i

Table of Contents

Chapter no. Title of the chapter Page No.

I

INTRODUCTION 1

I.1 Theoretical aspects of the Study 1

I.2 Importance and Relevance of the topic 3

I.3 Objectives of the Study 4

I.4 Literature Review 5

II

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 24

II.1 Universe of the study and Data Collection 24

II.2 Primary and Secondary source of Data 25

II.3 Tools and Techniques Used 25

III

ABOUT THE ORGANISATION 29

III.1 Company Profile 29

III.2 Business Verticals 30

III.3 Existing Future Plans and Policies 32

IV

RESEARCH ANALYSIS 34

IV.1 Analysis and Findings 34

IV.2 Limitations 40

IV.3 Final Outcomes 40

V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 41

Bibliography 45

Appendix Annexure - 1 Questionnaire (Sample)

Annexure - 2 Questionnaire (Filled)

ii

List of Tables

Serial No. Title Page No.

1 Stogdill Personality Traits 10

2 Master Sheet of Tabulated Data 34

Table of Graphs

Graph No. Title of Graph Page No.

I Blake-Mouton Grid 1

II Task - Relationship Graph 15

III Leadership Matrix 26

IV Pie-Charts 36

V Five styles of Leadership 44

1

CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION

I.1 Theoretical aspects of the Study :

A popular framework for thinking about a leader’s 'task versus person' orientation was

developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in the early 1960s called the Managerial Grid, or

Leadership Grid, it plots the degree of 'task-centeredness' versus 'person-centeredness' and

identifies five combinations as distinct leadership styles. The treatment of task orientation and

people orientation as two independent dimensions was a major step in leadership studies. Blake

and Mouton proposed the famous managerial grid with these two dimensions, each dimension

ranging from low (1) to high (9). This describes the five styles of the leadership.

I.1.1 Balancing Task - Oriented and People - Oriented Leadership :

a. Concern for People – This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team

members, their interests, and areas of personal development when deciding how best to

accomplish a task.

b. Concern for Production – This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes concrete

objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to

accomplish a task.

Using the axis to plot leadership 'concerns for production' versus 'concerns for people', Blake

and Mouton defined the following five leadership styles:

2

I.1.2 Five styles of Leadership :

a. Impoverished Leadership : (Low Production - Low People)

This leader is mostly ineffective. He/she has neither a high regard for creating systems

for getting the job done, nor for creating a work environment that is satisfying and

motivating. The result is disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony.

b. Country Club Leadership : (Low Production - High People)

This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of his/her

team. These people operate under the assumption that as long as team members are happy

and secure then they will work hard. What tends to result is a work environment that is

very relaxed and fun but where production suffers due to lack of direction and control.

c. Produce or Perish Leadership : (High Production - Low People)

Also known as Authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, people in this category believe that

employees are simply a means to an end. Employee needs are always secondary to the

need for efficient and productive workplaces. This type of leader is very autocratic, has

strict work rules, policies, and procedures, and views punishment as the most effective

means to motivate employees.

d. Middle-of-the-Road Leadership : (Medium Production - Medium People)

This style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns, and it may at first appear

to be an ideal compromise. Then the problem originates, though: When you compromise,

you necessarily give away a bit of each concern, so that neither production nor people

needs are fully met. Leaders who use this style settle for average performance and often

believe that this is the most anyone can expect.

e. Team Leadership : (High Production - High People)

According to the Blake-Mouton model, this is the best managerial style. These leaders

stress production needs and the needs of the people equally highly. The premise here is

that employees understand the organizations purpose and are involved in determining

production needs. When employees are committed to, and have a stake in the

organization’s success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates a team

environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation

and, as a result, high production.

This report involves a survey in the Management and the Function/Line heads of the GRASIM

Industries (Aditya Birla Group), Nagda , Madhya Pradesh and find out the leadership style which

prevails in the organization and also the importance of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership.

This study is to put into perspective the level of awareness and satisfaction from the employees

3

point of view in front of the management and to help them understand what more can be done in

the various fields.

I.2. Importance and Relevance of the topic :

I.2.1 Importance :

Leadership is an extremely popular topic in organizational behaviour because of the role we

assume it plays in group and organizational effectiveness. We assume that the success of a group

depends primarily on the quality of leadership. To have a winning season requires a good coach;

to achieve a military victory requires a good commander; and to have a productive work group

requires a supervisor. Whether they deserve it or not, leaders are usually credited for the group’s

success and blamed for the group’s failure. When a team has a losing season, instead of firing the

team, the coach is fired. Although leadership is similar to management, there is a clear

difference between these topics. For managers to be effective, they need to be good leaders.

However, not all leaders are good managers. Leadership is more narrowly defined; it refers to

influencing the behaviour of others. Not all acts of influence, however, are necessarily acts of

leadership. There are important differences, for example, between leadership and the exercise of

power described in this report.

I.2.2 Relevance :

Good leadership is essential to business, to government and to the numerous groups and

organizations that shape the way we live, work and play. Leadership is an important factor for

making an organization successful. Here we are concerned with the manager as a leader.

Leadership transforms potential into reality. They are a key human resource in any organization.

We generally think of companies competing by means of their products, but they probably

compete more by means of their leaders than their products. Better leaders develop better

employees and the two together develop better products.

The importance of leadership in management cannot be over emphasized. To get things done by

people, management must supply leadership in the organization. Team-work is essential for

realizing organizational goals. Managers must influence the team for work accomplishment

through leadership.

There are limits to the use of authority in obtaining high performance amongst subordinates.

Authority alone cannot generate a favourable attitude for improved performance. Because of its

main reliance on influence, leadership is essential for obtaining successful work

accomplishment. If the management fails to provide able and prominent leadership which best

fits the organizational culture and climate, informal leadership will develop which will

eventually regulate the behavior of the employees and may come into conflict with managerial

leadership. If management cannot provide leadership, people will be forced to rely on informal

4

leadership. Lastly, management is transformed into a social process through leadership action. It

is the social skill of leadership which accomplishes organizational goals by utilizing the potential

of the people.

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid is a practical and useful framework that helps us think about

our leadership style. By plotting ‘concern for production’ against ‘concern for people’, the grid

highlights how placing too much emphasis in one area at the expense of the other leads to low

overall productivity.

The model proposes that when both people and production concerns are high, employee

engagement and productivity increases accordingly. This is often true, and it follows the ideas of

Theories X and Y, and other participative management theories.

While the grid does not entirely address the complexity of “Which leadership style is best?” It

certainly provides an excellent starting point for thinking about the performance and improving

the general leadership skills.

I.3 Objectives of the Study :

To understand and to extract the work culture exercised with a view of the leadership style which

prevails in the GRASIM Industries. Also, to learn and understand the management-employee

relationship with respect to concern for people and concern for production. This study was to put

forward the leadership style being practiced in the organization according to the Blake and

Mouton Leadership Model and to give rise to the element of Emotional Intelligence in

Leadership. With the help of this survey and data gathered from the respondents through a

framed questionnaire, suggestions (if any) can be provided to the management for the room of

improvement.

I.3.1 Main focus is on the following parameters :

a. Emphasis on goal and task

b. Empowering and De-centralization

c. Creativity and innovation

d. Emotional Intelligence

e. Job satisfaction

f. Accountability

g. Rewards

h. Management-Employee relationship

i. Time management

j. Openness

k. Simplicity

l. Transparency within organization

5

m. Team building

n. Challenging work place

o. Empathy towards the employees

p. Encouragement

q. Counseling

r. Situational Leadership

I.3.2 After the study on this topic I should be able to :

a. Explain the difference between management and leadership and identify some of the

major personal traits associated with leadership.

b. Explain the limitations of using personal traits to understand leadership.

c. Identify and describe the major leadership behaviors that occur within a group.

d. Identify some of the major situational factors influencing leadership and explain how

they influence group performance.

e. List and describe the major variables that determine the appropriate leadership style.

f. Explain some of the strategies for improving leadership effectiveness.

g. Explain the importance of Emotional Intelligence in Situational Leadership.

I.4 - Literature Review :

Overall Reflection on Leadership : The word “leadership’ has been used in at least three

different ways. Occasionally it refers to a position within an organization, e.g., “We are inviting

all of the leadership to attend the seminar. "Leadership" has also been used to describe a

personality characteristic, e.g.. 'Our new supervisor doesn’t have as much leadership as our

previous one.'

Although leaders may use force or coercion to influence the behavior of followers, leaders by our

definition use their ability to induce voluntary committee. By this definition, anyone in the

organization can be a leader, whether or not that individual is formally identified as such. Indeed,

informal leaders are extremely important to the effectiveness of most organizations.

An important distinction is made by some between leadership and management. To manage

means to direct, to bring about to accomplish, and to have responsibility for. The functions of

management are planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. The successful manager is

viewed as someone who achieves results by following the prescribed activities and by

maintaining behaviors and products within prescribed limits. To lead, however, 'is to inspire', 'to

influence', and 'to motivate'. Effective leaders inspire others to pursue excellence, to extend

themselves and to go beyond their perform job requirements by generating creative ideas. It has

6

been said that managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right

thing. This distinction is somewhat overstated, since effective leaders do a lot of managing and

effective managers need to lead. But it serves to emphasize an Important organizational outcome;

the creation of an energetic and highly committed work force that is successfully adapting to the

demands of a changing environment and competently producing a viable product or service.

