Words: 3113
Surprisingly, the literature on project success factors does not typically mention the project manager and is or her leadership style or competence as a success factor on projects. This is in direct contrast to the general management literature, which views effective leadership as a critical success factor in the management of organizations, and has shown that an appropriate leadership style can lead to better performance. Since, unlike most literature on project success factors, project management literature does consider the role of the project manager, we also review what it says about his or her leadership style and competence.
Keywords: leadership; emotional intelligence; literature; project success factors 02005 by the Project Management Institute Volvo. 36, No. 1, 49-61, SINS 8756-9728/03 Introduction The authors have been commissioned by the Project Management Institute to determine: 1 . Whether the competence, including personality and leadership style, of the project manager is a success factor for projects; and 2. If different competence profiles are appropriate for different project types. In reviewing the literature on project SUccess factors, we found it largely ignores the project manager, and his or her leadership style and competence.
This is in direct contrast to the general management literature, which considers effective dervish a success factor in organizations, and has shown that an appropriate leadership style can lead to better performance. In this paper, we review the literature on leadership in a project context. We start by reviewing the general management literature on leadership, and show how the project management literature has reflected this. We indicate specific instances where it has been shown that an appropriate leadership style, and the competence and emotional intelligence of the leader, delivers better results.
We then review the literature on project success factors, and consider how and why it largely ignores the reject manager, and his or her leadership style and competence. We look at literature on the role of the project manager and his or her leadership style and competence. We close by indicating how this suggests further research as sponsored by the Project Management Institute. General Management Literature on Leadership Styles and Competence Throughout history, people have tried to say what makes a good leader.
Some of the most often quoted historical authors include Plato, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Locke from the West (Collisions, 1998), and Confucius and Jinx from the East (Collisions, Plan, & Wilkinson, 2000). As early as 500 B. C. , Confucius listed the virtues (De) of effective leaders. Four were key to his beliefs: Ken (love) Lie (proper conduct) Ixia (piety) Ghana rang (the doctrine of the mean) J U N E 2005 Project Management Journal 49 Notice that three of the virtues are emotional and only one managerial.
Confucius theory has formed the basis of Chinese government for 2,500 years. In this review of what the general management literature says about successful leadership styles and competence, we consider: The development of leadership theory through the 20th century, and how that is reflected in the reject management literature The literature on behavior of team members The literature on cultural behaviors of managers The current literature on the competence of leaders.
Theories of Leadership in the 20th Century Bernard (1938) suggested the functions of a leader. He said an executive had both managerial and emotional functions, which he called cognitive and cathartic, respectively: Cognitive functions include guiding, directing, and constraining choices and actions. Cathartic functions include emotional and motivational aspects of goal-setting, and developing faith and commitment to a larger moral purpose. This is similar to Aristotle view of pathos, ethos, and logos, according to which a leader must: 1.
Build relationships with those who are led 2. Advocate a moral vision 3 Persuade by logic to manage actions. Over the last seventy years, there have been six main schools of leadership theory (Dialectic & Highs, 2003; Handy, 1982; Barrington, 2003): 1. The trait school 2. The behavioral or style school 3. The contingency school 4. The visionary or charismatic school 5. The emotional intelligence school 6. The competency school. The Trait School The trait approach was popular up to the sass. The idea behind this school is that effective leaders share common traits.
It effectively assumes that leaders are born, not made. Attempts to identify the traits of effective leaders have focused on three main areas: Abilities: hard management skills Personality: such as self-confidence and emotional variables Physical appearance: including size and appearance. In a recent study, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) identified six traits of effective leaders: Drive and ambition The desire to lead and influence others Honesty and integrity Self-confidence Intelligence Technical knowledge.
Through his work at Henley Management College, Turner 1999) identified seven traits of effective project managers: Problem-solving ability Results orientation Energy and initiative Self-confidence Perspective Communication Negotiating ability. The Behavioral or Style School The behavioral or style school was popular from the sass to the sass. It assumed that effective leaders adopt certain styles or behaviors. It assumes, in effect, that effective leaders can be made.
Most of the best-known theories characterize managers or leaders against one or two parameters, and place them on a one-dimensional continuum or in a dimensional matrix (see, for example, Adair, 1983; Blake & Mouton, 1978; Hershey & Blanchard, 1988; Sleeve, 1989; Attainment & Schmidt, 1958). The parameters (see Table 1) include: 1. Concern for people or relationships 2. Concern for production 3. Use of authority 4. Involvement of the team in decision-making (formulating decisions) 5.
