Task-oriented and relationship-oriented leadership - Wikipedia
used either before or after a lesson explaining task and relationship relationship-oriented behavior roles had a positive effect on both the. Balancing Task and Relationship Behaviors it should be apparent that no one behavior is conducive to leadership success in every situation. Consideration - relationship behaviors, such as respect and trust (concern for people) can describe leadership behavior has the attraction of simplicity. Team Leader (high task, high relationship) - These leaders lead by.
Task Leadership The accomplishment of goals and work-group effectiveness are the primary concerns of task-oriented leaders. As a result, this type of leader focuses on task structure, process standards, desired outcomes and meeting deadlines, rather than interpersonal relationships.
Balancing Task and Relationship Behaviors
These directive leaders use conditional reinforcement to manage the performance of employees. For example, the leader rewards the performance of tasks and evaluates employees according to the relative value of their contributions to the accomplishment of group objectives.
The task-oriented leader also applies disciplinary measures to correct unacceptable behavior. In addition, the degree to which an employee contributes to the accomplishment of group goals -- rather than personal goals -- determines the degree of work-related support he will receive from his manager.
Effects of Task Leadership A task-oriented leader often has a thorough understanding of business processes and procedures, which contributes to the appropriate delegation of work and the accurate and on-time completion of work tasks. In addition, a task-oriented leader imposes deadlines and standards on team members who may lack self-motivation, which contributes to the timely accomplishment of business objectives.
However, the leader's apparent indifference to the personal concerns of employees might serve to demotivate employees and lead to personnel retention issues. Relationship Leadership Unlike the task-oriented leader, the relationship-oriented leader exhibits support for and acceptance of their employees as individuals, rather than as production factors. These leaders focus on the professional and personal welfare of subordinates, rather than task structures and deadlines.
While the two separate studies used different terms, they can be thought of as concern for people and concern for tasks. The study at Ohio State University identified these two behaviors as Fleishman,Stogdill, Consideration - relationship behaviors, such as respect and trust concern for people Initiating Structure - task behaviors, such as organizing, scheduling, and seeing that work is completed concern for tasks The study at the University of Michigan identified these two behaviors as Katz, Maccoby, Morse, ; Northouse, Employee Orientation - approaching employees with a strong human relations orientation concern for people Production Orientation - stressing the technical and production aspect of the job concern for tasks The researchers from Michigan State thought of these two behaviors as being on opposite ends of a single continuum.
Thus, a leader could be strong with one of these two behaviors, but would be weaker in the opposite one. The Ohio State studies viewed these two behaviors as distinct and independent. Thus, a leader could be high or low in one or both behaviors. For example, in the U. Army, one of the most important rules is to take care of your soldiers and complete the mission task — a leader should be good with both.
Bad leaders can do neither or do one, but not the other. The notion that just two dimensions can describe leadership behavior has the attraction of simplicity. However, humans are far from being two dimensional in their behaviors, hence, you have to learn more than the model, but the model is a great place to start.
Two researchers, Robert Blake and Jane Mouton, created a short questionnaire that asked leaders how they approached tasks and people.
They also created a grid similar to the one shown below. Depending on how a leader scored, would place him or her in one of four quadrants: The four quadrants represent the level of strength of the two behaviors: Authoritarian — strong on tasks, weak on people skills Country Club — strong on people skills, weak on tasks Impoverished — weak on tasks, weak on people skills Team Leader — strong on tasks, strong on people skills The goal to good leadership is to score at least a 6 on both task and people, which places the leader in the Team Leader grid.
The four leadership behaviors are discussed in more detail below. Team Leader high task, high relationship - These leaders lead by positive example and endeavor to foster a team environment so that all team members can reach their highest potential, both as individual team members and as a group of people who use cooperation and collaboration.
They encourage the team to reach goals as effectively as possible, while also working tirelessly to strengthen the bonds among the various members.
They normally lead some of the most productive teams. Authoritarian Leader high task, low relationship - Leaders who get this rating are very much task oriented and are hard on their workers autocratic. There is little or no allowance for cooperation or collaboration. Authoritarian leaders mostly display these characteristics: Country Club Leader low task, high relationship - These leaders predominantly use reward power to maintain discipline and to encourage the team to accomplish its goals.
Conversely, they are almost incapable of employing the more punitive coercive and legitimate powers. This inability results from fear that using such powers could jeopardize relationships with the other team members. Since they are not committed to either task accomplishment or maintenance, they essentially allow their team to do whatever they wish and prefer to detach themselves from the team process by allowing the team to suffer from a series of power struggles within the group.
However, do not entirely dismiss the other three.
Task vs. Relationship Leadership Theories
Certain situations might call for one of the other three to be used at times. For example, by playing the Impoverished Leader, you allow your team to gain self-reliance. Be an Authoritarian Leader to instill a sense of discipline in an unmotivated worker.
Be an Impoverished Leader to allow others to teach others to lead. By carefully studying the situation and the forces affecting ityou will know at what points along the axes you need to be in order to achieve the desired result. Four Framework Approach In the Four Framework Approach, Bolman and Deal suggest that leaders display leadership behaviors in one of four types of frameworks: Structural, Human Resource, Political, or Symbolic: This model suggests that leaders operate in one of these four categories and there are times when one approach is more appropriate and times when it would not be.
That is, any style can be effective or ineffective, depending upon the situation.