Need for Leadership : Why is leadership necessary? Most organizations are highly structured

and have relatively clear lines of authority, stated objectives, and momentum to carry them

forward. Why, then, is there a need for incremental influence beyond the routine directives and

formal job requirements? Four reasons have been proposed to explain the need for ongoing

leadership.

a. Incomplete organizational structure : The first reason why leadership is necessary is

because there is a degree of incompleteness in every organization design. Social

organizations cannot be designed to be like machines, which are simply turned on and

allowed to run untouched. Leaders are needed to structuring the tasks, decide who should

do what, and delegate work assignments, level. Leaders help the people they lead to

accomplish their collective goals.

b. External change : The second reason why leadership is necessary is because the

organization exists in a changing environment. As the external environment changes,

leaders are needed to identify the strategic mission of the organization and help it adapt to

its changing environment.

c. Internal change : The third reason for leadership stems from the dynamics of internal

change in the organization. Leadership is needed to coordinate the efforts of diverse

organizational units, particularly during periods of rapid growth or decline. Leadership is

necessary to solve internal conflicts and settle differences of opinion.

d. Motivate and inspire : The fourth reason why organizations require leadership stems

from the need to motivate people and maintain their involvement in the organization.

Individuals are not permanent fixtures within the organisation. Instead, they come and go,

and when they are present, their needs and Intel interests change. Effective leadership

provides meaning and purpose by creating a vision of where the organization is going.

This ability to inspire and motivate others and transform them into committed

contributors to the organisation is the function of leadership that has captured the interest

of philosophers and scholars and propelled the study of leadership. (Ashwathapa, 2013)

Patterns of Organizational Leadership : The type of influence required for effective leadership

is not the same for all leaders. Depending on their level in the organization, different cognitive

and affective skills are required of leaders. Three basic leadership roles have been identified:

'origination', 'interpolation', and 'administration'.

7

a. Origination : It refers to strategic decision making regarding policy formulation or

structural change. These critical decisions determine the culture and mission of the

organization.

b. Interpolation : It refers to interpreting strategic decisions and designing a method for

implementing them within the organisation. Interpolation includes adapting or

supplementing the present structure to new policy directives,

c. Administration : It consists of implementing the policies and procedures that have been

provided to keep the organization operating efficiently.

These three types of Leadership are typically performed at different levels in the organization

and require different abilities and skills. The origination of new programs and policies, which

may involve a change in the organization’s structure or a reinterpretation of the organisation’s

mission, occurs at the top level of the organization. Individuals at this level must have an

understanding of the entire organization and of the ways it interacts with the external

environment. Top-level managers symbolize the organization and what it stands for.

Interpolation - interpreting policy decisions and applying them to the existing organization is

typically done by intermediate-level managers. Middle-level managers must maintain a two-way

orientation by taking directives from hose above and accommodating them for people below.

Lower-level supervisors administer the policies and procedures of the organization. Successful

supervisors need to possess both technical knowledge and a clear understanding of the

organization’s rules. Lower-level supervisors must be concerned with equity and with the

administration of rewards and punishments, since they continually deal with these issues in

leading others, contingency theories of leadership. Leadership plays an essential role in

organizational dynamics and often makes the difference between effective and ineffective

organizations. As defined earlier, leadership occurs when one person influences others to do

something of their own volition they would not ordinarily do. Leadership is an essential

organizational process and, like other processes it can be studied on three different levels - 'the

individual', 'the group', and 'the organisation'.

At the individual level of analysis, leadership studies have focused on the traits of successful

leaders, At the group level, leadership studies have focused on leadership behaviors of both

formal and informal leaders. The organizational level of analysis has examined how

organizational effectiveness is determined by the interaction between the leader, the follower,

and the situation. These studies have given rise to situational leadership theories or contingency

theories of leadership. Each level will be analyzed separately, beginning with leadership traits.

(Pareek, 2013)

In Search of Leadership : Although early writers attempted to describe the characteristics of

effective leaders, systematic investigations of leadership traits first began after the turn of the

century. World War I highlighted the need for selecting and training effective leaders, and for the

8

quarter century between World War l and World War II, numerous studies investigated the

personal traits of good leaders. These studies are generally referred to as trait studies, since their

primary goal was to identify the traits and personal characteristics of effective leaders.

A variety of methods were used to study leadership traits, and this variety is probably one reason

why the results were so inconsistent. Most studies compared effective leaders with ineffective

leaders or leaders with non-leaders. The studies were inconsistent in the methods used to identify

leaders Some were identified by outside observers, some were selected by the group via

nominations or voting, others were named by qualified observers such as teachers, and some

were selected because they occupied a position of leadership such as student-body president or

team captain. The studies were also inconsistent -the way they measured traits. In some studies

the traits were measured b psychological tests; other studies relied on observers to identify the

traits they saw; and some studies relied on the individuals to report their own character traits.

In general, the trait studies were quite disappointing, especially to researchers who had hoped to

develop a measure of leadership that predicted leader effectiveness as accurately as intelligence

tests predicted problem solving ability. Because of weak results, the focus of leadership research

shifted from trait studies to contingency studies, which examined more than just the traits of the

leader.

Research on leadership traits should not be dismissed too quickly, however. Although the traits

studies were disappointing, they were not worthless.

Several traits produced a significant difference in leadership effectiveness, but they did not act

alone. Instead, they interacted with other situational variables to influence leader effectiveness,

Four major reviews have surveyed the trait studies, and the results can be summarized according

to physical traits, intelligence, and personality traits.

Physical Traits : Trait studies examined such physical factors as height, weight, physique,

energy, health, and appearance. To the extent that anything can be concluded regarding the

relationship between these factors and leadership, it appears that the leaders tend to be slightly

taller and heavier, have better health, a superior physique, a higher rate of energy output, and a

more attractive appearance.

To illustrate, one of the early studies on the effects of height found that executives in insurance

companies were taller than policyholders, that bishops were taller than clergymen, that university

presidents were taller than college presidents, that sales managers were taller than sales

representatives, and that railway presidents were taller than station agents. Results of this sort,

how-ever, have not always been consistent. While one literature review found nine studies

showing that leaders tend to be taller, it reported two studies showing that leaders tended to be

shorter. Attractiveness and a pleasant appearance found to be highly correlated with leaders

among Boy Scouts: but among groups of delinquent youth, leaders were rated as more slovenly

and unkempt.

9

Intelligence : Numerous studies have investigated the relationship between leadership and

general intelligence, and they generally agree that leaders are more intelligent than non-leaders.

The relationship between intelligence and leadership probably stems from the fact that so many

leadership functions depend upon careful problem solving. All three leadership roles -

'origination', 'interpolation', and 'administration' require significant mental ability.

An interesting conclusion coming from this study is the suggestion that leaders should be more

intelligent than the group but not by too wide a margin. Members who are significantly brighter

than other group members are seldom selected as leaders. Because of their superior intellect,

other group members tend to reject them; they are too different from and out of touch with the

rest of the group. Individuals with high IQ's tend to have different vocabularies, interacts, and

goals, which create communication and interpersonal relations problems.

Leadership effectiveness also appears to be related to two other variables closely associated with

intelligence: scholarship and knowledge. Leaders generally excel scholastically and receive

better than average grades. General information, practical knowledge, and simply knowing how

to get things done appears to be important for effective leadership, and several studies have

shown a positive relationship between general knowledge and leadership ability.

Personality Traits : Studies of the relationship between leadership and personality traits have

examined a lengthy list of factors. Unfortunately, most of the results have been inconsistent and

even contradictory. Only a limited number of personality traits appear to be related to leadership,

and most of these relationships are not especially strong. A list of the personality traits most

frequently associated with leadership are lead shown in table below. This list is based upon the

1948 review by Ralph Stogdill were of 124 studies of leadership traits. This list suggests that the

average leader is use a more social, displays greater initiative, is more persistent, knows how to

get things done, is more self-confident, displays greater cooperativeness and adaptability, and

possesses greater verbal skills to facilitate communication. Studies examining personality

integration or emotional adjustment consistently found that leaders were more emotionally

mature than non-leaders. Rather consistent. The support was also found for the relationship

between leadership and self-confidence or self-esteem. Indeed, the relationship between self-

confidence and leadership generally produced some of the highest correlations of any of the

personality traits tested Consequently, it is not correct to conclude that personal characteristics

are unrelated to leadership; there are indeed some relationships, but they are more complex than

they first appear to be. (Stogdill, Leadership, 2012)

After four major reviews of the trait studies, researchers concluded that the effective leadership

does not depend solely upon a combination of personality the traits. Situational variables were

also important: they frequently determined of whether a personality characteristic was positively

or negatively associated with effective leadership. Each review concluded that leadership must

be examined as an interaction of three variables: characteristics of the leader, characteristics of

the subordinate, and the nature of the task.

10

Capacity Achievements Responsibility Participation Status

Intelligence Scholarship Dependability

Activity Socioeconomic

position

Alertness Knowledge Initiative

Sociability Popularity

Verbal facility Athletic

accomplishment

Persistence Cooperation

Originality Personality

adjustment

Aggressiveness Adaptability

Judgment Self-Confidence

Humor

Desire to Excel

(Stogdill, Leadership, 2012)

While the trait studies focused on individual leaders, another line of research examined leader

behaviors within the context of a group and attempted to describe what leaders actually do.

These studies essentially asked whether certain ways of behaving were more effective than

others: How do effective readers behave differently from other group members? Most of these

studies occurred during the l940s and 50s.

Various styles of leadership were defined as a result of these studies of leader behaviors. One of

the earlier studies compared three leadership styles: authoritarian democratic and laissez-faire.

Perhaps the best research on styles of leadership, however, occurred simultaneously at The Ohio

State University and the University of Michigan. At each university, researchers identified two

leader behaviors that were essentially similar, even though both investigations were conducted

independently. These two dimensions of leadership have been to form an instrument, called the

Managerial Grid, that has been used for research and training.

