flowchart LR T[Trait Theories<br/>1900s–1940s] --> B[Behavioural Theories<br/>1940s–1960s] B --> C[Contingency Theories<br/>1960s–1980s] C --> N[Contemporary Theories<br/>1980s onwards] style T fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#C62828 style B fill:#FFF8E1,stroke:#F9A825 style C fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#2E7D32 style N fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1565C0
21 Leadership and Communication
This chapter covers two of the most-tested topics in OB. Leadership is the act of influencing a group towards a goal — what makes one person able to mobilise the effort of many. Communication is the medium through which leadership and most other organisational work happens. Together they cover the interpersonal craft of management.
21.1 Leadership
21.1.1 What is Leadership?
Stephen Robbins defines leadership as “the ability to influence a group towards the achievement of a vision or set of goals” (robbins2018ob?). Warren Bennis added the more poetic version: “Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality.” Three elements run through every workable definition — influence (without authority alone), group (leadership is interpersonal), and goal (leadership is purposive).
21.1.2 Leadership vs Management
The two words are often used interchangeably; the OB literature insists they are distinct.
TipLeadership vs Management
| Dimension | Management | Leadership |
|---|---|---|
| Aim | Coping with complexity | Coping with change |
| Activity | Plan, organise, staff, direct, control | Set direction, align people, motivate, inspire |
| Source of authority | Position | Personal influence |
| Time horizon | Short-to-medium term | Long term |
| Working question | How? | Why? |
| Output | Predictability, order | Useful change |
The slogan that has stuck — Bennis again: “Managers do things right; leaders do the right things.” The competent senior practitioner does both at once.
21.2 Theories of Leadership
Leadership theories evolved through four broad eras.
21.2.1 Trait Theories
The earliest era asked: what traits separate leaders from non-leaders? Ralph Stogdill’s 1948 and 1974 surveys of the trait literature found mixed results — no single set of traits guarantees leadership emergence or effectiveness across situations (stogdill1974?). Modern trait research, refreshed by the Big Five, finds reliable but modest links: extraversion, conscientiousness, openness and emotional stability correlate with leadership emergence; integrity and charisma matter for effectiveness.
21.2.2 Behavioural Theories
The next era shifted from who leaders are to what leaders do. Three classic studies define the behavioural era.
The Iowa Studies — Lewin’s Three Styles
Kurt Lewin and colleagues at the University of Iowa identified three leadership styles in their 1939 boys’-club studies.
TipLewin’s Three Leadership Styles
| Style | What the leader does | Productivity | Satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Autocratic | Decides alone, dictates methods, dominates | High when leader present, low when absent | Low |
| Democratic | Involves the group in decisions | Moderate to high | Highest |
| Laissez-faire | Hands off; minimal input | Lowest | Mixed |
The Ohio State Studies — Two Independent Dimensions
Researchers at Ohio State distilled leader behaviour into two independent dimensions.
TipThe Two Ohio State Dimensions
| Dimension | What it covers |
|---|---|
| Initiating structure | The extent to which the leader defines and structures her own role and that of subordinates in pursuit of goals |
| Consideration | The extent to which the leader has job relationships characterised by mutual trust, respect for ideas, and regard for feelings |
The two dimensions are independent — a leader can be high on both, high on one and low on the other, or low on both.
The Michigan Studies
Researchers at the University of Michigan identified two parallel dimensions: production-oriented leaders who emphasise the technical or task aspects of the job, and employee-oriented leaders who emphasise interpersonal relationships and the well-being of subordinates. Their finding: employee-oriented leaders generally produce higher group productivity and satisfaction.
Blake & Mouton’s Managerial Grid
The Managerial Grid (chapter 12) plots concern for production against concern for people. The 9-9 team management style is the recommended target. The grid integrates the Ohio and Michigan findings into a single framework.
21.2.3 Contingency Theories
The third era argued that the best style depends on the situation. Four models dominate.
