Social influence or power

††††††††††† Ability to control & influence others

††††††††††† Directed toward specific goals & objectives


Five types of social power or influence (French & Raven)

††††††††††† Informational or expert:Persuasion through expertise

††††††††††††††††††††††† Target must believe

††††††††††††††††††††††† Information must have importance for target

††††††††††† Referent:Desire for identification & interpersonal attraction

††††††††††† Legitimate: Power in formal role

††††††††††††††††††††††† Must be accepted by target

††††††††††† Reward:Contingent rewards for compliance

††††††††††† Coercive:Punishment

††††††††††††††††††††††† Causes poor relationships with subordinates



Good leaders possess certain traits

Born not made

Good supervision a selection problem

Good leaders good in all situations


General approach much like test validation

Identify sample of good & bad leaders

Measure traits

Analyze relations of traits & effectiveness

Mean r of leader effectiveness with I.Q.= .30, Personality = .28

Study: Randle (1956)

††††††††††† Appraisal of 1427 executive from 25 companies

††††††††††† Analysis of background

††††††††††† Ratings by 5 peers

††††††††††† Battery of tests

††††††††††† Interviews (1.5‑3 hr. each)

††††††††††† 30 traits found predictive of good managers

††††††††††††††††††††††† Creativity, Drive, Initiative, Intelligence, Motivation


Problems and limitations

††††††††††† Some inconsistency of results

††††††††††† Lack of insight into process

††††††††††† Ignores situational specificity

††††††††††† Counter to zeitgeist, i.e., fell out of favor when I/O abandoned

††††††††††††††††††††††† personality in favor of situational influences



Good leaders do certain things

Leaders made not born

Good supervision as training problem††††

Styles universal



††††††††††† Autocratic

††††††††††† Democratic

††††††††††† Laissez Faire

††††††††††† Person oriented

††††††††††† Task oriented


Ohio State Leadership Studies (1950's)

††††††††††† 1. Analysis of supervisory behavior (critical incidents)

††††††††††† 2. 1800 incidents distilled to 150 items

††††††††††† 3. Administered to employees to rate supervisors

††††††††††† 4. Factor analyzed to two dimensions

††††††††††† Consideration

††††††††††† Initiating structure


Problems & limitations

††††††††††† Ignores situational differences

††††††††††† Ignores individual differences



Considers situational and leader variables


Fiedler's Theory

††††††††††† Situational favorability has three components

††††††††††††††††††††††† Task structure

††††††††††††††††††††††† Position power

††††††††††††††††††††††† Leader‑group relations

††††††††††† Leader characteristic assessed with a scale

††††††††††††††††††††††† Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) assesses unknown trait/s

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† of the leader

Hypotheses (moderately supported)

††††††††††† High LPC leaders most effective in middle favorable

††††††††††† Low LPC leaders best at extremes



††††††††††† Fiedler argues that person should be chosen to fit the job or job

††††††††††††††††††††††† can be changed to fit the person

††††††††††† He does not recommend trying to change the leader



A more complex contingency theory than Fiedlerís

Basic idea

††††††††††† Supervisors motivate employees by

††††††††††††††††††††††† Increasing value of rewards

††††††††††††††††††††††† Clarifying paths to rewards

Complex theory with many components


Four styles

††††††††††† Achievement oriented

††††††††††† Directive

††††††††††† Participative

††††††††††† Supportive

Contingency factors

††††††††††† Subordinate personality such as locus of control

††††††††††† Perceived ability

††††††††††† Environment

††††††††††† Nature of task (aversiveness)


Theory has a series of hypotheses, e.g.

††††††††††† Leader initiating structure increases instrumentality with

††††††††††††††††††††††† unstructured, nonroutine tasks.

††††††††††† When tasks are frustrating, consideration will increase social

††††††††††††††††††††††† support & reduce negative valence of tasks


Support for the theory

††††††††††† Mixed, with some hypotheses holding and some not



Prescriptive model of how decisions should be made


Based on established principles


Focus on decision making


Decision aid


Five decision styles, based on problem attributes


Model indicates which approach should be taken, depending upon the situation



Leadership as interaction of supervisor & subordinate

Should be studied at level of dyad interaction between both

Supervisors treat different employees differently

††††††††††† In-group are those in the supervisorís inner circle

††††††††††† Out-group are everyone else

††††††††††† In-group treated better

††††††††††† Competence of subordinate an important determinant of group

††††††††††† membership


Laboratory study

††††††††††† Lowin & Craig (1968)

††††††††††† Subjects asked to act as supervisors for confederates who acted

††††††††††††††††††††††† either competent or incompetent

††††††††††† Competents received high consideration and low structure

††††††††††† Incompetents received low consideration and high structure


Field studies

††††††††††† Danseueau et al. (1975)

††††††††††† Found similar results with real supervisors and subordinates

††††††††††† Spector, Dwyer, Jex (1988) found that job performance related

††††††††††††††††††††††† to subordinate autonomy.



Leaders with considerable and unusual influence

Can convince followers to do things they would never do alone

Both good and evil

Generally considered a trait theory

Represents a return to focus on personality of leaders


Charisma of supervisor relates to subordinate

††††††††††† Job performance

††††††††††† Job satisfaction

††††††††††† OCB

††††††††††† Organizational commitment

Usually thought of as part of basic personality


Might be trainable

††††††††††† Actors were trained to be charismatic in a lab study

††††††††††††††††††††††† (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996, Journal of Applied

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Psychology)

††††††††††††††††††††††† Bank managers trained in charisma

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† (Barling et al., 1996, Journal of Applied Psychology)


Are men more charismatic than women?

††††††††††† Same as seen by male and female subordinates or females a

††††††††††††††††††††††† little higher (Bass et al., 1996, Applied Psychology: An

††††††††††††††††††††††† International Review)


Copyright Paul E. Spector, All rights reserved, July 22, 2002.