Authoritarian, Democratic, and Laissez-faire Leadership : The contrasting political systems

in the United States and Germany preceding World War II inspired one of the early classic

studies of leadership that compared the effects of three leadership styles: 'authoritarian',

'democratic', and 'laissez-faire'. This study involved groups of ten-year-old boys who were

organised in groups of five. Each group met regularly after school to engage in hobbies and other

activities under the direction of a leader who adopted one of the three styles of leadership. Every

six weeks the leaders were rotated among the groups so that each group experienced each type of

11

leadership. The leaders of these groups, who were graduate students in social psychology, were

trained to lead the boys using one of three leadership styles. Under the democratic style of

leadership, group decisions were made by majority vote in which equal participation was

encouraged and criticism and punishment were minimal. Under the autocratic leader, all

decisions were made by the leader and the boys were required to follow prescribed procedures

under strict discipline. Under the laissez-faire leader, the actual leadership was minimized and

the boys were allowed to work and play essentially without supervision.

During the eight weeks of this study, the performance of the workers were observed in order to

assess the effects of the three leadership styles. Under democratic leadership, the groups were

more satisfied and functioned in the most orderly and positive manner. Aggressive acts were

observed most frequently under the autocratic leadership. The effects of the leadership styles on

productivity were somewhat mixed, although actual objective measures of productivity were not

obtained. Under autocratic leadership the groups spent more time in productive work activity and

had more work-related conversations. However, the autocratic groups appeared to be more

productive Only when the leader was present. When the leader left the room, the amount of

work-related activity dropped drastically.

Other studies have also shown that democratic leadership styles are not always the most

productive. In fact, some studies have found that both the satisfaction and the productivity of

group members is higher under directive leaders than democratic leaders. For example a study of

488 managers in a consumer loan company found that employees who had high authoritarianism

scores (high acceptance of strong authority relationships) were more satisfied and productive

when they worked for supervisors who had little tolerance for freedom. Greater satisfaction with

an authoritarian leader was also found in another study of over 1,000 workers. This study found

that employees who worked independently but were required to have frequent interaction with

their superior preferred and were more satisfied with an autocratic leader. Some examples of

such employees are fire fighters, police officers, and administrative aides. (Pareek, 2013)

Initiating Structure and Consideration : This project involved a series of studies that also

produced a two-factor theory of leader behavior. The two leadership factors were referred to as

initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure consisted of leadership behaviors

associated with organizing and defining the work, the work relationships, and the goals. A leader

who initiated structure was described as one who assigned people to particular tasks, expected

workers to follow standard routines, and emphasized meeting deadlines. The factor of

consideration involved leader behaviors that showed friendship, mutual trust, warmth, and

concern for subordinates. These two factors were identified by administering questionnaires

containing numerous descriptions of leader behaviors and combining the items that seemed to

measure the same dimension, through a statistical technique called 'factor analysis'. After the

data from many employees had been collected and analyzed, I concluded that the responses were

measuring just two factors: initiating structure and consideration.

12

The research indicates that initiating structure and consideration are separate and independent

dimensions of leadership behavior. Therefore, a leader could be high on both dimensions, low on

both dimensions, or high on one and low on the other. Since both factors were considered

important dimensions of leadership, the early studies assumed that the most effective leaders

were high on both dimensions.

After extensive research it can now be concluded that the most effective leaders are not always

high on both initiating structure and consideration. Although most studies show that leadership

effectiveness is associated with high scores on both dimensions occasionally other combinations

have produced the highest levels of satisfaction and performance, such as being high on one

scale and low on the other or being at moderate levels on both dimensions.

Production-Centered and Employee - Centered Leader Behaviours : Studies on the

relationship between production-centered and employee centered behaviors also found them to

be independent dimensions of leadership. A review of 38 managers dispelled a popular myth

which suggested that supervisors focused on either production or employees, and to the extent

they focused on one, they were necessarily disinterested in the other. The study indicated instead

that supervisors can be interested in both production and employees. Therefore, a leader who has

a strong production orientation is not necessarily disinterested in the employees. Knowing an

individual’s orientation on one leader dimension says nothing about that person’s orientation on

the other.

Managerial Grid : A conceptual framework combining a concern for task accomplishment and

a concern for people was created by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton called the Managerial Grid.-

An illustration of the Managerial Grid is shown in the Graph Managerial Grid. The concern for

production dimension is measured on a nine-point scale and represented along the horizontal

dimension, while the vertical dimension measures an individual’s concern for people, again

using a nine-point scale. Blake and Mouton assume that the most effective leadership style is a

9,9 style, demonstrating both concern for production and concern for people. By responding to a

questionnaire developed by Blake and Mouton, individuals can place themselves in one of the

eighty-one cells on the managerial grid.

Five different grid positions are typically used to illustrate different leadership styles. A 9,1

leader is primarily concerned with production and task accomplishment and unconcerned about

people; This person wants-to get the job - -done and wants a schedule followed at all costs. The

1,9 leadership style reflects a maximum concern for people with minimum concern for

production. This individual is not concerned whether the group a small produces anything, but is

highly concerned about the members’ personal needs, interests and inter-personal relationships.

The 1,1 leadership style reflects minimal concern for both production and people and is

characteristic of a person who essentially abdicates the leadership role. The 5,5 leadership style

reflects a moderate concern for both people and production, while the 9,9 leadership style

13

reflects a maximum concern for both production and people. A 9,9 leader wants to meet

schedules and get the job done but at the same time is highly concerned about the feelings and

interests of the group members.

The Managerial Grid is popular among managers, and they have used it rather extensively to

assess their leadership style as part of a training program designed to move them to the 9,9 style.

In spite of its popularity, however, the usefulness of the Managerial Grid has not been

consistently supported by research. Most of the available research consists of case analyses

which have been loosely interpreted to support it. However, empirical research has failed to

show that a 9,9 leadership style is universally superior. The demands of the situation, the

expectations of other group members, and the nature of the work being performed interact in

complex ways that call for a variety of leadership styles. Consequently the 9,9 leadership style is

not always the most effective. Although the research has not shown that one leadership style is

universally superior, this research helps to identify the important leadership roles that occur

within a group. Rather than thinking of leadership strictly in terms of the behavior of the formal

leader, it is helpful to think of leadership as leadership roles performed within a group. Thinking

of leadership this way implies that leadership consists of leader behaviors performed by any

group members, whether they are formally appointed as leaders or not.

The two major leadership roles, initiating structure and consideration are similar to the work

roles and maintenance roles described. These two roles are necessary for a group to be effective

and can be performed either by the formally appointed leader or by other group members. If a

task is already highly structured, or if other group members are adequately structuring the task,

then efforts by the leader to add additional structure are unnecessary and ineffective. Likewise,

the maintenance role of showing consideration and concern for group members may be

performed by other group members thereby eliminating the need for the formal leader to perform

this role. In summarizing research on consideration and initiating structure, one review

concluded that when the formally appointed leaders fail to perform either of these leader

behaviors, an informal leader will emerge and perform them if it is necessary for success and if

the group desires success.

Situational Leadership : In analyzing leadership at the organizational level of analysis, the

effectiveness of the different leadership styles must be combined with different organisational

factors to assess their effect effectiveness. At this level of analysis, the study of leadership has

given rise to contingency theories of leadership or situational leadership theories. Four

situational leadership theories have received the primary attention: Paul Hersey’s and Ken

Blanchard’s situational leadership model, Fred Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership,

Robert Houses path-goal theory of leadership, and Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton’s normative

decision-making model of leadership.

14

Situational Leadership Model : Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard developed a situational

leadership model that combined three variables:

a. the amount of guidance and direction (task behavior) a leader gives;

b. the amount of emotional support (relationship behavior) a leader provides; and

c. the readiness level (maturity) that followers exhibit in performing a specific task

or function.

The focus of this model is the relationship between the leaders and followers, and the maturity of

the followers is viewed as the most important situational variable influencing loader behaviors.

Maturity is defined as the ability and willingness of people to take responsibility for directing

their own behavior as it relates to the specific task being performed. An individual or group may

demonstrate maturity on some tasks and immaturity on others. Effective leadership requires that

the leader’s task behaviors and relationship behaviors must change to match the maturity of the

group.

The maturity of followers varies along a continuum and is determined by two components: job

maturity (ability) and psychological maturity (willingness). Job maturity refers to the ability to

do something and is a function of the follower’s knowledge and skills. Psychological maturity

refers to the willingness or motivation to do something and is a function of the followers

commitment and confidence. The appropriate combination of task and relationship behaviors for

different levels of follower maturity are shown in Exhibit. The bell-shaped curve is called a

“prescriptive” curve because it shows the appropriate leadership style directly above the

corresponding level of maturity. Four potential leadership styles are created by combining

different amounts of task and relationship behaviors. (Robbins, 2012)

Insight for Managers : Research on leadership behaviors has identified two essential roles that

leaders fill. One role consists of Leader activities that focus on task accomplishment and includes

such behaviors as identifying the task at hand, deciding boy, it should be done, setting goals and

objectives, delegating assignments, providing feedback, and supervising performance.

The other role consists of leader behaviors that focus on interpersonal relationships and includes

such behaviors as creating a vision of the organization, communicating that vision to each

member, inspiring and motivating people, evaluating and rewarding performance, providing

personal support and encouragement, and creating a friendly atmosphere.

These two roles represent essential functions of a successful group; both the task structuring

activities and the interpersonal relationship activities must be performed by someone. It is

possible For the appointed leader to perform both functions, but other group members can also

perform either or both functions.

