LDRLB | Archive | January 2010

Archives For January 2010

Trait Theory

David Burkus — January 28, 2010

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has existed for centuries. History’s greatest philosophical writings from Plato’s Republic to Plutarch’s Lives have explored the question of “What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?” Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. So it is natural that the first systematic attempt t study leadership researched the traits of leaders. The theories that began were also dubbed “Great man” theories since early research focused on the innate qualities of historical leaders such as Lincoln, Napoleon and Ghandi.

Every trait researcher ultimately had the same aim, do develop a definitive list of the traits of leaders. However, each research inevitably arrived at a different list. There are at least five major trait theories, each listing different necessary traits. Some of the traits that commonly appear on this list are:

Intelligence: general intellectual ability
Self-Confidence: certainty of one’s skills and competencies
Determination: desire to achieve a certain end
Integrity: honesty and trustworthiness
Sociability: ability create pleasant interactions with others

Trait theory argues that effective leadership isn’t contingent on the situation or the followers, but rather the level to which leaders have certain characteristics. Not surprisingly trait theory has given birth to a host of trait assessments and selection criteria used by organizations to identify those who demonstrate the potential to become leaders.

Useful Lies

The trait approach is not only supported by our intuitive visualization of what make a leader, it is also supported by a century of research and analysis. Using an inventory or traits, aspiring leaders can objectively assess their capability to lead. However, trait theory has also been criticized for itself relative uselessness developing leaders. Recent research also suggests that followers may need different behaviors from leaders at different times. To both of these criticisms, trait theorist would respond: In essence, you either have it or you don’t.

Intro to Leadership Theory
Why Theory
A Word on Theory
Trait Theory
Skills Theory
Style Theory
Contingency Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
Path-Goal Theory
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
Transformational/Transactional Leadership Theory
Servant Leadership Theory
Strengths-Based Leadership Theory

In Leadership Leadership, theory, trait

Book Review: The Peter Principle

David Burkus — January 26, 2010

I’m going to stretch my rule on reviewing solid, researched books on leadership or organizational theory. The Peter Principle is in, fact theory. However, it hasn’t been researched because it’s also satire. The Peter Principle is both a book by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull and an organization principle similar to Parkinson’s Law.

The Peter Principle is the principle that “In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence.” The Peter Principle introduced the “salutary science of Hierarchiology,” “inadvertently founded” by Peter. It holds that in a hierarchy, members are promoted so long as they work competently. Sooner or later they are promoted to a position at which they are no longer competent (their “level of incompetence”), and there they remain, being unable to earn further promotions. This principle can be modeled and has theoretical validity. Peter’s Corollary states “in time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out his duties” and adds that “work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence.”

One way that organizations attempt to avoid this effect is to refrain from promoting a worker until he shows the skills and work habits needed to succeed at the next higher job. Thus, a worker is not promoted to managing others if he does not already display management abilities. The first solution is that employees who are dedicated to their current jobs should not be promoted for their efforts; instead, they might receive a pay increase. The second solution is that employees might be promoted only after being sufficiently trained to the new position. This places the burden of discovering individuals with poor managerial capabilities before (as opposed to after) they are promoted.

Despite beginning as satire, some real-life organizations now recognize that technical people may be very valuable for their skills but poor managers, and so provide parallel career paths allowing a good technical person to acquire pay and status reserved for management in most organizations. For that, we have The Peter Principle to thank.

In Leadership book review, peter

A Word on Theory

David Burkus — January 21, 2010

Two Actually: useful lies.

All theories are useful lies. Theories are attempts to simplify what is happening in a set of observations. They are attempts to describe reality that typically fall short (otherwise they wouldn’t be so simple). Consider the opposing theories of the earth’s shape: flat or round. At first, mankind thought the earth of flat. Then, at a highly debatable point in time, it was decided that the world was a sphere.

However, both theories are still being used. Shipbuilders didn’t need to make any adjustments in designing boats with this new information, so the old theory worked. Ship captains, however, needed to adjust and use a round-earth theory if they were going to properly navigate the globe. Today, we know that both theories are incorrect (the earth is actually slightly pear-shaped).

