can be effective - it is solely dependent on the situation
57 of 170
success will depend on what?
who they leading
58 of 170
size & nature of group, whether group likes leader etc.
59 of 170
What does the theory do for the leader?
removes full blame from the leader - e.g. cause in a difficult situation not because they are a bad leader
60 of 170
Who do Hogg&Vaughan use as an example?
61 of 170
why Churchill?
known to be argumentative/ opinionated - didn't always have love of the public
62 of 170
why was he suited for wartime?
his personality but wasn't suitable when situation changed
63 of 170
What question is central to situation?
why would we need to re-elect/ change leadership if it was to do with P traits?
64 of 170
who did a study to question situation, not trait?
Simonton 1980
65 of 170
What did he analyse?
326 (victory) or 205 (kill ratio) land battles
66 of 170
what was success via victory and kill ration predicted by?
situation predictors
67 of 170
which were?
army size, divided command and date (predicted mostly predicted kill ratio) and personality predictors
68 of 170
what're the personality predictors?
years experience, winning streaks, willingness to take offensive (predicted most predicted victory)
69 of 170
e.g. leader effectiveness
have to look at outcome of task to view who most effective leader is
70 of 170
Another theory is?
71 of 170
how leaders behave determines whether they are?
72 of 170
what do they say about behaviour?
it can be learnt/ made not necessarily born
73 of 170
an effective style is...
developed, you can be one type and change to be a different one with correct training
74 of 170
who devised the 3 categories with within-participants?
Lewin, Lippitt, & White (1993)
75 of 170
what were they able to do?
rule out P/ trait effects, able to look solely at leadership style
76 of 170
the leadership styles according to Lewin, Lippitt & White (1939)
autocratic, democratic, Laissez-faire
77 of 170
leaders are remote, only focused on task, very organisational in approach and give out orders to group members. make all decisions themselves
78 of 170
leaders prepare to consider others' opinions, and will call for discussion and suggestions
79 of 170
leaders hardly intervene in the group. group does whatever they want, have little involvement in decision-making
80 of 170
Who else spoke about behaviour?
Bales (1950)
81 of 170
His types?
task specialist, and socio-emotional
82 of 170
you cannot be
both!! you can't care about group as well as giving direction
83 of 170
what is task-specialist?
like autocratic - generally involves/ giving direction
84 of 170
what is socio-emotional?
like democratic - focused on feelings of group
85 of 170
what's the difference?
they're just different names for them e.g. task-specialist is just autocratic
86 of 170
what did the Ohio state leadership studies use to test for leadership?
the leader behaviour description questionnaire (LBDQ)
87 of 170
info about the LBDQ...
initiating structure: task-orientated, ensure work towards goal
88 of 170
what digit consider?
concern with welfare & harmonious relationships
89 of 170
the two styles are independent of each other, can be high on both - this is an effective leader
90 of 170
how can you be both?
can care about group and give direction, able to make sure they are working towards goal because they have good group dynamic
91 of 170
summary? limitations to considering...
solely trait, situation, or behaviour
92 of 170
if we aren't looking at how they work together then what are we missing?
a big part of it - we should be doing this because humans = complicated
93 of 170
What is contingency theory?
a consideration of both behaviour and situation
94 of 170
the effectiveness of leadership
95 of 170
behaviour/ style is...
contingent on the situation
96 of 170
two styles suggested; leaders will either be:
1. task orientated leaders, 2. situation-orientated leaders
97 of 170
What did Fielder (1964; 1967) say about the questions?
the way they came up with this was done upon questions & leadership style and asked q's about least preferred co-worked
98 of 170
Least preferred co-worker scale (LPC):
High LPC and low LPC
99 of 170
what is high LPC?
high - they've given more positive attributes e.g. pleasant friendly
100 of 170
the ones who rated high were...
relationship-orientated - favoured member even if underperfroming
101 of 170
what is low LPC?
rated more negatively e.g. unpleasant, rejecting etc.
102 of 170
the ones who rated low were...
task-orientated - respondent harsh on poor co-worker
103 of 170
Fielder's contingency theory: effectiveness of leader depends on
104 of 170
i.e. task orientated: best when
situational control is high or low (extremes)
105 of 170
or in relationship/ situation-orientated or those that
scored highly on low: best when situational control is between the extreme - wasn't high or low, more control/ in the middle
106 of 170
Contingency theory - from Hogg & Vaughan 2014
leader/ member relations most important then task structure
107 of 170
then position power, then...
situational control
108 of 170
leadership is dependent on...
109 of 170
contingency theory, low LPC =
task orientated
110 of 170
contingency theory, high LPC =
situation orientated
111 of 170
Fielder 1971 - however prediction is not
supported by lab studies
112 of 170
Support: meta-analysis by Strube & Garcia 1981 -
examined 145 tests and 33 results based on contingency model
113 of 170
the model is 'robust' in
predicting group performance
114 of 170
who came up with the decision-making model?
Vroom & Yetton 1973
115 of 170
what was the basis of it?
making decision about how to act was dependent on the situation & for decisions to be effective is dependent on situation
116 of 170
no single decision-making process fits every situation, no single one which is effective in every situation
117 of 170
it isn't identical to
normative decision theory
118 of 170
what is it based on?
