Leadershp in Hotels

7/31/2019 Leadershp in Hotels

1/21

Chapter 1

Leadership has been described as a process of social influence in which

one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a

common task". Other in-depth definitions of leadership have also emerged.

Theories

Leadership is "organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal". The

leader may or may not have any formal authority. Students of leadership have

produced theories involving traits, situational interaction, function, behavior,

power, vision and values, charisma, and intelligence, among others. Somebody

whom people follow: somebody who guides or directs others.

Early western history

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for

centuries. History's greatest philosophical writings from Plato's Republic to

Plutarch's Lives have explored the question "What qualities distinguish an

individual as a leader?" Underlying this search was the early recognition of the

importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the

1


2/21

characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on

individual attributes is known as the "trait theory of leadership".

The trait theory was explored at length in a number of works in the 19th

century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton,

whose works have prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship

(1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men

who rose to power. In Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869), he examined leadership

qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of

eminent relatives dropped off when moving from first degree to second degree

relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders

were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for

the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the leader.

Rise of alternative theories

In the late 1940s and early 1950s, however, a series of qualitative reviews of

these studies (e.g., Bird, 1940; Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959) prompted researchers

to take a drastically different view of the driving forces behind leadership. In

reviewing the extant literature, Stogdill and Mann found that while some traits

were common across a number of studies, the overall evidence suggested that

persons who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other

2


3/21

situations. Subsequently, leadership was no longer characterized as an enduring

individual trait, as situational approaches (see alternative leadership theories

below) posited that individuals can be effective in certain situations, but not others.

This approach dominated much of the leadership theory and research for the next

few decades.

Reemergence of trait theory

New methods and measurements were developed after these influential

reviews that would ultimately reestablish the trait theory as a viable approach to

the study of leadership. For example, improvements in researchers' use of the

round robin research design methodology allowed researchers to see that

individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks.

Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct

meta-analyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and summarize the

findings from a wide array of studies. This advent allowed trait theorists to create a

comprehensive picture of previous leadership research rather than rely on the

qualitative reviews of the past. Equipped with new methods, leadership researchers

revealed the following:

Individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations

and tasks.

3


4/21

Significant relationships exist between leadership and such individual

traits as:

intelligence

adjustment

extraversion

conscientiousness

openness to experience

general self-efficacy

While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, its

reemergence has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in

sophisticated conceptual frameworks.

Specifically, Zaccaro (2007) noted that trait theories still:

1. focus on a small set of individual attributes such as Big Five

personality traits, to the neglect of cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills,

expertise, and problem-solving skills;

2. fail to consider patterns or integrations of multiple attributes;

4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-efficacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-efficacy


5/21

3. do not distinguish between those leader attributes that are generally

not malleable over time and those that are shaped by, and bound to, situational

influences;

4. do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the behavioral

diversity necessary for effective leadership.

Attribute pattern approach

Considering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several

researchers have begun to adopt a different perspective of leader individual

differencesthe leader attribute pattern approach. In contrast to the traditional

approach, the leader attribute pattern approach is based on theorists' arguments that

the influence of individual characteristics on outcomes is best understood by

considering the person as an integrated totality rather than a summation of

individual variables. In other words, the leader attribute pattern approach argues

that integrated constellations or combinations of individual differences may

explain substantial variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness

beyond that explained by single attributes, or by additive combinations of multiple

attributes.

5


6/21

Behavioral and style theories

In response to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to

research leadership as a set of behaviors, evaluating the behavior of successful

leaders, determining a behavior taxonomy, and identifying broad leadership styles.

David McClelland, for example, posited that leadership takes a strong personality

with a well-developed positive ego. To lead, self-confidence and high self-esteem

are useful, perhaps even essential.

A graphical representation of the managerial grid model

Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal

work on the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers

6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Management_Grid.PNG


7/21

evaluated the performance of groups of eleven-year-old boys under different types

of work climate. In each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of

group decision making, praise and criticism (feedback), and the management of the

group tasks (project management) according to three styles: authoritarian,

democratic, and laissez-faire.

The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model

was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964 and suggests five

different leadership styles, based on the leaders' concern for people and their

concern for goal achievement.

Positive reinforcement

B.F. Skinner is the father of behavior modification and developed the

concept of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement occurs when a positive

stimulus is presented in response to a behavior, increasing the likelihood of that

behavior in the future. The following is an example of how positive reinforcement

can be used in a business setting. Assume praise is a positive reinforcer for a

particular employee. This employee does not show up to work on time every day.

