Likert’s Management Systems and Leadership

Rensis Likert and his associates of University of Michigan, U.S.A. have studied the patterns
and styles of managers for three decades and developed certain concepts and approaches
important to understanding leadership behaviour.
Likert developed four models of management which he termed systems of management.
He assigned numbers 1 to 4 to his conceptual models to indicate the stages of evolution in
the patterns and styles of management in organization.

While studying various systems Likert has taken seven variables such as:

(i) Leadership,

(ii) Motivations,

(iii) Communication,

(iv) Interaction-influence,

(v) Decision-making process,

(vi) Good-setting and

(vii) Control process.

These variables were studied in various management models.

These systems of leadership style are:

System 1—Exploitative Authoritative:

 In this system the managers/supervisors are highly autocratic.

 They decide the performance goals and the means of achieving them unilaterally.
 The things are got done from subordinates by issuing them orders.
 The relationship among managers and subordinates are characterized by distrust
and ill-will.
 The communication is very formal and downward.
 The motivational devices are threats and punishments.

System 2—Benevolent Authoritative:

 In this system the managers are also autocratic as in system I but they are not fully
authoritarian.
 They sometimes give liberty to subordinates to carry out their tasks within the
prescribed limits.
  The subordinates who exceed their targets are rewarded but are harsh to those who
do not perform well.
 The decision making and goal setting is mostly centralized.

System 3—Consultative:

 Under this system the goals are set in consultation with subordinates.
 All important decisions are taken at managerial level but work-related decisions are
left to the subordinates.
 There is a two-way communication among seniors and subordinates.
 The subordinates are free to discuss their problems with superiors.
 The control system tends to be flexible and goal-oriented.
 The superiors and subordinates repose a substantial degree of confidence and trust
between each other.
 As a tool of motivation, the emphasis is on rewards than on punishments.
 The managers trust the subordinates for carrying out the assigned task.

System 4—Democratic/Participation:

 Under this system the subordinates are involved in goal setting and decision making.
 The communication systems are open and effective.
 Managers adopt liberal humanistic leadership process and are supportive in their
attitude towards subordinates.
 The subordinates, on the other hand, feel motivated and are ready to assume
responsibilities.
 The relationship between managers and subordinates are cordial and friendly.
 This is an ideal management system.
 It is like democratic style of leadership.

Likert concluded that organizations with System 1 orientation scored very poorly while
those with System 4 scored creditably on these performance characteristics. He strongly
recommended system 4 and regarded it as the best way to develop and utilize human assets
of the organization. Likert found that many organizations are operating under Systems 2 and
3.

According to Rensis Likert, the nearer the behavioural characteristics of an organization

approach System 4 (Participative), the more likely this will lead to long-term improvement
in staff turnover and high productivity, low scrap, low costs, and high earnings and the
organization will achieve optimum effectiveness. He suggested intensive leadership training
to various levels of management so as to move them to System 4-Management. System 4 is
likely to be most effective in the long run as the leader manages with full consent and co-
operation of followers.
Managerial grid: Blake and Mouton

The managerial grid model (1964) is a style leadership model developed by Robert R. Blake
and Jane Mouton. It is a graphic model of alternative combinations of managerial styles or
orientations or behaviours, on a two dimensional space. The two styles or orientations are:
concern for production and concern for people.

The model is represented as a grid with concern for production as the x-axis and concern for
people as the y-axis; each axis ranges from 1 (Low) to 9 (High). Blake and Mouton argued
that a leader’s managerial style is point on the grid; they have identified five combinations
of styles, for illustrative purposes out of 81 possible combinations.