15

Effective group leaders are probably those who can sense which leadership roles are not being

adequately performed and either perform themselves or delegate then, to other group members.

Although these leadership roles are important to the effective functioning of a group, they do not

necessarily need to be performed by the formally appointed leader. Indeed the most effective

groups may occur ‘when the leadership roles are widely shared by many group members.

(Robbins, 2012)

a. Telling - Provide specific instructions and closely supervise performance. This style is

suited for followers of low maturity who are unable and unwilling.

b. Selling - Explain your decisions and provide opportunity for clarification. This style is

appropriate for followers who are willing but unable.

High Relationship and Low Task

Participating

S3

S4

Delegating

High Task and High Relationship

Selling

S2

S1

Telling

Low Relationship and Low Task

High Task and Low Relationship

16

c. Participating - Share ideas and facilitate in making decisions. This style is suited for

followers who are able but unwilling.

d. Delegating - Turn over responsibility for decisions and implementation. This style is

appropriate for followers who are able and willing.

Hersey and Blanchard have developed instruments for measuring maturity to determine the

appropriate leadership style, and they have applied their teacher-student relationships and parent-

child relationships. Support for their theory is provided by the experiences of managers who

have used it and a small number of research studies. They also have used this model to

reinterpret and understand the inconsistent findings in other leadership studies.

Contingency Theory of Leadership : The most popular and extensively researched situational

theory of leadership was first proposed by Fred Fiedler during the 1960s. Fiedler’s model claims

that group performance depends on the interaction of the leader style and the favourableness of

the situation. Fiedlers major contributions consist of :

a. Identifying the leadership orientation of the leader and developing a way to measure it,

and

b. Identifying three situational factors influencing leadership and developing a method of

measuring them. (Pareek, 2013)

Relationship-oriented versus Task-oriented : Leadership orientation is measured by the Least

Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale. Individuals are asked to think of a person with whom they

have worked who they least preferred as a co-worker, and describe this person using sixteen

scales. When the responses arc summed, an individual with a favourable description of the least

preferred co-worker would have a high LPC score, suggesting a relationship-oriented leader. An

unfavourable description of the least preferred co-worker would result in a low score, suggesting

a task-oriented leader.

Difficulty in interpreting the LPC scores has been a problem for Fiedler’s contingency theory.

The LPC scale is not related to any of the well-known personality measures. In spite of

uncertainty about what exactly it measures, however, the evidence indicates that it is a reliable

measure of something, and Fiedler concludes that “there can be little doubt that we are dealing

with a very important aspect of personality.” A review of 25 years of research using the LPC

scale concluded that high LPC leaders are primarily relationship-oriented while low LPC leaders

are primarily task-oriented consistent with Fiedler's claims.’ In general, a low LPC leader is

more directive, more structuring, more goal-oriented, and more concerned with efficiency. A

high LPC leader is more considerate, more human relations oriented, more participative, and

more sensitive to the feelings of others. (Ashwathapa, 2013)

17

Situational favourableness: Fiedler’s model claims that whether a high LPC leader or low LPC

leader will be more effective depends upon the favourableness of the situation. In some

situations, a high LPC leader is most effective, while a unenthusiastic low LPC leader is more

effective in other situations. Fiedler claimed that the favourableness of the situation is

determined by three variables:

a. Whether the relationships between the leader and the members are good or poor.

b. Whether the task is relatively structured or unstructured.

c. Whether the power position of the leader is relatively strong or weak.

In studies testing the model, Fiedler and his colleagues developed instruments to measure each of

these three situational variables. Of the three situational variables, the leader-member relations

variable was considered to be the most important for determining the favourableness of the

situation. Leader-member relations were measured using a simple questionnaire with ten scales

on which the leader was asked to describe the group. This instrument was called a “group

atmosphere scale”.

The second most important situational variable was the task structure which was evaluated by

judges who examined four aspects of the task structure.

a. Goal clarity : The degree to which the requirements of the job are clearly stated and

known by the people performing then,

b. Goal-path multiplicity : The degree to which the problems encounter in the job can be

solved by a variety of procedures.

c. Decision verifiability : The degree to which the correctness of the solutions or decisions

can be demonstrated and ascertained.

d. Decision specificity : The degree to which there is generally more than one correct

solution involved in performing the task.

In a highly structured task, goals are very clear, there is only one correct procedure for

performing the task, the correctness of the decisions can be immediately verified, and there is

only one correct solution. Obviously, a highly structured task does not require leaders to provide

additional structure.

The third situational variable was the power position of the leader. This factor was measured by

a series of questions asking whether the leaders could recommend rewards or promotions,

whether they could assign tasks and evaluate performance, and whether they had been given

official titles by the organization to differentiate them from subordinates.

By determining whether a group is high or low on each of the three situational factors, Fiedler

classified each group into one of eight categories, which ranged along a scale from extremely

favourable situations to extremely unfavourable situations for the leader. A highly favourable

situation consisted of good leader-member relations, a highly structured task, and a strong power

18

position, as illustrated in Exhibit. On the other hand, an extremely unfavourable situation existed

when the leader-member relations were poor, the task was unstructured, and the leader possessed

a weak power position. (Stogdill, Leadership, 2012)

Group effectiveness : Fiedler examined the relationship between the leaders' LPC score and the

effectiveness of the group in a variety of situations. The results indicated that a high LPC leader

was most effective when the situation was moderately favourable. If the situation was extremely

favourable or unfavourable, however, the low LPC leaders tended to have the most effective

groups.

Although these results may look rather complex and difficult to understand, they seem plausible

after a brief consideration. Relationship-oriented leaders (high LPC) tend to excel in situations

of intermediate favourableness' where concern for the group members is apparently a necessary

prerequisite for motivating them to perform well. In these situations, people want to have

leaders who care about them. Task-oriented leaders (low LPC), however, are more effective

when the situation is either very favourable or very unfavourable. In a highly favourable

situation, the personal needs of members are apparently already satisfied and what is needed is a

task-oriented leader to get the job done. In an extremely unfavourable situation, however,

satisfying individual needs is probably impossible. A task-oriented leader who simply focuses

on getting the work done is more effective than a relationship-oriented leader who spends time

fruitlessly trying to build good relationships in an impossible situation.

Fiedler's theory has some interesting implications for the selection and training of leaders in

organizations. Candidates for leadership positions should be evaluated to assess their basic

orientations, and they should be placed in jobs consistent with their leadership orientation. The

favourableness' of a situation should be assessed before assigning a leader to that position.

Leaders who are struggling may need to be placed in a different situation, or their current

situation may need to be changed.

When leaders are not successful, it is tempting to suggest that they need to change their

leadership orientation. Fiedler does not recommend this approach, however, and argues that the

basic leadership orientation of an individual is a relatively stable personality characteristic that

cannot be easily changed. Rather than changing the leader to fit the situation, Fiedler

recommends changing the situation to fit the leader through what he calls job engineering. Job

engineering consists of changing one of the situational factors to increase or decrease the

favourability of the situation. For example, the task structure and power position can be

effectively changed through job redesign programs or changes in personnel policies.

The validity of Fiedler's contingency theory has been examined in numerous studies. Although

most of the studies have been supportive, there have been enough contradictory findings for the

model to remain somewhat controversial among leadership scholars. The most serious

controversy about Fiedler's model concerns the LPC scale. Although the theory seems to predict

19

leader effectiveness, the ambiguity over what the LPC score is actually measuring is disturbing.

(Pareek, 2013)

Leader behaviours : The path-goal model suggests that leadership consists of two basic

functions. The first function is path clarification: the leader helps subordinates understand which

behaviors are necessary to accomplish the tasks. The second function is to increase the number

of rewards available to subordinates by being supportive and paying attention to their personal

needs. To perform these functions, leaders may adopt a variety of leadership styles. Four distinct

leadership styles are explained in the model:

a. Directive leadership : Tells subordinates what is expected of them and provides specific

guidance, standards, and schedules of work.

b. Supportive leadership : Treats subordinates as equals and shows concern for their well-

being, status, and personal needs; attempts to develop pleasant interpersonal relationships

among group members.

c. Achievement-oriented leadership : Sets challenging goals expects subordinates to

perform at their highest level, and continually seeks improvement in performance.

d. Participative leadership : Consults with subordinates and uses their suggestions and

ideas in decision making.

Unlike Fiedler's model, which suggested that leadership style was resistant to change, the path-

goal model suggests that these four styles can be performed by the same manager at different

times and in different situations. In other words, the path-goal theory suggests that if a directive

leader discovers the situation has changed and now requires a participative leader, it is possible.

For the leader to change. The appropriate leadership style depends on the situation. Although the

path-goal model does not explain how to identify the appropriate leadership leader style, the

model does present a list of situational factors that need to be considered. (Robbins, 2012)

Situational factors : Two types of situational factors are proposed - "the characteristics of the

follower" and "environmental factors". Three characteristics of the followers have been

identified as significant variables determining the appropriate leadership style:

a. Locus of control : It refers to the individual’s belief concerning the determinants of

reward. Individuals with an internal locus of control believe their rewards are based on

their own efforts, while those with an external locus of control believe their rewards are

controlled by external forces. Internals prefer a participative leadership style while

externals are generally more satisfied oh are with a directive leadership style.

b. Authoritarianism : Authoritarianism refers to an individual’s willing to accept the

influence of others. High authoritarian followers tend to be less receptive to a

participative leadership style and more responsive to directive leadership.

c. Abilities : The ability and experience of the followers will influence leader whether they

are able to work more successfully with an achievement oriented leader who sets

20

challenging goals and expects high performance, or a supportive leader who is willing to

patiently encourage and instruct them.