The manager of this employee decides to praise the employee for showing up on

time every day the employee actually shows up to work on time. As a result, the

employee comes to work on time more often because the employee likes to be

7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedbackhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedback


8/21

praised. In this example, praise (the stimulus) is a positive reinforcer for this

employee because the employee arrives at work on time (the behavior) more

frequently after being praised for showing up to work on time.

The use of positive reinforcement is a successful and growing technique

used by leaders to motivate and attain desired behaviors from subordinates.

Organizations such as Frito-Lay, 3M, Goodrich, Michigan Bell, and Emery Air

Freight have all used reinforcement to increase productivity. Empirical research

covering the last 20 years suggests that reinforcement theory has a 17 percent

increase in performance. Additionally, many reinforcement techniques such as the

use of praise are inexpensive, providing higher performance for lower costs.

Situational and contingency theories

Situational theory also appeared as a reaction to the trait theory of

leadership. Social scientists argued that history was more than the result of

intervention of great men as Carlyle suggested. Herbert Spencer (1884) (and Karl

Marx) said that the times produce the person and not the other way around. This

theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics; according

to this group of theories, no single optimal psychographic profile of a leader exists.

According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader

8


9/21

is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he

functions."

Some theorists started to synthesize the trait and situational approaches.

Building upon the research of Lewin et al., academics began to normalize the

descriptive models of leadership climates, defining three leadership styles and

identifying which situations each style works better in. The authoritarian leadership

style, for example, is approved in periods of crisis but fails to win the "hearts and

minds" of followers in day-to-day management; the democratic leadership style is

more adequate in situations that require consensus building; finally, the laissez-

faire leadership style is appreciated for the degree of freedom it provides, but as the

leaders do not "take charge", they can be perceived as a failure in protracted or

thorny organizational problems. Thus, theorists defined the style of leadership as

contingent to the situation, which is sometimes classified as contingency theory.

Four contingency leadership theories appear more prominently in recent years:

Fiedler contingency model, Vroom-Yetton decision model, the path-goal theory,

and the Hersey-Blanchard situational theory.

The Fiedler contingency model bases the leader's effectiveness on what Fred

Fiedler called situational contingency. This results from the interaction of

leadership style and situational favorability (later called situational control). The

9


10/21

theory defined two types of leader: those who tend to accomplish the task by

developing good relationships with the group (relationship-oriented), and those

who have as their prime concern carrying out the task itself (task-oriented).

According to Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both task-oriented and relationship-

oriented leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation.

When there is a good leader-member relation, a highly structured task, and high

leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable situation". Fiedler

found that task-oriented leaders are more effective in extremely favorable or

unfavorable situations, whereas relationship-oriented leaders perform best in

situations with intermediate favorability.

Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton (1973) and later with

Arthur Jago (1988), developed a taxonomy for describing leadership situations,

which was used in a normative decision model where leadership styles were

connected to situational variables, defining which approach was more suitable to

which situation. This approach was novel because it supported the idea that the

same manager could rely on different group decision making approaches

depending on the attributes of each situation. This model was later referred to as

situational contingency theory.

Varieties of individual power

10


11/21

According to Patrick J. Montana and Bruce H. Charnov, the ability to attain

these unique powers is what enables leadership to influence subordinates and peers

by controlling organizational resources. The successful leader effectively uses

these powers to influence employees, and it is important for leaders to understand

the uses of power to strengthen their leadership.

The authors distinguish the following types of organizational power:

Legitimate Power refers to the different types of professional

positions within an organization structure that inherit such power (e.g. Manager,

Vice President, Director, Supervisor, etc.). These levels of power correspond to the

hierarchical executive levels within the organization itself. The higher positions,

such as president of the company, have higher power than the rest of the

professional positions in the hierarchical executive levels.

Reward Power is the power given to managers that attain

administrative power over a range of rewards (such as raises and promotions).

Employees who work for managers desire the reward from the manager and will be

influenced by receiving it as a result of work performance.

Coercive Power is the manager's ability to punish an employee.

Punishment can be mild, such as a suspension, or serious, such as termination.

11


12/21

Expert Power is attained by the manager due to his or her own talents

such as skills, knowledge, abilities, or previous experience. A manager who has

this power within the organization may be a very valuable and important manager

in the company.

Charisma Power: a manager who has charisma will have a positive

influence on workers, and create the opportunity for interpersonal influence.

Referent Power is a power that is gained by association. A person

who has power by association is often referred to as an assistant or deputy.

Information Power is gained by a person who has possession of

important information at an important time when such information is needed to

organizational functioning.