Involvement of the team in decision-taking (choosing options) 6. Flexibility verse the application of rules. Parameter 1 . People 2. Production 3. Authority 4. Decision-making 5. Decision- taking Blake and Mouton 2-D grid based on 1 & 2 covering 3 Attainment and Schmidt Hershey and Blanchard 2-D grid based on 1 & 2 Bonbon and Sleeve I-D spectrum based on 3 covering 4 & 5 covering 3 2-D grid based on 4 & 5 covering 3 Table 1: : Models of leadership style based on five parameters 50 Parameter 4.
Team Decision-making 5. Team Decision-taking 6. Flexibility Laissez-fairer High High High Democratic High Low High Autocratic Low Low High Bureaucratic Low Low Low Table 2: Four styles of project manager (Turner, 1999) Turner (1999) identified four styles of project manager based on parameters 4 t 6 (see Table 2). The Contingency School The contingency school was popular in the sass and sass (see Fiddler, 1967; House, 1971; Creche, Crucified, & Bellyache, 1962; Robbins, 1997).
Rather than seeking universal theories of leadership that would apply in every situation, contingency theories suggest that what makes an effective leader would depend on the situation. They ten to follow the same pattern: 1 . Assess the characteristics of the leader 2. Evaluate the situation in terms of key contingency variables 3. Seek a match between t leader and the situation. One contingency theory that has proven popular is path-goal theory (House, 1971). The idea is the leader must help the team fin the path to their goals and help them in that process.
Path-goal theory identity our leadership behaviors: Directive leaders Supportive leaders Participate leaders Achievement-oriented leaders. These must then be matched to environmental and subordinate contingency factors: Environmental factors: – Task structure – Formal authority system – Work group. Subordinate factors – Locus of control – Experience – Perceived ability. Fiddler (1967) recommends different leadership styles, depending on the formability of the leadership situation.
He identified three major variables to determine this formability, which then affects the leader’s role and influence: Leadership Style Laissez-FAA Democratic Autocratic Bureaucratic Stage Feasibility Design Execution Close-o Team Type Goggles Matrix Task Surgical Leader-member relations: degree to which the leader is trusted and liked by members Task structure: degree of clearness of a task and its instructions Position power: leader power by virtue of organizational position.
Fiddler distinguishes between task-oriented and participative approaches to leaders He uses a least-foreknowledge’s (LAP) score to assign team members to leaders depending on the leadership situation. In very favorable situations ND very unfavorable situations, he assigns task-oriented leaders (having a 10 LAP score) to achieve effectiveness through a directive and controlling style. In moderately favorable situations, he assigns participative leaders (high LAP score) for high effectiveness through interpersonal relationship orientation.
I the project management field, Frame (1987) suggested how the four leadership styles listed in Table 2 are appropriate at different stages of the project life icy and with different team structures (see Table 3). The Visionary or Charismatic School The visionary school was popular during the sass and 1 sass, and rose from the study of successful business leaders leading their organization through change. Bass (1990) identified two types of leadership, transactional transformational: 1.
Transactional leadership: Emphasizes contingent rear rewarding followers for meeting performance targets Manages by exception, taking action when tasks are not going as planned. 2. Transformational leadership: Exhibits charisma, developing a vision, engendering pride, Reese and trust Provides inspiration, motivating by creating high expectations and modeling appropriate behaviors Gives consideration to the individual, eying personal attention to followers and giving them respect and personals Provides intellectual stimulation, challenging followers with new ideas and approaches.
Team Nature Experts with shared responsibility Mixed discipline working on several tasks Single discipline working on separate tasks Mixed working on a single task Table 3: Leadership styles, project team types and the project life cycle 51 Style Transformational Dimensions Idealized influence (attributed) Idealized influence (behavior) Inspirational motivation Intellectual stimulation Individualized consideration
Contingent reward leadership Management by exception (active) Management by exception (passive) Laissez-fairer leadership Description The charisma of the leader Charisma centered on values, beliefs, and mission Energize followers by optimism, goals, and vision Challenging creativity for problem solving Advising, supporting, and caring for individuals Providing role, task clarification and psychological rewards Active vigilance of a leader to ensure goals are met Leaders intervene after mistakes have happened Transactional Laissez-fairer Leader avoids making decisions, abdicates responsibility, and does not use authority Table 4: Dimensions of the Multiracial Leadership Questionnaire (Bass, 1990) The transactional leader emphasizes Barnyard’s cognitive roles and Aristotle logos. The transformational one emphasizes Barnyard’s cathartic roles, and Aristotle pathos and ethos.