The path-goal model identifies three environmental factors moderating the effects of leadership

styles:

a. The nature of the task,

b. The formal authority system within the organization, and

c. The group norms and dynamics.

These environmental factors can influence the effectiveness of different leadership styles in a

variety of ways. A highly structured task, for example, may reduce the need for a directive leader

and even make a directive leader’s attempt to provide additional structure seem unwarranted and

unwanted. However, a directive leader would be more likely to succeed than a participative

leader if the organization had a highly formal authority structure that followed a strict chain of

command. Likewise, a concern for the personal needs of subordinates by a supportive leader may

seem superficial and unnecessary in a highly cohesive work group. The perceptions of the

followers concerning the situation and the followers’ level of motivation determine their job

satisfaction, performance, and acceptance of the leader.

In the first two situations, subordinates have an ambiguous job or they feel insufficiently

rewarded. Both situations call for a directive leader who explains the job and helps subordinates

know how to get rewarded for performing it. The next two situations, boring work and a lack of

self-confidence call for a support leader. Repetitive jobs are not as boring if a supportive leader

helps subordinates see that their work is meaningful and significant. Likewise, a supportive

leader can help subordinates feel greater self-confidence by coaching them and praising their

accomplishments. In situation 5, subordinates are not challenged by the task. An achievement-

oriented leader will set high goals and emphasize the intrinsic and extrinsic rewards from more

effort. Finally, situation 6 involves a task that is unstructured and poorly defined, calling for

participative leadership. By participating in the decision making, subordinates help to create an

effective solution to the problem and, as a result of their involvement, feel committed to making

it work. (Stogdill, Leadership, 2012)

Criteria for selecting a leadership style : Two criteria are used for assessing the effectiveness

of a leadership style: quality and acceptance. The quality of the decision refers to its accuracy

and the extent to which it will achieve some objective, such as increase profitability, raise

productivity, lower costs, reduce turnover, or increase sales. Decision quality depends on

gathering accurate and which tree relevant information, identifying good alternatives, and

evaluating them carefully to select the best solution. Consulting other group members often

provides additional information, but when there are severe time constraints or styles vested

interests on the part of the members, participative decision making would be inappropriate. For

example, participative decision making is quite quality inappropriate during a commando raid, in

21

the middle of a police rescue action, style is autocratic or during the twenty-second huddle of a

football team.

Decision acceptance refers to the degree to which the subordinates or might group members are

willing to implement the decision. There are two questions that leaders should consider in order

to determine whether acceptance is an issue:

a. Do subordinates feel strongly about the decision? and

b. Is individual initiative and judgment on the part of members required to

implement the decision?

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, then the acceptability of the decision is

important. Regardless of the technical quality of the solution, the decision may be a failure if the

members are not willing to accept it.

Diagnostic decision rules : Vroom and Yetton suggested that leaders select an able appropriate

decision making style by diagnosing the situation using a sequence of decision rules. These

decision rules are designed to help the leader know how to involve subordinates in decisions in a

way that enhances the quality and series acceptability of the decision. The first three rules focus

on the quality of the decision.

The decision rules are contained in eight questions that a leader answers either yes or no.

a. As long as it is accepted, does it make any difference which decision is selected? Are

some decisions qualitatively superior to others?

b. Do I have sufficient information to make a high-quality decision?

c. Do subordinates have sufficient additional information that needs to be considered to

result in a high-quality decision?

d. Do I know exactly what information is needed, who possesses it, and how to collect

it?

e. Is acceptance of the decision by subordinates critical to effective implementation?

f. If I were to make the decision by myself is it certain that it would be accepted by my

subordinates?

g. Can subordinates be trusted to base their solutions on considerations consistent with

the organization’s goals?

h. Is conflict among the subordinates likely, given the preferred solutions?

22

These diagnostic questions are used to determine the appropriate decision making style. The

application of these diagnostic questions is contained in the decision-tree chart shown above. The

chart reads from left to right and the letters at the top, A through H, represent the questions

shown above the decision tree. The boxes in the decision tree below each number represent the

point where that question is asked. The lines connecting the boxes indicate the decision making

path the manager follows, depending upon whether the answers to the questions are yes or no.

The symbols at the far right illustrate which decision style is appropriate for the various paths

through the decision tree. (Ashwathapa, 2013)

Emotional Intelligence and Leadership : In 1985 an influential psychologist called Howard

Gardener also challenged the current view of Emotional Intelligence. Emotional Intelligence has

become a vital part of how today's leaders meet the significant challenges they face. Emotional

Intelligence can help leaders in an ever more difficult leadership role, one that fewer and fewer

people seem capable of fulfilling. And in the middle of the "Talent War", especially at the

highest levels in organizations, emotional intelligence can give developing leaders a competitive

edge.

Emphasis on :

a. How the importance of Emotional Intelligence was recognized?

b.Why Emotional Intelligence is needed in Leadership?

c. The new demands leaders have to meet.

d.How to use Emotional Intelligence in developing leadership?

How the importance of Emotional Intelligence was recognized : In 1980 Reuven Baron was

researching the qualities that lead to success. He showed there was much more than traditional

Intelligence or IQ and developed the concept of Emotional Intelligence the Emotional Quotient

or EQ was born. Intelligence and proposed 7 multiple intelligences which included social

intelligence.

The idea that success in both life and in work (at least where managing people is a significant

factor) became highly credible and organizations have recognized how their best leaders and

managers need to develop their understanding of themselves and others.

In 1995 Daniel Goleman published the best seller "Emotional Intelligence" which has done a

great deal for popularizing the concept.

Need of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership : Emotional Intelligence does not fit the classic

historical models of leadership. The latter are usually associated with great figures of military

history and conjure up charismatic and sometimes despotic images. However, people often use

the same language for leadership today - bold, brave and tough with a strong sense of purpose

and resolve. However, this does not fit today's needs, because:

23

a. Today’s workforce does not accept the autocratic style often adopted by leaders

following historical models of leadership.

b. Leadership has had to evolve to match a growing sense of democracy and

independence in the workforce.

c. Employees now have far more options and choices than the foot soldiers of yesterday.

The new demands leaders have to meet : Leaders now need to manage and lead an

'empowered' workforce and go beyond the consultative, co-operative and democratic styles of

today. These new demands include:

a. Consultation and involvement - but leaders still get criticized for not having and

communicating a compelling vision and purpose

b. Autonomy and freedom - but leaders are still expected to take full responsibility

when things go wrong

c. Opportunities for growth, challenge and glory - but leaders must be on hand to

coach and mentor us so that we develop our potential

d. Inclusion and team spirit - but we still want our leaders to give us individual

recognition and acknowledgement.

Use Emotional Intelligence in developing leadership : There are now a number of models and

questionnaires aimed at measuring Emotional Intelligence, often based on self-report

questionnaires. However, this approach has obvious limitations in identifying levels of self-

awareness - how can you be aware of what you are not aware of!

So, whilst questionnaires can play a part, better approaches also involve:

a. Experiential exercises

b. 360 feedback processes

These provide much more effective and comprehensive ways of identifying possible strengths

and weaknesses in Emotional Intelligence terms. When the self-assessment and 360 is

undertaken online, and results processed by someone independent, it assures confidentiality to

the extent that achieves a much higher level of honesty in the feedback and assessment. This

approach challenges complacency and can enable people to grow and develop.

However, the assessment of EI in leadership is complex. The use of simple self-report

questionnaires to explore self-awareness has significant limitations. Team Focus approach the

topic using a sophisticated variety of approaches including 360 feedback and experiential

exercises. This brings the whole concept alive and allows individuals to go beyond their existing

knowledge and comfort zones thus producing real impact, growth and change.

24

CHAPTER II - RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The term ‘Research Methodology’ indicates an exhaustive search and investigation into some

accepted principles and conclusions, so as to bring into light some new and noble facts. Research

has been done to analyze the present leadership style which prevails in the GRASIM Industries,

Nagda-Dhar whether effective or not and also to know the present trends of the management

style and relationship between the management and the employee and to check if any further

improvement and suggestions can be put into place for enhancing the overall climate of the

organization.

II.1 Universe of the study and Data Collection :

This consists of the entire work force at GRASIM Industries, Nagda-Dhar which comprises of

256 Employees (Managerial Functions).

II.1.1 Sample Size :

I am presenting a sample size of 38 Managers who are functional heads and departmental

heads.

II.1.2 Data Collection :

This is primarily a Qualitative and Quantitative Study in which investigative method is applied.

This includes the use of the following:

a. Stratified Random Sampling

b. Questionnaires

c. Personal interviews and discussions

d. Analysis of data

e. Interpretation through statistical techniques

f. Use of Records of the Organization

g. Use of Internet and Intranet

Methods refer to the designing of evaluation instrument. Evaluation instrument is a data

collection device administered at the appropriate stage of any analysis. Data Collection is a

major ingredient of any research project.

II.1.3 The Concept :

a. Methods are to be used for collecting required information.

b. Interpretation of data will be done to get the required result through an analysis.

c. Outcome will be necessary recommendations and suggestions.

25

II.2 Primary and Secondary source of Data :

II.2.1 Design :

The research will be focused on the collection of data, interpretation of data, and analysis of data.

There will use of two types of data involved:

a. Primary data: Information provided by the administration of the questionnaire.

b. Secondary data: Information collected by reviewing literature about the company from

journals, books, magazines, articles and also from the usage of the internet facility.

II.3 Tools and Techniques Used :

a. Questionnaire will be administered with weighted scores being assigned to each question.

b. Weightage will be assigned to the various categories and category wise analysis will also

be done.

c. Comparative study will be done of each parameter for which mean of weighted average

of each parameter will be calculated.

d. There will be use of percentages and pie-charts for the illustration of the analysis.