Job satisfaction describes how happy an individual is with his or her job. The

happier people are within their job, the more satisfied they are said to be. Logic

would dictate that the most satisfied (happy) workers should be the best

performers and vice versa. This is called the "happy worker" hypothesis. However,

this hypothesis is not well supported, as job satisfaction is not the same as

motivation or aptitude, although they may be clearly linked. A primary influence

on job satisfaction is the application of Job design,which aims to enhance job

12


13/21

satisfaction and performance using methods such as job rotation, job enlargement,

job enrichment and job re-engineering. Other influences on satisfaction include

management styles and culture, employee involvement, empowerment, and

autonomous work position. Job satisfaction is a very important attribute and is

frequently measured by organizations. The most common technique for

measurement is the use of rating scales where employees report their thoughts and

reactions to their jobs. Questions can relate to rates of pay, work responsibilities,

variety of tasks, promotional opportunities, the work itself, and co-workers. Some

examinations present yes-or-no questions while others ask to rate satisfaction using

a 1-to-5 scale, where 1 represents "not at all satisfied" and 5 represents "extremely

satisfied."

Definition

Job satisfaction can simply be defined as the feelings people have about their

jobs.It has been specifically defined as a pleasurable (or unpleasurable) emotional

state resulting from the appraisal of ones job, an affective reaction to ones job,

and an attitude towards ones job. These definitions suggest that job satisfaction

takes into account feelings, beliefs, and behaviors.

History

13


14/21

One of the biggest preludes to the study of job satisfaction was the Hawthorne

studies. These studies (19241933), primarily credited to Elton Mayo of the

Harvard Business School, sought to find the effects of various conditions (most

notably illumination) on workers productivity. These studies ultimately showed

that novel changes in work conditions temporarily increase productivity (called the

Hawthorne Effect). It was later found that this increase resulted, not from the new

conditions, but from the knowledge of being observed. This finding provided

strong evidence that people work for purposes other than pay, which paved the

way for researchers to investigate other factors in job satisfaction.

Scientific management (aka Taylorism) also had a significant impact on the study

of job satisfaction. Frederick Winslow Taylors 1911 book, Principles of Scientific

Management, argued that there was a single best way to perform any given work

task. This book contributed to a change in industrial production philosophies,

causing a shift from skilled labor and piecework towards the more modern of

assembly lines and hourly wages. The initial use of scientific management by

industries greatly increased productivity because workers were forced to work at a

faster pace. However, workers became exhausted and dissatisfied, thus leaving

researchers with new questions to answer regarding job satisfaction. It should also

be noted that the work of W.L. Bryan, Walter Dill Scott, and Hugo Munsterberg

set the tone for Taylors work.

14


15/21

Some argue that Maslows hierarchy of needs theory, a motivation theory, laid the

foundation for job satisfaction theory. This theory explains that people seek to

satisfy five specific needs in life physiological needs, safety needs, social needs,

self-esteem needs, and self-actualization. This model served as a good basis from

which early researchers could develop job satisfaction theories.

Job satisfaction can also be seen within the broader context of the range of issues

which affect an individual's experience of work, or their quality of working life.

Job satisfaction can be understood in terms of its relationships with other key

factors, such as general well-being, stress at work, control at work, home-work

interface, and working conditions.

Models of job satisfaction

Affect theory

Edwin A. Lockes Range of Affect Theory (1976) is arguably the most famous job

satisfaction model. The main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is

determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what one has in

a job. Further, the theory states that how much one values a given facet of work

(e.g. the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one

becomes when expectations are/arent met. When a person values a particular facet

15


16/21

of a job, his satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively (when

expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to

one who doesnt value that facet. To illustrate, if Employee A values autonomy in

the workplace and Employee B is indifferent about autonomy, then Employee A

would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy and

less satisfied in a position with little or no autonomy compared to Employee B.

This theory also states that too much of a particular facet will produce stronger

feelings of dissatisfaction the more a worker values that facet.

Dispositional theory

Another well-known job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional Theory. It is a very

general theory that suggests that people have innate dispositions that cause them to

have tendencies toward a certain level of satisfaction, regardless of ones job. This

approach became a notable explanation of job satisfaction in light of evidence that

job satisfaction tends to be stable over time and across careers and jobs. Research

also indicates that identical twins have similar levels of job satisfaction.

A significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory was the

Core Self-evaluations Model, proposed by Timothy A. Judge, Edwin A. Locke,

and Cathy C. Durham in 1997.[5] Judge et al. argued that there are four Core Self-

evaluations that determine ones disposition towards job satisfaction: self-esteem,

16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_satisfaction#cite_note-Judge1997-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_satisfaction#cite_note-Judge1997-4


17/21

general self-efficacy, locus of control, and neuroticism. This model states that

higher levels of self-esteem (the value one places on his/her self) and general self-

efficacy (the belief in ones own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction.