In reality, a different combination of the two styles will be appropriate in different circumstances. Bass (1990) developed the Multiracial Leadership Questionnaire (ML) to test transactional, transformational, and non-transactional laissez-fairer leadership style (see Table 4). It is now the most widely used leadership assessment questionnaire. Antiskid, Viola and Submariner’s (2003) identified the impact of context on the ML results. Contextual factors identified were environmental risk, leader’s hierarchical level, and gender. Dialectic and Highs (2004) showed the need to integrate contextual concepts in the ML questionnaire and added scales for Organizational Commitment and Organizational Context.
These scales contain four items designed to assess the degree of commitment that followers show to the organization and to the team in which they work, and one item to measure the extent of change faced by the organization. These items cover: Job distraction Realism Commitment to requisite change and to the organization Understanding the need for change Change faced by the organization. Duel and Highs’ questionnaire removes the weaknesses identified within the origin version of ML, and provides for the broadest coverage in assessing leaders and context simultaneously. In a project management context, Keenan and d Warthog (2004) predict that a project manager’s leadership style needs to be m transformational than transactional, but found no significant link.
What they find is that although there is a significant correlation between the manager’s dervish style and employees’ commitment, motivation, and stress for line managers, there is no such correlation for project managers. The Emotional Intelligence School The emotional intelligence school has been popular since the late sass, and says the leader’s emotional intelligence has greater impact on his or her success as a leader??and the performance of his or her team??than does the leader’s intellectual capability (Coleman, Obtain & McKee, 2002). They identified four dimensions of emotional intelligence (see Table 5), and, from there, six leadership styles: Visionary Democratic Coaching Pacesetting Affiliated Commanding.
Domains Personal Competence Self-awareness Competencies Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-awareness Self-confide Emotional self-control Transparency Adaptability Achievement Initiative Optimism Self-management Social Competence Social awareness Empathy Organizational awareness Service Inspirational leadership Influence Developing others Change catalyst Conflict management Building bonds Teamwork and collaboration Relationship management Table 5: Domains of emotional intelligence 52 Coleman, Botanists, and McKee (2002) say that the first four of these styles ill foster resonance in the team, and usually lead to better performance in appropriate circumstances. The last two styles can foster dissonance, so?? although appropriate in the correct circumstances??these last two styles nee be used with care. Coleman, Botanists, and McKee, as well as other authors, h shown a clear correlation between the emotional intelligence and leadership style of managers and the performance of their organizations. The Competence School Since the late sass, the emphasis has been to identify the competence of effective leaders. This may appear to be a return to the trait approach. However, competencies can be learned, so leaders can be made, not just born.
Further, different combinations of competencies can lead to different styles of leadership, appropriate in different circumstances, producing transactional leaders in situations of low complexity and transformational leaders in situation of high complexity. In addition, competencies can be technical or intellectual in nature, emphasizing Barnyard’s cognitive roles, or emotional in nature, emphasizing Barnyard’s cathartic roles and the domains of emotional intelligent Dialectic and Highs (2003) give an overview of the competency school. Since the competency school forms the basis of our research model, we discuss it in a separate section after considering the literature on team behaviors and culture behaviors of leaders.
Literature on Behaviors of Team Members In addition to the literature on the styles and behaviors of leaders, there is a substantial literature on the behavior of team members. Sometimes people apply team roles to leadership styles. However, Dialectic and Highs (2003) have shown the is little correlation between competencies of leaders and commonly identified team roles and behaviors. However, many of these are used as the basis for psychometric testing to determine the personality and behaviors of team members and team leaders to judge how they will perform, and as part of the recruitment of managers and executives. We describe five of the most common discussed theories: FIR-B FIR-B stands for Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior, and was developed by Schultz (1955).