II.3.1 Scoring Section :

After completing the Questionnaire, filled the responses to the spaces below:

People-Concern Questions :

Q. No. Response

1. ______

4. ______

6. ______

9. ______

10. ______

12. ______

14. ______

16. ______

17. ______

Calculate Total ________

Total Score x 0.25 = ________

(Multiply the Total by 0.25 to get individual's final score)

26

Task/Production-Concern Questions :

Q. No. Response

2. ______

3. ______

5. ______

7. ______

8. ______

11. ______

13. ______

15. ______

18. ______

Calculate Total ________

Total Score x 0.25 = ________

(Multiply the Total by 0.25 to get individual's final score)

II.3.2 Matrix Section :

Plot your final scores on the graph below by drawing a horizontal line from the approximate

people score (vertical axis) to the right of the matrix, and drawing a vertical line from the

approximate task score on the horizontal axis to the top of the matrix. Then, draw two lines from

each dot until they intersect. The area of intersection is the leadership dimension that you operate

out of.

27

The above sample shows score of 4 in the people section and a score of 6 in the task section. The

quad where the two lines intersect is the leadership style, in this case - Authoritarian section.

II.3.3.The Results :

This chart will give you an idea of your leadership style. But, like any other instrument that

attempts to profile a person, you have to take in other factors, such as, how your peers and

employees rate you as a leader, do you get your job done, do you take care of your employees,

are you helping to "grow" your organization, etc.

One should review the statements in the survey and reflect on the low scores by asking yourself,

"If I scored higher in that area, would I be a more effective leader?" And if the answer is yes,

then it should become a personal action item.

a. Authoritarian Leader (high task, low relationship) : People who get this rating are very

much task oriented and are hard on their workers (autocratic). There is little or no

allowance for cooperation or collaboration. Heavily task oriented people display these

characteristics: they are very strong on schedules; they expect people to do what they are

told without question or debate; when something goes wrong they tend to focus on who is

to blame rather than concentrate on exactly what is wrong and how to prevent it; they are

intolerant of what they see as dissent (it may just be someone's creativity), so it is

difficult for their subordinates to contribute or develop.

b. Team Leader (high task, high relationship): This type of person leads by positive

example and endeavors to foster a team environment in which all team members can

reach their highest potential, both as team members and as people. They encourage the

team to reach team goals as effectively as possible, while also working tirelessly to

strengthen the bonds among the various members. They normally form and lead some of

the most productive teams.

c. Country Club Leader (low task, high relationship) : This person uses predominantly

reward power to maintain discipline and to encourage the team to accomplish its goals.

Conversely, they are almost incapable of employing the more punitive coercive and

legitimate powers. This inability results from fear that using such powers could

jeopardize relationships with the other team members.

d. Impoverished Leader (low task, low relationship) : A leader who uses a "delegate and

disappear" management style. Since they are not committed to either task

accomplishment or maintenance; they essentially allow their team to do whatever it

wishes and prefer to detach themselves from the team process by allowing the team to

suffer from a series of power struggles.

28

The most desirable place for a leader to be along the two axis at most times would be a 9 on task

and a 9 on people -the Team Leader. However, do not entirely dismiss the other three. Certain

situations might call for one of the other three to be used at times. For example, by playing the

Impoverished Leader, you allow your team to gain self-reliance. Be an Authoritarian Leader to

instill a sense of discipline in an unmotivated worker. By carefully studying the situation and the

forces affecting it, you will know at what points along the axis you need to be in order to achieve

the desired result.

I have used all the above tools to get along with research project, but the main emphasis is given

to the responses collected through questionnaires, personal and telephonic interviews and

discussions. The numerous official records of the past and the present, intranet site were also

referred for the collection of exact information and statistical data.

29

CHAPTER- III : COMPANY PROFILE

Grasim Industries has a strong presence in textile industry in India in the fabrics and synthetic

yarns sector. Grasim is well known for its branded suiting's. Grasim and Graviera, mainly in the

polyester - cellulosic branded menswear. Its textile plants are located in Bhiwani (Hariyana) and

Nagda (Madhya Pradesh).

Grasim's strong nation-wide retail network includes exclusive showrooms, wholesalers, and

Multi-Brand outlets through which it reaches its customers. Grasim also has a strong presence in

the international market, catering to international fashion in the US, supplying fabric for

manufacturing garments. These garments are available in retail stores around the world.

Grasim Industries, a flagship company of the Aditya Birla Group, ranks among India's largest

private sector companies, with a consolidated net revenue of Rs 279 billion and consolidated net

profit of Rs 27 billion (FY 2013).

Starting as a textiles manufacturer in 1948, today Grasim's business also includes the

manufacture of viscose staple fibre (VSF), cement and chemicals.

Under its chemicals business, the company manufactures caustic soda using the latest membrane

cell technology. For gainful utilisation of chlorine, the unit has expanded its operations with the

production of stable bleaching powder (SBP) used in water purification, sanitation and as a

bleaching agent; poly aluminium chloride (PAC) used in water treatment, paper sizing and

effluent treatment; and chloro-sulphonic acid (CSA) used in vinyl sulphate, the raw material for

dyes and intermediates, drugs and pharmaceuticals and chlorinated paraffin wax (CPW), used in

plasticisers.

Grasim's caustic soda business at Nagda, Madhya Pradesh, started with an initial capacity of

33,000 tpa, and has since grown to 258,000 tpa, making it the country's largest caustic soda unit.

The company has recently commissioned a new chlor-alkali plant at Vilayat in Gujarat, India.

(Grasim)

III.1.1 Vision :

To be a leading customer-focused global chemicals business that delivers best-in-class products

and specialty solutions using safe, sustainable and innovative processes.

III.1.2 Mission :

To deliver superior value to our customers, shareholders, employees and society at large.

30

III.1.3 Values :

a. Integrity : Acting and taking decisions in a manner that is fair and honest. Following the

highest standards of professionalism and being recognized for doing so. Integrity for us

means not only financial and intellectual integrity, but encompasses all other forms as are

generally understood.

b. Commitment : On the foundation of Integrity, doing all that is needed to deliver value to

all stakeholders. In the process, being accountable for our own actions and decisions,

those of our team and those in the part of the organisation for which we are responsible.

c. Passion : An energetic, intuitive zeal that arises from emotional engagement with the

organisation that makes work joyful and inspires each one to give his or her best. A

voluntary, spontaneous and relentless pursuit of goals and objectives with the highest

level of energy and enthusiasm.

d. Seamlessness : Thinking and working together across functional groups, hierarchies,

businesses and geographies. Leveraging diverse competencies and perspective to garner

the benefits of synergy while promoting organisational unity through sharing and

collaborative efforts

e. Speed : Responding to internal and external customers with a sense of urgency.

Continuously striving to finish before deadlines and choosing the best rhythm to optimise

organisational efficiencies.

III.2 Business Verticals :

Grasim Industries, the flagship company of the Aditya Birla Group was incorporated on August

25,1947. It ranks among India's largest private sector companies. Starting as a textiles

manufacturer in 1948, today Grasim’s businesses comprise viscose staple fibre (VSF), cement,

chemicals and textiles. Its core businesses are VSF and cement, which contribute to over 90 per

cent of its revenues and operation.

Total Income - Rs. 59882.9 Million ( year ending Mar 2014)

Net Profit - Rs. 8959.9 Million ( year ending Mar 2014)

(Annual Report - Grasim, 2013)

III.2.1 Viscose Staple Fibre :

Grasim is India's pioneer in Viscose Staple Fibre (VSF), a man-made, biodegradable fibre with

characteristics akin to cotton. As an extremely versatile and easily bendable fibre, VSF is widely

used in apparels, home textiles, dress material, knitted wear and non-woven applications.

Grasim's VSF plants are located at Nagda in Madhya Pradesh, Kharach in Gujarat and Harihar in

Karnataka, with an aggregate capacity of 454,425 tpa.

31

III.2.1.1. Nagda :

Nagda is its largest unit producing a wide range of VSF to suit customer requirements in terms of

length, denier and colour and also second and third generation fibres like Modal, Excel and

Solvent Spun fibres, respectively. Nagda is also the largest producer of spun-dyed specialty fibre

in the world.

III.2.1.2 Harihar :

The Harihar unit houses facility for manufacture of both VSF and rayon grade pulp, the basic

raw material for VSF. The company's Rayon Grade plant was the first in India to use totally

indigenous wood resources with in-house technology for producing rayon pulp with an

innovative oxygen bleaching process to reduce the use of chlorine.

III.2.1.3 Kharach :

The VSF plant at Kharach, set up in 1996, employs the most modern technology giving it a

competitive edge in the export market.

III.2.2 Joint Ventures (JV) :

Grasim has the following joint ventures overseas :

AV Cell Inc. and AV Nackawic Inc. in Canada :

o AV Cell and AV Nackawic supply dissolving grade pulp to the Group’s VSF

units in India, Thailand and Indonesia.

Domsjö Fabriker AB in Sweden :

o Grasim acquired one-third stake in Domsjö Fabriker AB, a leading Swedish

speciality pulp and bio-refinery company in June 2011. With this acquisition,

Grasim is assured of high-quality dissolving grade pulp.

AV Terrace Bay Inc. in Canada :

o In line with the strategy to secure key inputs, Grasim acquired assets of Terrace

Bay in July 2012 in JV with Thai Rayon, a Group company. This will help in

meeting the increasing pulp requirement for VSF business after the mill is

converted into a dissolving grade mill.

