Leadership

In 1948, Ralph Stogdill offered for consideration, the thought that leadership is actually a relationship. Not a matter of passive traits that an individual was born with, or actions that they take in a specific circumstance—leadership is a culmination of working relationships.

I feel a more accurate examination of the theory would consider that leaders develop separate exchange relationships with each of their individual followers—some good, some not-so-good. The true value of the theory, in my humble opinion, is membership in in-group or out-group can be predictive of success, satisfaction, job performance, turnover intentions, and ultimately the evaluated effectiveness of the leader. That alone probably makes it worth our time to investigate the theory more closely.

Northouse observes: “Followers in the in-group receive more information, influence, confidence, and concern from the leader than do out-group followers… In addition, they are more dependable, more highly involved, and more communicative than out-group followers…”

Question #1:

At what point does this become a self-fulfilling prophecy? If you are a member of the in-group, aren’t you more inclined to freely offer your discretionary effort in all matters work related? Wouldn’t you be inclined to accept more responsibilities, work more holidays and weekends, just to stay a member of the in-group?

Question #2:

At what point do you, as the leader, cease with strategies to move followers into the in-group, acknowledge that you are honoring a sunk cost, allow them the option of remaining as a member of the out-group?

Professor Northouse states: “Out-group members act quite differently than in-group members. Rather than trying to do extra work, out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational goals.”

Question #3:

Doesn’t this seem to be another way of describing the difference between the Economic Worker and the Social Worker? What studies from the History of Management have reinforced this concept?

Nestled in Case 7.2, there is an interesting issue of leader/follower relations that we should explore. In explicating Jenny’s style of leadership, it is mentioned that, “…she avoids social lunches because she thinks they foster the perception of favoritism.” More broadly than the issue of favoritism, is the issue of being friends with our followers.

Question #4

Explore the pros and cons of becoming friends with your workers when you are the leader in an organization.

Solution Preview

Leadership in an Organization

In groups is referred to as when an individual acknowledge himself or herself as a member of a group. On the other hand, when a person does not recognize himself or herself as a member of a group is known as an out-group. At one point, this philosophy of in-group makes the members walk towards the self-fulfilling prophesy because they express themselves using the term “we” as opposed to the out-group since they refer them using the term “they.”

(313 words)