The resulting leadership styles are as follows:

1. The indifferent (previously called impoverished) style (1,1): evade and elude. In this
style, managers have low concern for both people and production. Managers use
this style to preserve job and job seniority, protecting themselves by avoiding getting
 into trouble. The main concern for the manager is not to be held responsible for any
mistakes, which results in less innovation decisions.
2. The accommodating (previously, country club) style (1,9): yield and comply. This
style has a high concern for people and a low concern for production. Managers
using this style pay much attention to the security and comfort of the employees, in
hopes that this will increase performance. The resulting atmosphere is usually
friendly, but not necessarily very productive.
3. The dictatorial (previously, produce or perish) style (9,1): control and dominate.
With a high concern for production, and a low concern for people, managers using
this style find employee needs unimportant; they provide their employees with
money and expect performance in return. Managers using this style also pressure
their employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals. This
dictatorial style is based on Theory X of Douglas McGregor, and is commonly applied
by companies on the edge of real or perceived failure. This style is often used in
cases of crisis management.
4. The status quo (previously, middle-of-the-road) style (5,5): balance and compromise.
Managers using this style try to balance between company goals and workers' needs.
By giving some concern to both people and production, managers who use this style
hope to achieve suitable performance but doing so gives away a bit of each concern
so that neither production nor people needs are met.
5. The sound (previously, team) style (9,9): contribute and commit. In this style, high
concern is paid both to people and production. As suggested by the propositions of
Theory Y, managers choosing to use this style encourage teamwork and commitment
among employees. This method relies heavily on making employees feel themselves
to be constructive parts of the company.

Blake and Mouton argued that the two concerns are independent and can be present
together. According to them team leadership is the most desirable approach in the long run
than others. They claim that the Grid concept can be used to enable managers to identify
their current leadership behavioural position.
Those managers who are in lower positions in their concerns for people and production can
be exposed to some training programme to enable them to move to team position. Blake
and Mouton place emphasis not only on leadership training but also on Organisational
Development. The latter is necessary to serve as a setting in which managers can
successfully show high concern for people and production.
Trait Theory of Leadership

The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both
successful and unsuccessful - and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting
lists of traits are then compared to those of potential leaders to assess their likelihood of
success or failure.

Scholars taking the trait approach attempted to identify physiological (appearance, height,
and weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background), personality,
self-confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence, decisiveness, judgment, and
knowledge), task-related (achievement drive, initiative, and persistence), and social
characteristics (sociability and cooperativeness) with leader emergence and leader
effectiveness.

Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are
different from those of the less effective leaders. Through many researches conducted in
the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of core traits of successful leaders have
been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to identify whether a person will be a
successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people
with leadership potential.

Among the core traits identified are:

 Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energy and initiative
 Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach shared goals
 Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open
 Self-confidence: Belief in one’s self, ideas, and ability
 Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical abilities, and
conceptually skilled
 Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technical matters
 Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severe psychological
disorders.
 Others: charisma, creativity and flexibility

Strengths:

 It is naturally pleasing theory.

 It is valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory.
 It serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be
assessed.
 It gives a detailed knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the
leadership process.
Why its not more successful in explaining leadership ?

 There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a

‘good’ or ‘successful’ leader
 The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of
successful leaders in various leadership positions have been identified. These
descriptions are simply generalities.
 There is also a disagreement over which traits are the most important for an
effective leader
 The model attempts to relate physical traits such as, height and weight, to effective
leadership. Most of these factors relate to situational factors. For example, a
minimum weight and height might be necessary to perform the tasks efficiently in a
military leadership position. In business organizations, these are not the
requirements to be an effective leader.
 The theory is very complex

The trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people
at all levels in all types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the
theory to evaluate their position in the organization and to assess how their position can be
made stronger in the organization. They can get an in-depth understanding of their identity
and the way they will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the manager
aware of their strengths and weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they
can develop their leadership qualities.

The traits approach gives rise to questions: whether leaders are born or made; and whether
leadership is an art or science. However, these are not mutually exclusive alternatives.
Leadership may be something of an art; it still requires the application of special skills and
techniques. Even if there are certain inborn qualities that make one a good leader, these
natural talents need encouragement and development. A person is not born with self-
confidence. Self-confidence is developed, honesty and integrity are a matter of personal
choice, motivation to lead comes from within the individual, and the knowledge of business
can be acquired. While cognitive ability has its origin partly in genes, it still needs to be
developed. None of these ingredients are acquired overnight.