Ambiguity of Leadership

Older research on management and leadership can often still provide valid insights for the modern business world.

In 1970 Jeffrey Pfeffer wrote a paper on the ambiguity of leadership, published in The Academy of Management review

One of the points Pfeffer made is that leadership is not an easy, straightforward concept that can be described in a few personality traits. This is something that we continually observe with the GRI.

According to Pfeffer, problems with the concept of leadership are:

• the ambiguity of its definition and measurement,
• the issue of whether leadership has an affect on organizational performance,
• the process of selecting leaders, which frequently emphasizes organizationally-irrelevant criteria.

When we view this study through the lens of the modern business world, we see ambiguity reflected in the fact that there is no one style of leadership that fits all people and all situations. What is clear is that leadership, both as a concept and in real-world application, varies - by individual, from culture to culture, between different industries and even from company to company.

We also see that the selection process for leaders can still be somewhat arbitrary, something that the GRI works to change.

Recognizing Differences in Leadership Styles

Awareness of cultural differences in leadership styles becomes more important as globalization increases and the world's cultures are brought into contact more and more.

Just a few examples culturally-based leadership differences:

• China and Japan - are more collectivist and paternal, or familial, in their leadership approach, being more authoritative, but also tending to provide more for their workers.
• The United States - strongly individualistic, with an ideal of leaders who are special or charismatic, have a vision, set the direction, make decisions and motivate and energize their workforce.
• France - it's really more management than leadership, and tends to be quite formal and favor a strong hierarchy.
• Sweden - there is less emphasis on the leader and more on a flattened hierarchy and team-based consensus-building.

Of course, leadership styles vary from person to person, as well. Leaders tend to have a style that they are most comfortable using, and employees have a preference for which style is the most effective motivator for them.

To complicate matters, there are also differences in types of leadership between industries - manufacturing, for example, will likely have different leadership needs from the hospitality sector - and even between different companies within industries.

GRI Clarifies the Concept of Leadership and Leadership Styles

The GRI helps to clarify the leadership concept and to refine the understanding of how each leadership style can succeed in the right context. The GRI assessment also identifies the different, yet complementary, styles that are needed for any given team to succeed.

GRI Improves the Selection of Leaders

By using the GRI when filling a leadership position, many factors are taken into account to ensure that a leader is chosen with increased precision, to be the best fit for the job, rather than based on, as Pfeffer says, "organizationally irrelevant criteria."