autocratic, consultative and group decision-making model (collaboration)
119 of 170
why was the model constructed?
to determine effective leadership across situations
120 of 170
Vroom-Yetton decision model, the following are the most...
effective leadership styles when looking at the model below
121 of 170
what does it give?
the scenario and what the most effective leader for that situation is
122 of 170
start with question one then answer each all the way
to question 7
123 of 170
Autocratic (A2): you consult your
team to obtain specific info that you need - you reflect then make final decision
124 of 170
Consultative (C1): you inform your team of the situation and
ask for members' opinions individuals, but you don't bring the group together for a discussion, you make the final decision
125 of 170
Consultative (C2): you get your team together for a group
discussion about the issues and seek their suggestions, decision is made by yourself
126 of 170
Collaborative (G2): our work with your team to
reach a group consensus, your role is mostly facilitative, and you help team members to reach a decision that they all agree on
127 of 170
A1&A2 autocratic - decision on prior info after
consulting team
128 of 170
c1&C2 consultative - consult team individually or
as a group
129 of 170
G2 Collaborative - work to
reach consensus
130 of 170
transactional leadership is more modern and
more respected within leadership
131 of 170
contingency theories do not account for
group relationships - doesn't account for how leaders interact with followers and vice versa
132 of 170
transactional leadership focused on the
transaction between leaders and followers
133 of 170
active leadership - motivates individuals through
reward and what their expectations are
134 of 170
in a way is about self-interest - why??
if a leader approaches followers in terms of being able to boost self-interest then this is what is going to make a more effective leadership styles
135 of 170
followers want to follow and praise/
approve of leader
136 of 170
Leader-member exchange (LMX): one of the most popular areas in
leadership Graen & Uhl-Bien 1995
137 of 170
Leaders differentiate among their subordinates and therefore
LMX may differ within the group e.g. differentiate between members of the group
138 of 170
not always the case that everyone
is treated in the same way
139 of 170
if there is large differentiation, some followers don't have
rewarding expectation with leader whereas others do
140 of 170
Li & Liao
The difference between individuals who have low and high leadership exchange and role of engagement
141 of 170
Those who have low member exchange engage a lot less but
won't be as low as when differentiation is high
142 of 170
when we look at role engagement it has the same kind of pattern with
employee engagement - leadership performance is often looked at and value by engagement
143 of 170
Transformational leadership... who spoke about it in 1878?
144 of 170
what was said about transactional leaders?
they are motivated by reward (followers follow for self-interest)
145 of 170
How do transformational leaders inspire?
individualised consideration, intellectual stimulation, charismatic & inspiring
146 of 170
Individualised consideration?
mentoring/ coaching
147 of 170
Intellectual stimulation?
innovation, new ideas, inspiring
148 of 170
Charismatic and inspiring?
role model, team spirit, fits in a small bit with personality
149 of 170
this is followed even when idea of reward isn't there - this arguable makes them
the most effective leader by far, they inspire without having to give them rewards e.g. not having to buy them in a way
150 of 170
what's good about this approach?
looks at relationship between leader and leadership
151 of 170
and also the interaction between
followers and members, and showing effectiveness personality etc.
152 of 170
Wang et al., 2011 said it was one of the
more effective leadership styles
153 of 170
Transformational and personality, model shows
the big 5 effects
154 of 170
neuroticism isn't significant with
transformational leadership
155 of 170
the only trait which directly linked leadership performance is
156 of 170
seems to be more a case that these P traits predict
leadership style, e.g. higher levels of extraversion seem to predict a more transformational leadership style
157 of 170
this predictor is what
predicts leader performance
158 of 170
it emphasises a strong link between TL and LP and shows
indirect, but still relationship with P
159 of 170
a meta-analysis on
58 studies - 2015
160 of 170
Transformational leadership and context - 2016
context in which their seems to be 1. low organisational consideration, 2. high
161 of 170
looking at leader support and
cooperation and transformational leaderships
162 of 170
highlights how TL still may be
influenced to some extent by context
163 of 170
we still have to think about different situations
people are in that may influence perception of leadership performance/ effectiveness
164 of 170
Sternberg versus Vroom
The person versus the situation in leadership - exchange of letters - good for critical argument
165 of 170
summary - what makes an effective leader?
traits/ personality - big 5
166 of 170
anyone can be an effective leader
167 of 170
leadership styles
168 of 170
contingency theories?
behaviour contingent on situation
169 of 170
but what about the relationships in the group?
transactional - leader-member exchange (reward) and transformational - inspire, most recognition in research
170 of 170

Other cards in this set

Card 2


What is leadership?


persuading & directing group members towards attainment of a common goal

Card 3


who said it?


Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4


why are they leading?


Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5


critical thinking point 1?


Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards


No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Individual Differences resources »