WEEK 7 PA

RTICIPATIVE LEADERSHIP A
ND EMPOWERMENT
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-1
Leadership In
Organizations
 AFTER STUDYING THIS CHAPTER, YOU S
HOULD BE ABLE TO:
 Understand different forms of participative
leadership and empowerment.
 Understand the major findings in research on
consequences of participative leadership.
 Understand the situations in which
participative leadership is most likely to be
effective.
5-2
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Leadership In
Organizations
  Understand procedures for the effective use of
consultation.
 Understand the potential benefits and risks of
delegation.
 Understand when and how to use delegation
effectively.

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-3
Leadership In
Organizations
 UNDERSTAND DIFFERENT FORMS
OF PARTICIPATIVE LEADERSHIP A
ND EMPOWERMENT
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-4
Leadership In
Organizations
  Consultation
 Joint decision making
 Power sharing
 Decentralization
 Empowerment
 Democratic management

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-5
Leadership In
Organizations
  Autocratic decision
 Consultation
 Joint decision
 Delegation

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-6
Leadership In
Organizations
 AUTOCRATIC DECISION: The manager makes a de
cision alone without asking for the opinions or suggesti
ons of other people, and these people have no direct i
nfluence on the decision; there is no participation.
 CONSULTATION: The manager asks other people for
their opinions and ideas and then makes the decision a
lone after seriously considering their suggestions and c
oncerns.
 JOINT DECISION: The manager meets with others t
o discuss the decision problem and make a decision to
gether; the manager has no more influence over the fi
nal decision than any other participant.
 DELEGATION: The manager gives an individual or gr
oup the authority and responsibility for making a decisi
on; the manager usually specifies limits within which t
he final choice must fall, and prior approval may or ma
y not be required before the decision can be implemen
ted.
UNDERSTAND THE MAJOR FINDING
S IN RESEARCH ON CONSEQUENC
ES OF PARTICIPATIVE LEADERSHI
P
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-9
Leadership In
Organizations
  Decision quality
 Decision acceptance
 Process satisfaction
 Differing objectives

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-10
Leadership In
Organizations
 Decision Quality. Involving other people in making a decis
ion is likely to increase the quality of a decision when participan
ts have information and knowledge lacked by the leader.
 Cooperation and sharing of knowledge will depend on the exten
t to which participants trust the leader.
 If participants and the leader have incompatible goals, cooperat
ion is unlikely to occur.
 Even high cooperation does not guarantee that participation will
result in a better decision.
 When members have different perceptions of the problem or dif
ferent priorities for the various outcomes, it is difficult to discov
er a high-quality decision
 Decision Acceptance. People who have considerable in
fluence in making a decision tend to identify with it and perceiv
e it to be their decision.
 This feeling of ownership increases their motivation to impleme
nt it successfully.
 Participants gain a better understanding of how they will be affe
cted by a decision, which is likely to reduce any unwarranted fe
ars and anxieties about it.
 Finally, when a decision is made by a participative process consi
dered legitimate by most members, then the group is likely to a
pply social pressure on any reluctant members to do their part i
n implementing the decision.
 Process Satisfaction. Research on procedural justice f
ound that the opportunity to express opinions and preferences
before a decision is made (called “voice”) can have beneficial ef
fects
 People are more likely to perceive that they are being treated w
ith dignity and respect when they have an opportunity to expres
s opinions and preferences about a decision that will affect the
m.
 The likely result is more perception of procedural justice and str
onger satisfaction with the decision process.
 The process may reduce rather than increase satisfaction if part
icipants perceive that the leader is attempting to manipulate the
m into supporting an undesirable decision.
 Differing Objectives. The potential benefits of participati
on are not identical for all types of participants. The leader’s obj
ectives for using participation may differ depending on whether
participants are subordinates, peers, superiors, or outsiders.
 Downward consultation may be used to increase the quality of
decisions by drawing on the knowledge and problem-solving ex
pertise of subordinates. Another objective is to increase subordi
nate acceptance of decisions by providing a sense of ownership.
 Lateral consultation with people in different subunits may be us
ed to increase decision quality when peers have relevant knowl
edge about the cause of a problem and likely solutions. When c
ooperation from other managers is necessary to implement a de
cision, consultation is a way to increase their understanding and
commitment.
 Differing Objectives.
 Upward consultation allows a manager to draw on the expertise
of the boss, which may be greater than the manager’s expertise
. In addition, upward consultation allows a manager to find out
how the boss feels about a problem and is likely to react to vari
ous proposals.
 Consulting with outsiders such as clients and suppliers helps en
sure that decisions affecting them are understood and accepted
. It is also a way to learn more about their needs and preferenc
es, strengthen external networks, improve coordination, and sol
ve mutual problems.
UNDERSTAND THE SITUATIONS IN
WHICH PARTICIPATIVE LEADERSHI
P IS MOST LIKELY TO BE EFFECTI
VE
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-16
Leadership In
Organizations
 Victor Vroom, a professor at Yale University and a scholar
on leadership and decision-making, developed the normative
model of decision-making. 
 Drawing upon literature from the areas of leadership, group dec
ision-making, and procedural fairness, Vroom’s model predicts t
he effectiveness of decision-making procedures. 
 Specifically, Vroom’s model takes into account the situation and
the importance of the decision to determine which of Vroom’s fi
ve decision-making methods will be most effective
 Vroom identified five types of decision-making processes,
each varying on degree of participation by the leader.
 1) Decide: The leader makes the decision or solves the proble
m alone and announces his/her decision to the group. The lead
er may gather information from members of the group.
 2) Consult (Individually): The leader approaches group mem
bers individually and presents them with the problem. The lead
er records the group member’s suggestions and makes a decisi
on, deciding whether or not to use the information provided by
group members.
VROOM AND YETTON IDENTIFIED FIVE DECISION PROCEDURES FOR DECISIONS INVOLVI
NG MULTIPLE SUBORDINATES, INCLUDING TWO VARIETIES OF AUTOCRATIC DECISION (
A-I AND A-II), TWO VARIETIES OF CONSULTATION (C-I AND C-II), AND ONE VARIETY
OF JOINT DECISION MAKING BY THE LEADER AND SUBORDINATES AS A GROUP (G-II). T
HE PROCEDURES ARE DEFINED IN TABLE 5-1 .
 3) Consult (Group): The leader holds a group meeting where
he/she presents the problem to the group as a whole. All memb
ers are asked to contribute and make suggestions during the m
eeting. The leader makes his/her decision alone, choosing whic
h information obtained from the group meeting to use or discar
d.
 4) Facilitate: The leader holds a group meeting where he/she
presents the problem to the group as a whole. This differs from
consulting approach as the leader ensures that his/her opinions
are not given any more weight than those of the group. The de
cision is made by group consensus, and not solely by the leader
.
 5) Delegate: The leader does not actively participate in the de
cision-making process. Instead, the leader provides resources (
e.g., information about the problem) and encouragement.
  Decision acceptance and quality
 Situational variables
 Decision Rules