All theories are false, but have a useful element of truth to them. What makes some leadership theories more useful than others is the same as what makes earth-shape theories more useful than others: situation.

The theory that will be most useful is the theory that works best with the situation. This is why leaders and aspiring leaders both need to become students of leadership theories: in order to know which one the situation calls for. In order to help you, this series will summarize the array of leadership theories and end each summary with a segment titled “useful lies.” This segment will explain the strengths (useful) and the criticisms (lies) of each theory.

Intro to Leadership Theory
Why Theory
A Word on Theory
Trait Theory
Skills Theory
Style Theory
Contingency Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
Path-Goal Theory
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
Transformational/Transactional Leadership Theory
Servant Leadership Theory
Strengths-Based Leadership Theory

In Leadership Leadership, theory

0101 | Bret Simmons

David Burkus — January 19, 2010

This inaugural episode’s guest is Bret Simmons, PhD. Dr. Simmons is a professor of organizational behavior and leadership at the University of Nevada, Reno. His interests include leadership, followership and positive organizational behavior. Additionally, Dr. Simmons runs corporate training sessions and blogs regularly at bretlsimmons.com.

0:00 Introduction

2:05 Do you notice a difference in receptiveness to theory between university students and corporate trainees?

5:15 Do you tend to favor certain theories?

6:41 How do you determine what theory to use?

10:45 Talk to us about positive organizational behavior.

13:48 What are you reading now?

18:13 What are you working on now?

Referenced Resources:

Positive Organizational Behavior

Positive Psychology

Linchpin – Seth Godin

Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths And Total Nonsense- Robert Sutton & Jeffrey Pfeffer

The Leadership Challenge – James Kouzes & Barry Posner

The Fifth Discipline – Peter Senge

Tribes – Seth Godin

The Starfish and the Spider – Ori Brafman & Rod Beckstrom

Deep Change – Robert Quinn

What I Wish I Knew When I Was 20 – Tina Seelig

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

In Leadership LDRLB Podcast, Leadership, simmons, theory

Why Theory?

David Burkus — January 14, 2010

During WWII, Allied bomber losses were high, so high that the British Air Ministry undertook a rigorous analysis in hopes of finding a solution. Their engineers set out to eyeball every bomber they could, gathering data on each bullet hole. After analyzing the results, engineers decided to reinforce the areas that had the highest concentrations of holes with armor plating.

It didn’t work.

Perplexed, the engineers assumed that the extra plating had made the planes too heavy, and that the difficulty in handling the planes was offsetting the protection of the armor plating.

Enter Abraham Wald.

Wald, a mathematician, suggested simply that they put extra armor plating where the bullet holes weren’t. The idea was simple: if the planes are returning with bullet holes, obviously those areas can be struck without causing the planes to crash. The planes that aren’t returning, Wald theorized, are the ones that are getting hit in different areas. This idea was so significant, statisticians decided to name it: survivorship bias (the tendency to include only successes in statistical analysis). Any time you only examine the successes, you will skew the results.

If we return to the airport bookstore of our minds, we see the shelves littered with survivorship bias. We love reading about successes. That’s why books by celebrity CEOs and leadership gurus are among the best sellers of any list. We’d much rather read about the brilliant company leader who started working out of his garage and ended up dominating the industry. However, when this is all we consume about leadership, we succumb to survivorship bias. While a celebrity CEO may reveal the 7 secrets he used to climb to the top, how are we to know it works in every situation?

This is where theory comes in.

Leadership and organizational theories are constructed and tested by examining not just the successes but also the failures. Good and bad leaders, successful and failing change efforts, all get included in the analysis and the resulting theories spare us from our survivorship bias. If we want to grow into outstanding leaders, we must know how and when to utilize the knowledge provided by the existing body of leadership research.

Good leaders focus on where the bullet holes are, Great leaders consider where they aren’t.

Intro to Leadership Theory
Why Theory
A Word on Theories
Trait Theory
Skills Theory
Style Theory
Contingency Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
Path-Goal Theory
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
Transformational/Transactional Leadership Theory
Servant Leadership Theory
Strengths-Based Leadership Theory

In Leadership Leadership, theory