Fiedler’s Contingency Model
Fred Fiedler’s 1967 model uses the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale to classify a leader as task-oriented (low LPC) or relationship-oriented (high LPC). The situation is then assessed on three contingencies, producing eight combinations of situational favourableness.
TipFiedler’s Three Situational Contingencies
| Contingency | What it captures |
|---|---|
| Leader–member relations | Trust and respect between leader and group |
| Task structure | Whether the task is structured or unstructured |
| Position power | Formal authority of the leader |
Fiedler’s prediction: task-oriented leaders (low LPC) perform best in very favourable and very unfavourable situations; relationship-oriented leaders (high LPC) perform best in moderate situations (fiedler1967?). The implication is that the firm should match leaders to situations — or change the situation to match the leader.
Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Leadership
Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard’s Situational Leadership model argues that the right style depends on the readiness of followers — their willingness and ability to perform (hersey1969?). The model maps four leader styles to four levels of follower readiness.
TipHersey-Blanchard’s Four Leadership Styles
| Follower readiness | Description | Style | Behaviour |
|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | Unable and unwilling | S1 — Telling | High task, low relationship |
| R2 | Unable but willing | S2 — Selling | High task, high relationship |
| R3 | Able but unwilling / insecure | S3 — Participating | Low task, high relationship |
| R4 | Able and willing | S4 — Delegating | Low task, low relationship |
Style flows with readiness: as the follower grows, the leader steps back.
House’s Path-Goal Theory
Robert House’s path-goal theory argues that the leader’s job is to clarify the path to the follower’s goals and to remove obstacles on that path (house1971?). The model identifies four leader styles, the right one chosen by reading two contingencies (follower characteristics and environmental factors).
TipHouse’s Four Leader Styles
| Style | What the leader does | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Directive | Tells subordinates what is expected; gives specific guidance | Ambiguous tasks; inexperienced followers |
| Supportive | Friendly, concerned for follower welfare | Stressful, frustrating tasks |
| Participative | Consults followers; uses their suggestions | Capable, internal-locus followers |
| Achievement-oriented | Sets challenging goals; expects high performance | Capable, achievement-oriented followers |
Vroom–Yetton–Jago Decision Model
Vroom and Yetton’s normative leadership model (later extended with Jago) prescribes the right level of subordinate participation in a decision. Five leadership styles run from purely autocratic (AI, AII) through consultative (CI, CII) to fully group-based (GII), and the leader picks the style by answering a sequence of decision rules about the situation.
21.2.4 Contemporary Theories
The fourth era shifted attention to leaders who transform organisations.
Transactional vs Transformational Leadership
James MacGregor Burns’s 1978 Leadership drew the seminal distinction; Bernard Bass’s subsequent work operationalised it into a measurable framework (burns1978?; bass1985?).
TipTransactional vs Transformational Leadership
| Dimension | Transactional | Transformational |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Exchange of rewards for performance | Inspiring followers to transcend self-interest |
| Followers’ needs | Lower-level — pay, benefits, security | Higher-level — meaning, growth, contribution |
| Style | Contingent reward, management by exception | Idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualised consideration |
| Output | Performance against agreed targets | Extraordinary effort, fundamental change |
Bass’s Four I’s of transformational leadership are widely tested: Idealised influence, Inspirational motivation, Intellectual stimulation, Individualised consideration.
Charismatic Leadership
Robert House’s later charismatic-leadership theory identifies traits common to charismatic leaders — vision, willingness to take personal risks, sensitivity to follower needs, unconventional behaviour. Conger and Kanungo extended the work, and the line between charismatic and transformational leadership is thin.
Authentic Leadership
A more recent strand — championed by Bill George and others — argues that leaders must lead from a genuine self: self-awareness, balanced processing, internalised moral perspective, and relational transparency. Authentic leadership emerged after the post-2000 ethical scandals.
Servant Leadership
Robert Greenleaf’s The Servant as Leader (1970) argued that the leader’s first instinct should be to serve — followers, customers, community (greenleaf1977?). Servant leadership is operationalised through ten behaviours: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualisation, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth, building community.
Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
George Graen’s LMX theory observes that leaders form different-quality relationships with different subordinates, leading to in-groups (high-quality LMX) and out-groups (low-quality LMX). High-quality LMX is associated with higher performance, satisfaction and commitment.
Ethical Leadership
A normative cousin of authentic leadership, ethical leadership emphasises honesty, fairness, principled decision-making and concern for stakeholders. The moral person and moral manager dual aspect — proposed by Brown, Treviño and Harrison — is the standard definition.
Inspirational and Visionary Leadership
These overlap heavily with transformational and charismatic leadership; the common thread is the leader’s capacity to articulate a picture of a desirable future that mobilises others.
21.3 Communication
21.3.1 What is Communication?
Communication is the process of transmitting and receiving meaning between two or more people. It is the bloodstream of any organisation: every plan, decision, instruction, motivation, conflict and emotion flows through it. The classical model — Shannon and Weaver’s adapted version — identifies seven elements.
TipSeven Elements of the Communication Process
| Element | What it does |
|---|---|
| Sender | The originator of the message |
| Encoding | Converting the meaning into a transmittable form (words, gestures, images) |
| Message | The content actually transmitted |
| Channel | The medium through which the message travels |
| Decoding | The receiver’s interpretation of the encoded message |
| Receiver | The intended recipient |
| Feedback | The receiver’s response back to the sender |
Two further elements complete the model: noise (anything that distorts the message) and context (the surrounding setting).
flowchart LR S[Sender] --> E[Encoding] E --> M[Message + Channel] M --> D[Decoding] D --> R[Receiver] R -. Feedback .-> S N[Noise] -.-> M style S fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1565C0 style M fill:#FFF3E0,stroke:#E65100 style R fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#2E7D32 style N fill:#FCE4EC,stroke:#AD1457
21.3.2 Functions of Communication
Communication serves four functions in organisations: control (telling people what to do, ensuring compliance), motivation (clarifying goals, providing feedback), emotional expression (releasing feelings, social interaction), and information (data needed to make decisions).
21.3.3 Directions of Communication
TipFour Directions of Organisational Communication
| Direction | Flow | Typical content |
|---|---|---|
| Downward | Senior to junior | Goals, instructions, policies, feedback |
| Upward | Junior to senior | Reports, suggestions, grievances, status updates |
| Horizontal / lateral | Same level | Coordination, support, problem-solving |
| Diagonal | Across levels and functions | Cross-functional projects, urgent escalation |
21.3.4 Formal vs Informal Channels — the Grapevine
The formal communication system follows the organisation chart; the informal system — the grapevine — runs alongside it. Keith Davis identified four grapevine patterns: single-strand (one to one to one), gossip (one to many), probability (random spreading), and cluster (selective passing — most common in firms).
The grapevine is faster and often more accurate than formal communication — but also more selective and more vulnerable to distortion. A wise manager works with it rather than against it.
21.3.5 Verbal, Non-Verbal and Written Communication
Roughly 55 per cent of meaning is carried by body language, 38 per cent by tone and only 7 per cent by the words themselves — Mehrabian’s much-cited (and often over-extended) finding for emotional communication. The takeaway: words alone are an unreliable carrier; the channel matters.
TipForms of Communication
| Form | Examples | Strength | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral / verbal | Conversations, meetings, phone calls | Speed, immediate feedback | No record; potential distortion |
| Written | Letters, memos, reports, e-mail | Permanent, precise, verifiable | Slow; impersonal; no immediate feedback |
| Non-verbal | Facial expression, gesture, posture, eye contact, tone, silence, space | Carries emotional content | Easy to misread; cultural variation |
| Visual | Charts, diagrams, infographics, video | Quickly grasped; high impact | Designer’s framing affects message |
| Electronic | E-mail, messaging, video-conferencing | Fast, scalable, async | Tone often lost; security risks |
21.3.6 Channel Richness
Richard Daft and Robert Lengel’s channel-richness concept ranks channels by their capacity to handle multiple cues, immediate feedback and personal warmth. Face-to-face is richest; numeric reports are leanest.