Birla Lao Pulp & Plantation Limited in Laos :

o To further strengthen the backward integration in pulp, Birla Lao has been formed

as a JV with other associate companies for raising captive plantations at Laos.

This will provide a low cost source for wood to meet future requirements of a

green field pulp plant in due course of time.

Birla Jingwei Fibres Company Limited in China :

32

o Through Birla Jingwei, Grasim has its footprint in China, the largest VSF market

globally. Plant capacity was doubled in 2012 and currently the capacity is 72,000

TPA.

This spread and scale of operations make the Group's VSF operations very cost competitive.

Moreover, vertical integration into manufacturing of rayon grade pulp and horizontal integration

into production of principal raw material required for VSF production, namely, caustic soda,

intermediate inputs namely CS2, sulphuric acid along with captive power and steam generation

facilities, further enhance its competitive edge.

III.3 Existing Future Plans and Policies :

For Grasim it has been an eventful year. The Company’s two key businesses – Cement and

Viscose Staple Fibre have performed well. The performance of the Chemicals, Sponge Iron and

Textile businesses has been constrained due to the economic slowdown. Overall the results have

been satisfactory. Revenues declined marginally on lower VSF and Sponge Iron volumes.

Improved profitability of the Cement business and reduced finance costs offset the impact. Gross

profits improved by 11% and pre-tax profits by 18% in FY02. Profit after current and deferred

taxes before exceptional charges due to business restructuring have grown 14% to Rs.386.8

crores in FY02. In the context of the prevailing difficult environment, the Company’s

performance is indeed commendable. The year was sluggish on several counts. GDP grew by

5.7% only because of the recovery in the agriculture sector, which benefited from a well

precipitated monsoon. The industrial sector suffered the most with growth rates nearly halving to

a decade low level of 2.7% taking a serious toll on consumer sentiment. The deepening of

recession in the US following the 9/11 attacks added further pressure. Reflecting weak sentiment

and the resultant reduction in consumer spending, demand contracted across the sectors, both in

India and abroad.

An Eventful year Strategically - It was an eventful year strategically. The Company closed the

loss making Pulp and Fibre Plants at Mavoor (Kerala) and sold its loss-making fabric unit at

Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh). The stake in its software subsidiary was divested as well. Apart from

these restructuring moves, the Company strengthened its cement operations by commissioning a

grinding plant at Bhatinda (Punjab) and made strategic investments in Larsen & Toubro Limited.

Mavoor Plant Closure The Company has been pursuing for closure of its Pulp and Fibre plants at

Mavoor with the Government, primarily due to non availability of raw materials, the resultant

poor quality of fibre and overall unviable operations. The plant operations were suspended from

May 1999. Subsequently, the Company reached a settlement with its Labour Unions for the

closure of Mavoor from 1st July 2001. The Company incurred a sum of Rs.55.3 crores towards

employee retrenchment compensation and provided an additional Rs.19.0 crores towards the

shortfall in realisation from fixed assets retired from active use. Following the closure, the

Company’s workforce stands reduced by 2300, which accounts for 11% of its aggregate

33

workforce. An annual savings of Rs.27.0 crores towards employee costs and fixed overheads will

accrue in future. Textile Unit at Gwalior Divested The Textile business of the Company

consisted of fabrics unit at Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh), a composite unit at Bhiwani (Haryana)

and a spinning unit at Malanpur (Madhya Pradesh). The textile business has been under pressure

due to adverse market conditions and rising cost of operations in recent years. Given that the

domestic textile industry is not showing definite signs of recovery, the Company decided to

restructure operations to prevent value erosion in future. As part of a carefully chosen strategy,

the Company decided to sell its textiles manufacturing units / undertakings at Gwalior and

centralise fabric operations at Bhiwani. The operation at Gwalior been the biggest drag and

accounted for operating losses of Rs.27.3 crores against operating profit of Rs. 6.7 crores at other

textile units. A turnaround in the unit’s operations appeared unlikely due to in-efficient

operations, higher overheads and growing costs. The Company thus decided to sell the fabrics

unit at Gwalior as a going concern. The Company reached an agreement with Melodeon Exports

Limited for the sale of the textile manufacturing units at Gwalior for a consideration of Rs.1.0

lac. The Company also agreed to pay Rs.15.0 crores to the Buyer for taking over the liabilities

relating to employees. The Company has incurred Rs.31.9 crores as an exit cost, which is

charged to revenue account as an exceptional cost in FY02. With brands remaining under its fold

and the high cost operation sold-off, the Company hopes to improve its position and overall

profitability of the business. Divestment of Stake in Software subsidiary In another important

move, the Company divested its entire holding in its software subsidiary - Birla Technologies

Limited. With a view to bring focus on key businesses and divest its smaller businesses,

Company’s software division was hived off last year into a subsidiary, named Birla Technologies

Limited. The Company sold its entire stake in Birla Technologies to PSI Data Systems for a

consideration of Rs.11.3 crores in FY02. This was against its capitalised value of Rs.29.4 crores

and thus resulted in a non-cash loss of Rs.18.1 crores in FY02. The erosion in value of its

software subsidiary needs to viewed in the light of the deterioration in the industry environment

and the sharp fall in sector valuations. As you are aware, the Company had booked a non-cash

profit of Rs.18.4 crores last year thru the corporatisation. Hence even with the non-cash loss at

present, the Company made a net gain of Rs. 0.3 crores from the divestment efforts, which is

satisfactory. (Grasim at a Glance, 2014)

34

CHAPTER IV - RESEARCH ANALYSIS

IV.1 Analysis and Findings :

IV.1.1 Master-Sheet :

S.

No. Name Age Designation

People

Score

Y-axis

Value

Task

Score

X-axis

Value

Leadership

Style

1 Anurag Gupta

39 General Manager 25 6.25 32 8 Team Leader

2 Ashok Jain 56

Deputy General Manager 33 8.25 34 8.5 Team Leader

3 M P Agarwal 42

Deputy General Manager 33 8.25 32 8 Team Leader

4 Sanjay K Lal 44 General Manager 35 8.75 36 9 Team Leader

5 Pranit Nagwekar

53 General Manager 26 6.5 26 6.5

Middle of the Road

6

Purna Chandra Samantray

40 General Manager 33 8.25 34 8.5 Team Leader

7 S P S Baghel 59

Deputy General Manager 31 7.75 22 5.5 Team Leader

8 B S Sahani 57

Deputy General Manager 25 6.25 31 7.75 Team Leader

9 Rajesh P Sharma

50 General Manager 30 7.5 24 6 Team Leader

10 Rao K R 58 General Manager 31 7.75 33 8.25 Team Leader

11 Rajiv Kaul 54

Deputy General

Manager 31 7.75 30 7.5 Team Leader

12 Rajmal Shrinath

52 Deputy General Manager 32 8 30 7.5 Team Leader

13 Minesh Agarwal

42 Deputy General Manager 29 7.25 23 5.75 Team Leader

14

Jitendra

Jherwar 56 General Manager

30 7.5 33 8.25 Team Leader

15 Ashok Gupta 52 General Manager 30 7.5 31 7.75 Team Leader

16 Deepak Surana

52 Deputy General Manager 20 5 19 4.75

Middle of the Road

17 Jagmohan Gaur

54 Deputy General Manager 29 7.25 30 7.5 Team Leader

18

Arunodaya Seetha

46

Assistant General Manager

26

6.5

29

7.25

Team Leader

19

Manoj

Kumar Joshi 51

Assistant General

Manager 29 7.25 23 5.75 Team Leader

20 Sajjan Singh 48 General Manager 31 7.75 29 7.25 Team Leader

35

21 Nalin Soral 54

Deputy General

Manager 31 7.75 28 7 Team Leader

22 M R Mansoori

47 Assistant General Manager 25 6.25 26 6.5

Middle of the Road

23 Jai Kishore Roy

51 Deputy General Manager 34 8.5 34 8.5 Team Leader

24

Shailendra

Deshlahra 44

Assistant General

Manager 31 7.75 25 6.25 Team Leader

25 Subir Atri 43

Deputy General Manager 30 7.5 33 8.25 Team Leader

26 Saiduzzaman Haque

43 Assistant General Manager 33 8.25 29 7.25 Team Leader

27 Rajesh Matai 45 General Manager

27 6.75 21 5.25 Middle of the Road

28 Partha Samaddar

38 Assistant General Manager 27 6.75 27 6.75

Middle of the Road

29 Rajendra Nagle

45 General Manager 31 7.75 29 7.25 Team Leader

30 Praveen Surange

56 Assistant Vice President 29 7.25 30 7.5 Team Leader

31 Abhay Nagar 41 Manager 32 8 31 7.75 Team Leader

32 Vivek Kale 44

Assistant General Manager 30 7.5 32 8 Team Leader

33 Rajeev Gupta

42 Assistant General Manager 30 7.5 29 7.25 Team Leader

34 Vijay Singh 38 Manager

20 5 27 6.75 Middle of the Road

35 Ajay Gupta 39 Manager 32 8 27 6.75 Team Leader

36 Deepak Patidar

40 Manager 26 6.5 27 6.75

Middle of the Road

37 Nirbhay Gupta 32

Assistant General Manager 27 6.75 27 6.75

Middle of the Road

38 Vijay Kant Sharma

42 Manager 32 8 32 8 Team Leader

Sample Average 29.3684 7.34211 28.816 7.20395 Team Leader

36

IV.1.2 Pie - Charts :

(Figure 1)

Out of 38 managers (Sample Size) :

79% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

21% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

(Figure 2)

Executives at Manager Positions :

60% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

40% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

Team leader 79%

Middle of the road

21%

Distribution of sample size by their leadership style

60%

40%

Distribution of Managers according to Leadership Style

Team Leader

Middle of the Road

37

(Figure 3)

Executives at Assistant General Manager Positions :

67% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

33% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

(Figure 4)

Executives at Deputy General Manager Positions :

92% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

8% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

67%

33%

Distribution of Assistant General Managers according to Leadership

Style

Team Leader

Middle of the Road

92%

8%

Distribution of Deputy General

Managers according to Leadership Style

Team Leader

38

(Figure 5)

Executives at General Manager Positions :

95% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

5% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

(Figure 6)

Executives between the age 30 to 39 (Generation Z) :

40% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

60% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

95%

5%

Distribution of General Managers according to

Leadership Style

Team Leader

Middle of the Road

40%

60%

Distribution according to

age(30-39)

Team Leader Middle of the Road

39

(Figure 7)

Executives between the age 40 to 49 (Generation Y) :

82% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

18% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

(Figure 8)

Executives between the age 50 to 59 (Generation X) :

87% fall under "Team Leader Leadership Style"; and

13% fall under "Middle-of-the-road Leadership Style".