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-21
Leadership In
Organizations
 Decision Acceptance and Quality -the degree of c
ommitment to implement a decision effectively. Acceptance
is important whenever a decision must be implemented by s
ubordinates or has implications for their work motivation.
 In some cases, subordinates are highly motivated to implem
ent a decision made by the leader because it is clearly benef
icial to them or because the leader uses influence tactics to
gain their commitment to the decision.
 However, subordinates may not accept an autocratic decisio
n for other reasons. For example, subordinates may resent
not being consulted, they may not understand the reasons f
or the decision, and they may see it as detrimental to their i
nterests.
 A basic assumption of the model is that participation increases
decision acceptance if it is not already high, and the more influe
nce subordinates have in making a decision, the more they will
be motivated to implement it successfully. Thus, decision accept
ance is likely to be greater for joint decision making than for co
nsultation, and for consultation than for an autocratic decision.
 Decision quality refers to the objective aspects of the decision t
hat affect group performance aside from any effects mediated b
y decision acceptance. The quality of a decision is high when th
e best alternative is selected.
 Situational Variables The effect of the decision procedur
es on decision quality and acceptance depends on various aspe
cts of the situation, and a procedure that is effective in some sit
uations may be ineffective in other situations.
 The effectiveness of a decision procedure depends on several a
spects of the decision situation, including the importance and co
mplexity of the decision, the distribution of relevant information
, subordinate attitudes regarding the decision, and leader depen
dence on subordinates to implement the decision. The causal re
lationships among the variables are shown in Figure 5-3
 Situational Variables (Cont)
 The effect of participation on decision quality depends on the di
stribution of relevant information and problem-solving expertise
between leader and subordinates.
 The model assumes that participation will result in better decisi
ons if subordinates possess relevant information and are willing
to cooperate with the leader in making a good decision.
 The model assumes that consultation and joint decision making
are equally likely to facilitate decision quality when subordinates
share the leader’s objectives.
 Decision Rules The model provides a set of rules for identi
fying any decision procedure that is not appropriate in a given s
ituation because decision quality and/or acceptance would be je
opardized by using that procedure
 UNDERSTAND PROCEDURES FOR
THE EFFECTIVE USE OF CONSU
LTATION
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-29
Leadership In
Organizations
 DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS

 Decision importance
 Expertise
 Likely cooperation
 Likely acceptance
 Meeting feasibility

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-30
Leadership In
Organizations
DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS

 DECISION IMPORTANCE
 Decision quality is likely to be important if the decision has important c
onsequences for the manager’s work unit or the overall organization a
nd if some of the alternatives are much better than others.
 Decision quality is also more important when the manager’s position h
as high exposure (i.e., mistakes are very visible and will reflect poorly
on the manager).
DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS

 EXPERTISE
 Participative decision procedures are appropriate when a manager lack
s relevant information possessed by others such as subordinates, peer
s, or outsiders.
 This situation is likely when the decision problem is complex and the b
est way to resolve the problem is not evident from the data or from th
e manager’s prior experience with similar problems.
 For complex decisions, it is essential to identify people who have relev
ant knowledge and expertise, and a good network of contacts is invalu
able for identifying such people
DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS
 LIKELY COOPERATION
 Participation is unlikely to be successful unless the prospective particip
ants are willing to cooperate in finding a good solution to the decision
problem.
 Cooperation is more likely when the decision is important to followers
and they perceive that they will actually have some influence over the
final decision.
 Cooperation is also unlikely if potential participants have task objective
s that are incompatible with those of the manager.
 It is unwise to hold a meeting with a hostile group of people who want
to make decisions that are contrary to the interests of the manager. W
hen people with relevant information have different objectives, then so
me consultation may be useful to diagnose the cause of a problem and
identify promising alternatives, but the final choice of an alternative m
ust remain with the manager.
DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS

 LIKELY ACCEPTANCE
 A time-consuming participative procedure is not necessary if the mana
ger has the knowledge to make a good decision and it is likely to be ac
cepted by subordinates or others who must implement it or who will b
e affected by it.
 An autocratic decision is more likely to be accepted if the manager has
considerable position and personal power over group members or has
the persuasive skills to “sell” the decision successfully.
 Acceptance of an autocratic decision is also likely if the decision is to d
o something people already want to do, or the decision appears to be
a reasonable response to a crisis situation.
DIAGNOSE DECISION SITUATIONS

 MEETING FEASIBILITY
 Consulting with people separately or holding a group meeting usually r
equires more time than making an autocratic decision and telling peopl
e to implement it.
 It is especially difficult to hold a meeting if the number of people who
need to be involved is large and they are widely dispersed.
 In many crisis situations, time is not available either for extensive cons
ultation with individuals or for a lengthy group meeting to decide how
to react to the crisis. In this situation, a leader who knows what to do
and takes charge in a decisive way is likely to be more effective than o
ne who is very participative
 ENCOURAGE PARTICIP
ATION
 Express concerns  Tactful
 Tentative proposals  Avoid defensiveness
 Record ideas  Utilize suggestions
 Build on ideas  Appreciation

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-36
Leadership In
Organizations
ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION

 Consultation will not be effective unless people are actively involved in

generating ideas, making suggestions, stating their preferences, and e
xpressing their concerns. Some guidelines for encouraging more partici
pation include the following:
 1) Encourage people to express their concerns. Before making c
hanges that will affect people in significant ways, it is useful and consi
derate to consult with them. This guideline applies to peers and outsid
ers as well as subordinates. One form of consultation that is often app
ropriate is to hold special meetings with people who will be affected by
a change to identify their concerns and deal with them.
ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION

 2) Describe a proposal as tentative. More participation is likely if y

ou present a proposal as tentative and encourage people to improve it
, rather than asking people to react to a plan that appears complete. I
n the latter case, people will be more inhibited about expressing conce
rns that appear to be criticism of the plan.
 3) Record ideas and suggestions. When someone makes a sugges
tion, it is helpful to acknowledge the idea and show that it is not being
ignored. One approach is to list ideas on a flipchart, blackboard, or co
mputer display when they are expressed.
 4) Look for ways to build on ideas and suggestions. Most peopl
e quickly focus on the weaknesses of an idea or suggestion made by s
omeone else without giving enough consideration to its strengths. It is
helpful to make a conscious effort to find positive aspects of a suggesti
on and mention them before mentioning negative aspects.
ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION

 5) Be tactful in expressing concerns about a suggestion. If you

have concerns about a suggestion, express them tactfully to avoid thre
atening the self-esteem of the person who made the suggestion and di
scouraging future suggestions. EX Your suggestion is a promising one,
but I am concerned about the cost. Is there any way we could do it wi
thout exceeding our budget?
 6) Listen to dissenting views without getting defensive. In ord
er to encourage people to express concerns and criticisms of your plan
s and proposals, it is essential to listen carefully without getting defens
ive or angry. Use restatement of a person’s concerns in your own word
s to verify that you understand them
ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION

 7) Try to utilize suggestions and deal with concerns. People will

stop making suggestions if you dismiss them without serious considera
tion or simply ignore them in making a final decision. It is important to
make a serious effort to utilize suggestions and deal with concerns exp
ressed by people with whom you have consulted.
 8) Show appreciation for suggestions. People will be more likely t
o cooperate in making decisions and solving problems if they receive a
ppropriate credit for their helpful suggestions and ideas. Compliment s
omeone for good ideas and insights.
 UNDERSTAND THE POTENTIAL B
ENEFITS AND RISKS OF D
ELEGATION

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-41
Leadership In
Organizations
DELEGATION

 Delegation involves the assignment of new responsibilities to sub

ordinates and additional authority to carry them out.
 Although delegation is usually regarded as a variety of participativ
e leadership, it is different in some important ways from the other
forms of participative leadership such as consulting and joint decisi
on making.
 A manager may consult with subordinates, peers, or superiors, but
in most cases delegation is appropriate only with subordinates.
 Delegation often involves the shifting of primary responsibility for
a particular type of decision to an individual or group
  Decision quality improvement
 Subordinate implementation commitment
 Enriched job
 Time management
 Management development

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-43
Leadership In
Organizations
 DECISION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
 Delegation is likely to improve decision quality if a subordinate ha
s more expertise in how to do the task than the manager.
 Delegation is also likely to improve decision quality when the subo
rdinate’s job requires quick responses to a changing situation and
the lines of communication do not permit the manager to monitor
the situation closely and make rapid adjustments.
 A subordinate who is closer to the problem than the manager and
has more relevant information can make quicker and better decisio
ns about how to resolve the problem.
 SUBORDINATE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITMENT
 The commitment results from identification with the decisio
n and a desire to make it successful.
 However, commitment is unlikely to improve if a subordinate
views delegation as a manipulative tactic by the manager, c
onsiders the task impossible to do, or believes the newly del
egated responsibilities are an unfair increase in workload
 Delegation of additional responsibilities and authority can m
ake a subordinate’s job more interesting, challenging, and m
eaningful.
 ENRICHED JOB
 Enriched jobs are sometimes necessary to attract and retain comp
etent employees, especially when the organization has limited opp
ortunities for advancement to higher-level positions.
 Giving junior managers more responsibility and authority, with a c
ommensurate increase in salary, reduces the likelihood that they w
ill be lured away to other companies in times of stiff competition fo
r managerial talent.
 However, delegation will only increase the satisfaction of a subordi
nate who desires more responsibility, has the skills necessary to h
andle new responsibilities, and is able to experience some success
in accomplishing a challenging task.
 TIME MANAGEMENT
 Delegation is an important form of time management for a
manager who is overloaded with responsibilities.
 By delegating less important duties and functions to subordi
nates, a manager frees additional time for more important r
esponsibilities.
 Even when a manager could do the delegated tasks better t
han subordinates, it is a more efficient use of the manager’s
time to concentrate on those functions that will have the gre
atest influence on the performance of the manager’s organiz
ational unit.
 MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT
 Organizations need to develop managerial talent to fill vacant posit
ions at higher levels of authority.
 Delegation is a way to facilitate development of the skills necessar
y to perform key responsibilities in a higher position.
 When delegation is used for developmental purposes, however, it i
s usually necessary for the manager to do more monitoring and co
aching. Thus, when used for this purpose, delegation may not red
uce a manager’s workload.
  Power sharing
 Mistakes
 Competition
 Personal achievement
 Subordinate characteristics
 Distrust
 Leader authority

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-49
Leadership In
Organizations
 UNDERSTAND WHEN AND HOW
TO USE DELEGATION EFF
ECTIVELY

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-50
Leadership In
Organizations
 What to Delegate
 Tasks that can be done better by a
subordinate
 Urgent but not high priority
 Relevant to a subordinate’s career
 Appropriate difficulty
 Both pleasant and unpleasant
tasks
 Tasks not central to the
manager’s role
Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
5-51
Leadership In
Organizations
 How to Delegate
 Specify responsibilities
 Provide adequate authority limits
 Specify reporting requirements
 Ensure subordinate acceptance of
responsibilities

Copyright© 2013 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

5-52
Leadership In
Organizations