It examine the way people react with each other, looking at three types of work behavior. It judges how much a person gives and needs to receive each of the three dimensions: Inclusion: social skills and the need to get along with other people Control: leadership behavior, and how much control one wants to exert and h much one is willing to receive Affection: the deep need for giving and receiving affection. FIR-B also offers two other scores, the interpersonal score and expression-of-anger score. Used by the best practitioners, it can give an accuracy picture of how an individual behaves at work and how he or she is perceived b others. Beeline Beeline (1986) identified nine team roles, and associated characteristics.
To these we add the role of comic, identified as important by the emotional intelligence school of leadership: Plant Team worker Monitor-evaluator Implementer Shaper Completer-finisher Coordinator Specialist Resource investigator Comic. Mannerisms and McCann Mannerisms and McCann (1990) produced a leadership model based on two spectra: Controlling behavior to exploring behavior Advising roles to organizing roles. The team roles adopted by an individual depend on the extent to which they apply these two fundamental behaviors. Nine team roles result. Many of these roles are similar the roles identified by Beeline. APP Chattel, Beer, and Tattoo’s (1970) identified personality factors (1 APP) that influence a person’s performance in a team. The roped the 16 factors into three groups: 1 . Those showing extroversion versus introversion 2. Those showing emotional stability 3. Others. Dialectic (1995) has correlated the Beeline team roles and FOP, showing that people adopting certain team roles exhibit particular personality factors. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator The Myers-Briggs Type was developed by Briggs-Myers (1992), and mainly gives an indication of an individual’s thinking style and temperament i a team. It describes the individual’s personality on four scales: Introversion t extroversion Thinking to feeling Sensing to intuition Judgment to perceptive
Correlation Between Team Roles and Leadership Styles It is a common fallacy for people to mix the team roles mentioned here with leadership styles, saying that the team roles are styles adopted by leaders. However, Dialectic and High (2003) have shown that only some of the team roles and personality factors are correlated to performance as a leader. 1. Beeline: Dialectic and Highs (2003 showed that only the roles of resource investigator and team worker were strongly correlated to performance as a leader. The coordinator and implement roles are weakly correlated to performance as a leader. 2. FOP: There was rater correlation of the FOP personality factors with performance as a lead The results suggest that extroverts and more emotionally stable individuals a likely to be better leaders. There is also some correlation with some of the 20th factors. 3 Based on these results, Dialectic and Highs (2003) suggest that their 15 leader competencies give better insight into performance as a leader than the Beeline roles or FOP personality factors, though the latter are correlated to their 15 leader competencies. Literature on Cultural Behaviors of Leaders Another dimension used to explain the performance of leaders is their cultural references. This tends to be presented as an environmental factor, with different styles appropriate in different cultural contexts. The most commonly quoted lists come from Hefted (1991 ) and Trampers (1993) (see Table 6). Although these are environmental factors, many are related to the parameter determining styles of managers in the style school and in path-goal theory. Turner (1999) suggests that different cultural styles lead to better performance at different stages of the project life cycle.
Mјleer and Turner (2005) have shoo a correlation between the cultural preferences of project managers and their reference in different contexts. The Competence School of Leadership The focus of leadership research is now on the competence of leaders, and competencies they exhibit (see, for example, Alamo-Metcalf & Albany-Metcalf 2001; Bass & Viola, 1995; Bennie, 1989; Dialectic & Highs, 2003; Coffee & Gone 2000; Coleman et al. , 2002; Sets De Varies & Efflorescence, 2002; Cotter, 1990; Soundness & Poster, 1998; Marshall, 1991; Carrot, Raritan, & Marks, 2001). Competence and the Earlier Schools At first sight, it might appear that the competence school signals a return to the trait school.
However, in reality, the impotence school encompasses all the earlier schools. Competence can be defined as knowledge, skills, and personal characteristics that deliver sup results (Botanists, 1982; Crawford, 2003). Thus, competence covers person characteristics (traits as understood by the traits school and emotional intelligence), knowledge and skills (including intelligence and Author Hoofs Cultural Dimension Power distance Individualism vs.. Collectivism Uncertain avoidance Masculinity Universalism vs.. Particularistic Specific vs.. Diffuse Nee emotional Short term vs.. Long term Achievement vs.. Ascription Attitudes t Internal vs.. External problem-solving ability, as well as management skill).