82%

18%

Distribution according to age(40-49)

Team Leader Middle of the Road

87%

13%

Distribution according to

age(50-59)

Team Leader Middle of the Road

40

IV.2 Limitations :

Theories of leadership have moved on a certain amount since the Blake-Mouton Grid was originally

proposed. In particular, the context in which leadership occurs is now seen as an important driver of the

leadership style used.

And, in many situations, the "Team Leader" as an ideal has moved to the ideal of the "Transformational

Leader". Someone who:

a. Is a model of integrity and fairness?

b. Sets clear goals.

c. Have high expectations.

d. Encourages.

e. Provides support and recognition.

f. Stirs people's emotions.

g. Gets people to look beyond their self-interest.

h. Inspires people to reach for the improbable.

So, use Blake Mouton as a helpful model, but don't treat it as an "eternal truth".

And, keeping in mind problems and obstacles that occurred while conducting the study in the

organization such as- time constraints, insufficiency of data collection, uncertainty of the sample

matching with the entire population, and proper data analysis.

IV.3 Final Outcomes :

The correlation between the age and people orientation of the managers is positive. Therefore

with rising age the managers become more concern towards employees expectations.

As the managers rise higher In the hierarchy a similar effect takes place that is they become more

sensitive towards people's needs.

Situational Leadership plays a vital role in any manufacturing concern. As it forces managers to

behave differently according to the situation.

Emotional Intelligence is an integral part of the Leadership behaviour. It goes hand in hand.

41

CHAPTER V - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Managerial Grid developed by Robert Blake and Jane-Mouton focuses on task (production)

and employee (people) orientations of managers as well as combinations of concerns between

the two extremes. A grid with concern for production on the horizontal axis and concern for

people on the vertical axis and plots five basic leadership styles. The first number refers to a

leader's production or task orientation; the second, to people or employee orientation. The Blake

Mouton Managerial Grid they proposed that “Team Management” - a high concern for both

employees and production is the most effective type of leadership behavior.

Blake and Mouton focused on purpose, people, and hierarchy (power) as the common features of

organizations and asked how organization purposes are achieved through people by bosses. They

developed the grid by setting concern for people on the horizontal axis and concern for

production on the vertical axis in order to express the attitudes of bosses. Each axis ranged on a

scale of 1 to 9 from low to high. Then, Blake and Mouton called this grid the Managerial Grid

and categorized the attitudes of bosses into 5 types on this grid:

While they proposed that the ideal attitude was 9,9: Team Management, that stressed

participation as an interaction process based on openness, strong initiative, thorough inquiry,

effective advocacy, confrontational approach to conflict solving, appropriation delegation, sound

teamwork, and two-way critique, they also understood it was difficult to actualize because

followers did not always have the ability that leaders expected, and followers abilities were

diverse.

Being aware of the various approaches is the first step in understanding and improving how well

you perform as a manager. It is important to understand how you currently operate, so that you

can then identify ways of becoming effective in both areas.

It is important to recognize that the Team Leadership style isn’t always the most effective

approach in every situation. While the benefits of democratic and participative management are

widely accepted, there are times that call for more attention in one area than another.

If the company is in the midst of a merger or some other significant change, it can be acceptable

to place a higher emphasis on people than on production. Likewise, when they faced with an

economic hardship or physical risk, people concerns may be placed on the back burner, for the

short-term at least, to achieve high productivity and efficiency.

By interpreting leadership as a form of culture, a new conception of leadership emerges:

"Leadership as the management of influence processes". The Managerial Grid model offers a

model of leadership which is consistent with this new conception. In an era of "cross-functional

teams", "learning organizations" and "continuous quality improvement" where the emphasis is

squarely on the dynamic interactions within teams, Grid as a model of leadership culture,

42

deserves to be seriously reappraised by leadership researchers and practitioners. As an initial step

in the re-appraisal of Grid, it is proposed that research focus on measuring and differentiating the

five basic Grid leadership cultures and then establishing whether the Teamwork (9,9) leadership

culture represents the “one best way”.

Although deciding what makes an effective leader seems as if it should be a simple decision, the

theories and research reviewed earlier illustrate the complexity of the issue. In spite of the

complexity, however, individuals who are in positions of leadership are still faced with the

practical question of deciding which leadership pattern to adopt.

Realizing that there are constraints on a leader’s behavior and that other the factors may serve to

neutralize or substitute for the influence of a leader helps to explain why the research on

leadership has produced such inconsistent results. The fact that the results are inconsistent and

generally weak does not necessarily mean that leadership is unimportant or that leaders are not

really account for much. Instead, it illustrates the complexity of the world in which leaders are

required to function. Finally, 'Leadership' is an extremely important function that influence

enormously the effectiveness of groups and organizations. The complexity of the situation,

however, may prevent the leadership style if they know how to control their emotions in advance

which may called as 'effective leadership behaviors'.

43

RECOMMENDATIONS :

1. Self - Introspection through:

A. Step One: Identify the leadership style :

a. Think of some recent situations where you were the leader.

b. For each of these situations, place yourself on the grid according to

where you believe you fit (autocratic, democratic, participative or team

leadership).

B. Step Two - Identify areas of improvement and develop your leadership skills:

a. Look at your current leadership approach, and think about whether it

suits the context.

b. Look at ways that you could improve. Are you settling for ‘middle of the

road’ because it is easier than reaching for more?

c. Identify ways to get the skills you need to reach the ‘Team Leadership

position’. These may include involving others in problem solving or

improving how you communicate with them, if you feel you are too

task-oriented. Or it may mean becoming clearer about scheduling or

monitoring project progress if you tend to focus too much on people.

d. Continually monitor your performance and watch for situations where

you slip back into bad old habits.

C. Step Three - Put the Grid in Context

2. Behaving as per the Situation :

a. Sometimes the manager should use his/her authority to simply make the decision and

announce it.

b. Sometimes the manager provides an area of freedom for subordinates and permits

them to function within certain limits to make decisions and direct their own

activities.

c. Includes the manager's value system and the value the manager places on

participation and involvement by subordinates.

d. The amount of confidence managers have in their subordinates and the manager's

ability to handle uncertainty are also relevant.

e. As subordinates gain greater skill and competence in managing themselves, leaders

ought to provide more autonomy for them.

f. The culture of the organization and its history of allowing subordinates to exercise

autonomy.

44

g. Successful leader is one who is aware of the situational forces and responds

appropriately to them.

h. Effective leaders need to understand themselves, the members of the group, the

company, and the broader social environment in which they operate.

3. Strategies for Improving Leadership :

a. Reward the leader by the ways they perform.

b. Encouraging reciprocal nature of influence between leaders and subordinates.

c. It is important to remember that leadership may be significantly constrained by the

followers.

d. Participating Approach should be there in the Organisation.

4. Constraints on leader behavior :

a. External factors : Leaders are constrained in what they can do because of various

economic realities and a host of state and federal laws. For example, leaders are

required to pay at least the minimum wage and they are required to enforce safety

standards. Leaders who have unskilled followers will have difficulty leading

regardless of their leadership style, and the availability of skilled followers is

influenced by the external labor market. Some geographical areas have a much better

supply of skilled employees than others.

b. Organizational policies : The organization may constrain a leader’s effectiveness by

limiting the amount of interaction between leaders and followers and by restricting

the leader’s ability to reward or punish followers.

c. Group factors : Group norms are created by the dynamics of the group. If the group

is highly cohesive and very determined, it can limit the leader’s ability to influence

the group.

d. Individual skills and abilities : The leader’s own skills and abilities may act as

constraints since leaders can only possess so much expertise, energy, and power.

Some situations may simply require greater skills and abilities than the leader may

possibly hope to possess.

5. Substitutes for leadership :

a. Making the leader’s behavior unnecessary or by neutralizing the leader’s ability to

influence subordinates.

b. The task-oriented instructions from an instrumental leader are simply unnecessary

when subordinates already know what to do.

45

Bibliography

1. Annual Report (2013).- Grasim. Nagda.

2. Ashwathapa, K. (2013). Human Resource Management.

3. Grasim. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.grasim.com: http://www.grasim.com/about_us/

4. Grasim at a Glance. (2014, March).

5. Pareek, U. (2013). Organisation Behavior.

6. Robbins, S. (2012). wikipedia. In S. Robbins, Organisational Behaviour (pp. 344-389).

7. Stogdill, R. (2012). Leadership.

8. Stogdill, R. (2012). Leadership.

46

APPENDIX

Annexure 1 : Questionnaire (Sample)

47

Annexure : Questionnaire (Filled)