TipChannel Richness Hierarchy
| Rank | Channel |
|---|---|
| 1 (richest) | Face-to-face |
| 2 | Video conference |
| 3 | Telephone |
| 4 | |
| 5 | Letters and memos |
| 6 | Posted notices, bulletins |
| 7 (leanest) | Reports and numerical data |
The working rule: choose richer channels for non-routine, ambiguous, emotional messages; leaner channels for routine, clear, factual messages.
21.3.7 Communication Networks
Five basic patterns describe how communication flows in small groups.
TipFive Communication Networks
| Network | Structure | Speed | Accuracy | Centralisation | Member satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chain | Strict line | Moderate | High | Moderate | Moderate |
| Wheel | Hub-and-spoke through one person | Fast | High | High | Low (except hub) |
| Y | Inverted-Y branching | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Circle | Each connected to two neighbours | Slow | Moderate | Low | Higher |
| All-channel | Every member to every other | Fast | Moderate | Low | High |
The wheel and the all-channel networks are the two most-tested. Wheel is fast and accurate but rigid; all-channel is slower per message but produces higher member satisfaction and works best for complex, ambiguous problems.
21.3.8 Barriers to Effective Communication
TipCommon Barriers to Communication
| Barrier | What it does |
|---|---|
| Filtering | Sender shapes message to please the receiver, omits unwelcome facts |
| Selective perception | Receiver hears what fits prior expectations |
| Information overload | Too much information for the receiver to process |
| Emotions | Strong feelings distort interpretation |
| Language | Same words mean different things to different people, especially across cultures |
| Silence | Withholding information is itself a message |
| Cultural barriers | Different norms of communication, eye contact, directness |
| Defensiveness | Receiver protects self instead of listening |
| Physical / mechanical | Distance, noise, faulty technology |
| Status differences | Subordinates filter upward; seniors talk down |
| Rumour and gossip | The grapevine’s failure mode |
21.3.9 Improving Communication
Five well-tested practices.
- Use feedback. Confirm that the message was received as intended.
- Simplify language. Use plain words; match the vocabulary to the audience.
- Listen actively. Hold one’s own response while the other person speaks; restate to confirm.
- Constrain emotions. Postpone communication when emotions are high; reflect, then respond.
- Watch for non-verbal cues. The body often tells a different story from the words.
21.3.10 Active Listening
Active listening is a skill, not a personality trait. Carl Rogers’s four behaviours — intensity (full attention), empathy (understand from the speaker’s point of view), acceptance (suspend judgement), and willingness to take responsibility for completeness (probe, paraphrase, summarise) — remain the standard guide.
21.3.11 Non-Verbal Communication
Body language carries five distinct streams of information: kinesics (body movement, gesture, expression), paralanguage (pitch, pace, volume, tone), proxemics (space and distance), chronemics (use of time), and haptics (touch). Each is culture-laden — the rules of eye contact in Mumbai differ from those in Tokyo, and both differ from those in Berlin.
21.4 Practice Questions
Eight questions to test the chapter. Each card hides the answer — click Show answer to reveal it.
Q1
Match the leadership theory with its
Match the leadership theory with its lead author:
| Theory | Author | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| (i) | Contingency model | (a) | Hersey & Blanchard |
| (ii) | Path-goal theory | (b) | Robert Greenleaf |
| (iii) | Situational leadership | (c) | Fred Fiedler |
| (iv) | Servant leadership | (d) | Robert House |
A(i)-(c), (ii)-(d), (iii)-(a), (iv)-(b)
B(i)-(a), (ii)-(b), (iii)-(c), (iv)-(d)
C(i)-(b), (ii)-(c), (iii)-(d), (iv)-(a)
D(i)-(d), (ii)-(a), (iii)-(b), (iv)-(c)
Show answer
Correct answer
A. (i)-(c), (ii)-(d), (iii)-(a), (iv)-(b)
Q2
Bass's Four I's of transformational leadership
Bass's Four I's of transformational leadership include all except:
AIdealised influence
BInspirational motivation
CIndividualised consideration
DInflexible command
Show answer
Correct answer
D. The four are idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualised consideration.
Q3
Fiedler's contingency model classifies leaders as
Fiedler's contingency model classifies leaders as task-oriented or relationship-oriented based on the:
ABig Five personality scores
BLeast Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale
CHersey–Blanchard readiness assessment
DInitiating-structure dimension
Show answer
Correct answer
B. LPC is the diagnostic instrument in Fiedler's model.
Q4
The Ohio State leadership studies identified
The Ohio State leadership studies identified two independent dimensions of leader behaviour. They are:
AInitiating structure and consideration
BTransactional and transformational
CAutocratic and democratic
DProduction-oriented and employee-oriented
Show answer
Correct answer
A. Initiating structure and consideration. (Production / employee-oriented is the Michigan study.)
Q5
In Hersey-Blanchard's situational leadership, a...
In Hersey-Blanchard's situational leadership, a follower who is able but unwilling or insecure is best matched with which style?
AS1 — Telling
BS2 — Selling
CS3 — Participating
DS4 — Delegating
Show answer
Correct answer
C. S3 (participating) — low task, high relationship — fits the able-but-insecure follower (R3).
Q6
In the channel-richness hierarchy, the richest
In the channel-richness hierarchy, the richest medium is:
AE-mail
BTelephone
CFace-to-face conversation
DNumerical reports
Show answer
Correct answer
C. Face-to-face is the richest channel — multiple cues, immediate feedback, personal warmth.
Q7
A wheel communication network is characterised
A wheel communication network is characterised by:
AEqual communication among all members
BA hub through which all messages must pass
CA strict top-to-bottom chain
DNo formal communication at all
Show answer
Correct answer
B. The wheel funnels all communication through a central hub.
Q8
Filtering as a barrier to communication
Filtering as a barrier to communication occurs when:
AThe receiver hears only what fits her prior expectations
BThe sender deliberately shapes the message to please the receiver
CThere is too much information for the receiver to process
DStrong emotions distort interpretation
Show answer
Correct answer
B. Filtering is the sender-side barrier; selective perception is the receiver-side counterpart.
ImportantQuick recall
- Leadership = influence × group × goal. Bennis: managers do things right; leaders do the right things.
- Four eras: Trait → Behavioural → Contingency → Contemporary.
- Behavioural studies: Iowa (Lewin) — autocratic / democratic / laissez-faire; Ohio State — initiating structure + consideration; Michigan — production-oriented / employee-oriented; Blake & Mouton’s grid.
- Contingency: Fiedler (LPC + 3 contingencies); Hersey-Blanchard (S1-S4 / R1-R4); House’s path-goal (4 styles, 2 contingencies); Vroom-Yetton-Jago.
- Contemporary: Burns / Bass — transactional vs transformational (Four I’s), House charismatic, authentic, Greenleaf servant, Graen LMX, ethical, inspirational / visionary.
- Communication = sender → encoding → message + channel → decoding → receiver → feedback (with noise).
- Functions: control, motivation, emotional expression, information.
- Directions: downward, upward, horizontal, diagonal.
- Davis’s grapevine patterns: single-strand, gossip, probability, cluster (most common).
- Daft-Lengel channel richness: face-to-face (richest) → video → phone → email → letters → notices → reports (leanest).
- Five communication networks: chain, wheel, Y, circle, all-channel. Wheel is most centralised; all-channel produces highest satisfaction.
- Barriers: filtering, selective perception, information overload, emotions, language, silence, cultural, defensiveness, physical, status, rumour.
- Active listening (Rogers): intensity, empathy, acceptance, responsibility for completeness.
- Non-verbal streams: kinesics, paralanguage, proxemics, chronemics, haptics.