TEXT
Hundreds of studies have assessed leadership
styles, mainly by having employees report on how
their managers typically behave. Researchers have
also collected information on how effective
managers are. After large numbers of such studies
became available, reviewers aggregated them
quantitatively to discover what kinds of leadership
are effective.
One conclusion that has emerged based on
the research of the past 30 years is that a hybrid
style known as transformational leadership is highly
effective in most contemporary organizational
contexts.
A transformational leader acts as an
inspirational role model, motivates others to go
beyond the confines of their job descriptions,
encourages creativity and innovation, fosters good
human relationships, and develops the skills of
followers. This type of leadership is effective
because it fosters strong interpersonal bonds based
on a leader’s charisma and consideration of others.
These bonds enable leaders to promote high-quality
performance by encouraging workers rather than
threatening them, thus motivating them to exceed
basic expectations.
By bringing out the best in others,
transformational leaders enhance the performance
of groups and organizations.
Transformational leadership is androgynous
because it incorporates culturally masculine and
feminine behaviors. This androgynous mixing of the
masculine and feminine means that skill in this
contemporary way of leading does not necessarily
come naturally. It may require some effort and
thought.
Men often have to work on their social skills
and women on being assertive enough to inspire
others. It is nonetheless clear that both women and
men can adapt to the demands of leadership in the
transformational mode.
One of the surprises of research on
transformational leadership is that female managers
are somewhat more transformational than male
managers. In particular, they exceed men in their
attention to human relationships. Also, in delivering
incentives, women lean toward a more positive,
reward-based approach and men toward a more
negative and less effective, threat-based approach.
In these respects, women appear to be better
leaders than men, despite the double standard that
can close women out of these roles.
Why are women leaders more
transformational when they are less likely to become
leaders in the first place? One reason is that the
double standard that slows women’s rise would work
against mediocre women while allowing mediocre
men to rise. As a consequence, the women who
attain leadership roles really are better than the
men on average.
It is also true women generally avoid more
domineering, “command and control” behavior
because of the backlash they receive if they lead in
this way. Men can often get away with autocratic
behavior that is roundly disliked in women.
Ironically, this backlash against domineering women
may foster good leadership because the
androgynous middle ground is more likely to bring
success. Leaders gain less from ordering others
about than from forming teams of smart, motivated
collaborators who together figure out how to solve
problems and get work done.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2013/03/20
As to the effectiveness of managers,
researchers have found, after many years of study,
that
.∏.r
.
