(A) White and Lee Pitt's theory of three leadership styles.
American management scientists Ralph K. Weibit and Ronald Lippitt put forward three theories of leadership style: authority. Democracy and freedom are the most common classifications.
1. Authoritative leadership. All policies are decided by the leaders; The steps and techniques of all work are also leaders giving orders; The distribution and combination of work are mostly decided by him alone; Leaders have little contact with subordinates, and if there are rewards and punishments, they are often the wrong people.
2. Democratic leadership. The main policies are decided by the members of the organization through collective discussion, and the leaders adopt an attitude of encouragement and assistance; Through discussion, others can understand the overall situation of the work, and subordinates have considerable opportunities to choose the steps and technologies used in the work within the designed way and scope of completing the work.
3. Laissez-faire leadership: organization members or groups have complete decision-making power, and leaders let themselves go, only providing information and consultation for organization members, trying not to participate or actively intervene, and only occasionally expressing their opinions. Almost all work depends on members of the organization, and everyone is responsible for it. Robert Tannan-Baum and Warren H. Warren Schmidt described leadership as a continuum. This continuous flow is also called the continuous flow of supervisor-non-supervisor behavior, and they think there are various leadership styles. The appropriate leadership method depends on the environment and personality. They described a series of leadership styles from * * * as the center to subordinates as the center. These styles vary according to the degree to which leaders delegate power to subordinates.
Therefore, leadership style is not one of the two methods (dictatorship or democracy). The leadership constantly provides a series of leadership styles, and it is impossible to say which one is always right and the other is always wrong. It should be emphasized that they also drew a circle around the leadership style to show the influence of organizational environment and social environment on leadership style. In doing so, it emphasizes the open system nature of leadership style. This challenges the authority of the supervisor, that is, when making decisions or governing subordinates, we should consider the interests outside the organization. Richter's theory of "work center" and "employee center" is also called Richter's theory of four leadership styles. After 1947, American management scientist Lickert and related researchers from the Institute of Social Studies of the University of Michigan conducted a series of leadership studies, including enterprises, hospitals and various government organizations.
In 196 1, they divide leaders into two basic types, namely, work-centered leaders and employee-centered leaders. The former is characterized by structured task allocation, strict supervision, dynamic work and detailed regulations; The latter is characterized by: paying attention to people's behavioral reactions and problems. Use groups to achieve goals and give members of the organization a wider range of free choices.
On this basis, Richter advocates employee participation in management. He believes that effective leaders pay attention to their subordinates, and they rely on information communication to make all departments act as a whole. All members of the group (including the supervisor) practice a mutually supportive relationship, in which he feels that there are real common interests in demand value, desire, goal and expectation. Because this kind of leadership needs to encourage people, Lickert thinks it is the most effective way to lead a team. Richter hypothesized four management methods to study and clarify his leadership principles. One of the management methods: "use imperative" method. The supervisor gives instructions and subordinates participate in decision-making; Mainly use intimidation and punishment, and sometimes occasionally use rewards to motivate people; It is used to transmit information from top to bottom and limit the decision-making power to the highest level.
The second management method: "moderate-imperative" method. Encourage subordinates with rewards and some intimidation and punishment; Allow some information to pass from bottom to top; Solicit some ideas and opinions from subordinates, grant them some decision-making power, but strictly control policies.
The third management method: "business ceremony" method. Managers solicit, accept and use suggestions from subordinates when making decisions; Usually try to use the ideas and opinions of subordinates as appropriate; Encourage subordinates with rewards, occasionally punish and let employees participate in management; Even if the lower emotions are reached, the upper emotions are issued; The superior makes major policies and decisions that are applicable to the general situation, but lets the subordinate make specific decisions and discuss things in other ways.
The fourth management method: "collective participation" method. The supervisor puts forward challenging goals to his subordinates and expresses confidence in achieving them; Let the masses participate and give material rewards in setting goals and evaluating the progress of goals; Even if the information between superiors and subordinates is smooth, the information between peers is also smooth; Encourage organizations at all levels to make decisions or join forces with subordinates to engage in activities as a group.
Lickert found that managers who engage in management activities with the fourth management method are generally extremely successful leaders, and organizations managed in this way are the most successful in setting goals and achieving them. He attributed these to the degree of employees' participation in management and mutual support in practice. Chris argyris's immature-mature continuous flow theory mainly focuses on the study of individual needs and organizational needs. He advocates that effective leaders should help people change from immature or dependent state to mature state, as shown in table 1.
Immature-mature continuous flow of Pteris argentea. He believes that if an organization does not provide people with mature opportunities or treat them as mature individuals, then people will become worried and depressed, and will act in a way that goes against the organization's goals. Robert R. Blake Jane Mouton, an American management scientist, designed an ingenious management grid theory in 1964, which conspicuously expressed the executives' attention to production and people. The abscissa and ordinate indicate the degree of concern for production and people respectively. Each square represents a leadership style, in which the two basic factors of "caring for production" and "caring for people" are combined to varying degrees. Concern for production is manifested in managers' attitudes towards various things, such as the quality and process of decision-making; Creativity of research; Service quality, work efficiency and product output of functional personnel. People's concern also has a wide range of meanings, such as personal responsibility for achieving goals; Maintain employees' self-esteem; Obligation based on trust rather than obedience; Maintain a good working environment, only adequate interpersonal relationships. This is very similar to the above two-dimensional theory: (1) also uses two dimensions to explain the leadership style: caring for people and caring for production; (2) Various combinations of the above two-dimensional curved surfaces are also represented by coordinates, and each combination has 9 degrees, so there can be 8 1 combinations to form 8 1 squares.
This is the so-called "management grid" in the theory of management grid, in which there are five typical combinations, representing typical leadership styles.
