Assumptions in Theories of Leadership

1. Assumptions in Theories of Leadership The leader (trait, style, behavior, vision, charisma) The task (from holistic to reductionism, needing discretion or direction) The led (follower) (motivations, readiness, attitudes) The organization (structural, political, moral purpose)

2. Democratic Perspectives • Democratic perspectives view leadership as facilitating an essentially participative, internal process. • The perspectives range from a “restricted” democracy where the leader shares power with a limited number of senior colleagues to a “pure’ democracy where all members have an equal voice in determining policy.

3. Democratic Perspectives:Intellectual and Political Sources • The human relations movement • The constitutional ideal • A high pressure for accountability • A façade • A model for future citizens

4. Democratic perspectives on Leadership: Key points • Democratic perspectives on leadership are normative and idealistic in nature. • Democratic perspectives assume that people in an organization have a common goal and decisions are made through consensus rather than conflict, an assumption which is contrary to that of political perspective. • Democratic perspectives arise from a unique set of assumptions about the organization, the leader, and the follower.

5. Democratic perspectives on Leadership: Key points (Cont.) • If we view leadership from the democratic perspective, leadership is neither a function of personal characteristics, nor is it associated with position in a formal organization. Rather, leadership is to facilitate an essentially participative, internal process. To ensure a formal representation within an organization is the key to democratic leadership. • It is crucial for a leader to balance democratic perspectives with other perspectives.

6. Reframing Leadership

7. An overview of research • It is more in the reflective and philosophical mode than in the empirical mode • As to the empirical research, there is an overlap between democratic perspectives on one hand and personality and formal perspectives on the other. • with personality perspectives—democratic leadership style • with formal perspectives—overall structural arrangement and its effect

8. S-M-C-R Communication Model

9. Life magazine asked 1, 165 translators to contribute their examples of signs in fractured English that they had seen in their travel. Here are some of the winners of English as she is spoke. • At a Swiss restaurant: “Our wines leave you nothing to hope for.” • At a Bangkok dry cleaner: “Drop your pants here for best result.” • On a toy doll’s package in Spain: “Laugh while you throw up.” • At a German campground: “It is strictly forbidden…that people of different sex, for instance men and women, live together in one tent, unless they are married with each other for that purpose.”

10. Life magazine asked 1, 165 translators to contribute their examples of signs in fractured English that they had seen in their travel. Here are some of the winners of English as she is spoke (Cont.) A foreign-born plumber in New York once wrote to the Bureau of Standards that he found hydrochloric acid fine for cleaning drains, and he asked if they agreed. Washington replied: “The efficacy of hydrochloric acid is indisputable, but the chlorine residue is incompatible with metallic permanence.” The plumber wrote back that he was mighty glad the Bureau agreed with him. Considerably alarmed, the Bureau replied a second time: “ We cannot assume responsibility for the production of toxic and noxious residues with hydrochloric acid, and suggest that you use an alternative procedure.” The plumber was happy to learn that the Bureau still agreed with him. Whereupon, Washington wrote: “Don’t use hydrochloric acid; it eats hell out of pipes.”

11. Summary • Democratic perspectives on leadership are normative and idealistic in nature. • Because of the normative nature, there is little research on this topic. However, it will be interesting to test normative ideas using empirical data. • In practice, there is always a tension between formal and political perspectives on one hand and democratic perspectives on the other.