1. 1 mode: indicates that people and work are extremely indifferent. The leader of this model only does the minimum work to maintain his position, that is, as long as there is no mistake, it is better to do more than one thing, so it is called "poor management"
9. 1 mode: shows great concern for the work, but ignores the concern for people, that is, does not care about the needs and satisfaction of employees, and tries to let the latter not interfere with the work. In this way, the leadership power will be great, emphasizing the effective control of subordinates and striving to complete various tasks. Therefore, it is "authoritarian and task-based management".
1.9 type: shows great concern for people, that is, whether the needs of employees are met, attaches importance to good relations, and emphasizes the feelings of colleagues and subordinates for themselves. But ignore the effect of the work. Therefore, it is called "country club management".
5.5 mode: it means caring about both work and people, taking into account at the same time, with moderate degree and emphasis on moderation. This kind of leadership not only requires the quality and quantity of work, but also emphasizes that subordinates can complete tasks through guidance and encouragement. However, such leaders often lack initiative and are willing to maintain the status quo. Therefore, it is called "golden mean management".
9.9 mode: showing great concern for work and people. Leaders in this way can most effectively combine organizational goals with individual needs, attach great importance to all the work of the organization, make the groups cooperate with each other through communication and encouragement, and make the work become the conscious action of group members, thus achieving higher work efficiency, thus being called "the theory of fighting collectivism". This management method fully shows that in the management process, the role of guidance and leadership enables the organization to achieve the set goals more effectively and harmoniously. In other words, fully mobilize the enthusiasm of organization members, combine individuals with organizational goals, and form a positive and lively situation in which everyone works hard to achieve organizational goals. The key is how to coordinate the goals of individuals and organizations. It should be pointed out that the above five models are only theoretical descriptions, and they are all extreme cases. In real life, it is difficult to have a purely typical leadership style. The development of contingency leadership theory and leadership behavior theory from three-dimensional theory to three-dimensional theory is the contribution of American management scientist William J Redding in the past 70 years. ( 1)Jaskorion ted； (2) Relationship orientation; (3) Leadership effectiveness. As mentioned above, the concern for people in management grid theory is similar to that for production (work). Ding Lei simply divided the leadership style into four basic leadership styles.
1. Close people (re 1ated) indicated that the leader attached importance to interpersonal relationships, but not to work and tasks. As long as the group can live in harmony and have a harmonious relationship, time and efficiency are secondary. 2. Separation refers to this kind of leadership, which does not attach importance to work or interpersonal relationships. Subordinate personnel seem irrelevant, and everything is done according to regulations, regardless of personal differences and innovation. 3. Dedication refers to this kind of leader who only wants to complete the task, is impartial and focuses on business. 4. Integrator (integrated) means that this kind of leader takes into account the needs of the group and the completion of the task, and can achieve the goal through group cooperation, so it belongs to the nature of integration. Reading's theoretical feature lies in the third aspect-leadership effectiveness. Reading doesn't think which of the above four ways is the most effective, but each way may be efficient or inefficient, so he thinks efficiency is another separate aspect. To this end, Ding Lei gave each way two names, one representing an effective leadership style; The other represents an ineffective way of leadership. Ding Lei believes that the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a leadership style depends on the environment at that time; Used correctly, it is an effective way of leadership; Improper use is invalid. This includes the influence of environmental factors on leadership style and leadership effectiveness. The real germination of leadership behavior theory research began in the 1940s of 19. Many management psychologists have found that there is a close relationship between leaders' leadership behavior and their leadership effectiveness in the process of leadership. Based on this, in order to seek the best leadership behavior, many institutions have done a lot of research on this. In the various studies mentioned in the Classification of Leadership Behavior, although different names have been given to leadership styles, such as democracy, dictatorship and laissez-faire; Leader center, member center; Advocacy behavior, caring behavior, etc. But basically, these different names represent similar concepts, that is, the behavior of leaders is divided into two dimensions: emphasizing the needs of groups and emphasizing the needs of individuals. This is the difference between behaviorism and idiosyncrasism. Firstly, Ohio State University Hemphill( 194 1) and other factor analysis methods extract two basic factors from various factors of leadership behavior, find two independent dimensions of leadership behavior (grasping the organization and caring for people), and use the scale as a measuring tool to evaluate the leadership behavior of these two dimensions.
After World War II, a group of researchers led by E.Fleishman( 1948) from Ohio State University in the United States conducted a lot of research on the effectiveness of leadership. They used a variety of questionnaires and made a lot of measurements, and found that there are always two kinds of leadership behaviors, which are called "creating structure" and "caring for understanding". Creating structure refers to those leadership behaviors that are directly concerned with completing organizational performance. Caring and understanding means trusting subordinates, being friendly and caring about their personal welfare and needs.
1964, Blake and Mouton put forward the "management grid theory" on the basis of previous research on leadership behavior. They use the ordinate to show their concern for people and the abscissa to show their concern for production. The two are divided into nine equal parts according to the degree, thus forming a grid diagram. In this way, 8 1 different leadership styles can be combined theoretically, and 5 typical leadership styles can be selected from these 8 1 leadership styles.
Considering the behavior types of leaders from two angles, that is, leaders care about the completion of tasks and the needs of subordinates, this idea has aroused the interest of many researchers, and many other researchers outside the United States have also made useful explorations and studies on it. In 1980s, China Xu Liancang and others studied the PM theory and standardized the PM scale according to the national conditions of China. Later, Ling Wenquan and others also discussed the China model of leadership behavior evaluation, which increased the moral dimension. Dong Yan et al. (1996) also studied the types of PM leadership behaviors of junior military commanders, and found that the types of military leadership behaviors and situational factors are different from those of enterprises. [ 1]