Having an internal locus of control (believing one has control over her\his own

life, as opposed to outside forces having control) leads to higher job satisfaction.

Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction.

Opponent process theory

According to opponent process theory, emotional events, such as criticisms or

rewards, elicits two sets of processes. Primary processes give way to emotions that

are steady with the event in question. Events that seem negative in manner will

give rise to the feelings of stress or anxiety. Events that are positive give rise to the

feeling of content or relaxation. The other process is the opponent process, which

induces feelings that contradict the feelings in the primary processes. Events that

are negative give rise to feelings of relaxation while events that are positive give

rise to feelings of anxiety. A variety of explanations have been suggested to

explain the uniformity of mood or satisfaction. This theory shows that if you try to

enhance the mood of individual it will more likely fail in doing so. The opponent

process theory was formulated to explain these patterns of observations.

Equity theory

17
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_control


18/21

Equity Theory shows how a person views fairness in regard to social relationships.

During a social exchange, a person identifies the amount of input gained from a

relationship compared to the output, as well as how much effort another persons

puts forth.Equity Theory suggests that if an individual thinks there is an inequality

between two social groups or individuals, the person is likely to be distressed

because the ratio between the input and the output are not equal.

For example, consider two employees who work the same job and receive the same

benefits. If one individual gets a pay raise for doing the same or less work than the

other, then the less benefited individual will become distressed in his workplace. If,

on the other hand, one individual gets a pay raise and new responsibilities, then the

feeling of inequality is reduced..

Discrepancy theory

The concept of self-discrepancy theory explains the ultimate source of anxiety and

dejection. An individual, who has not fulfilled his responsibility feels the sense of

anxiety and regret for not performing well, they will also feel dejection due to not

being able to achieve their hopes and aspirations. According to this theory, all

individuals will learn what their obligations and responsibilities for a particular

function, over a time period, and if they fail to fulfill those obligations then they

are punished. Over time, these duties and obligations consolidate to form an

18


19/21

abstracted set of principles, designated as a self-guide. Agitation and anxiety are

the main responses when an individual fails to achieve the obligation or

responsibility. This theory also explains that if achievement of the obligations is

obtained then the reward can be praise, approval, or love. These achievements and

aspirations also form an abstracted set of principles, referred to as the ideal self

guide. When the individual fails to obtain these rewards, they begin to have

feelings of dejection, disappointment, or even depression.

Two-factor theory (motivator-hygiene theory)

Frederick Herzbergs Two-factor theory (also known as Motivator Hygiene

Theory) attempts to explain satisfaction and motivation in the workplace. This

theory states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by different factors

motivation and hygiene factors, respectively. An employees motivation to work is

continually related to job satisfaction of a subordinate. Motivation can be seen as

an inner force that drives individuals to attain personal and organizational goals

(Hoskinson, Porter, & Wrench, p. 133). Motivating factors are those aspects of the

job that make people want to perform, and provide people with satisfaction, for

example achievement in work, recognition, promotion opportunities. These

motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job, or the work carried out.

Hygiene factors include aspects of the working environment such as pay, company

19


20/21

policies, supervisory practices, and other working conditions.While Hertzberg's

model has stimulated much research, researchers have been unable to reliably

empirically prove the model, with Hackman & Oldham suggesting that Hertzberg's

original formulation of the model may have been a methodological artifact.

Furthermore, the theory does not consider individual differences, conversely

predicting all employees will react in an identical manner to changes in

motivating/hygiene factors. Finally, the model has been criticised in that it does not

specify how motivating/hygiene factors are to be measured.

Objective of the project

To study about the Luxury hotels at madurai

Leadership styles at thease hotles

To study about the job satisfaction of employees on behalf of leadership

CHAPTERISATION

The introduction chapter includes scope, objective, hypothesis, aim of the

study, which are all the ingredients of a research study. Second chapter lights on

the review of literature. Third Chapter describes deals with the Hotels in general

20


21/21

and Madurai Luxury hotel detail . Fourth chapter gives a brief sketch about

leadership and jobsatisfaction in hotel In Fifth chapter processing, analysis and

interpretation of data is done. Seventh chapter is devoted to the summary and

conclusion, suggestions and recommendations. This research report will prove

helpful in the development of genuine future research studies on this subject.

METHODOLOGY

Sampling Technique

The sampling technique used is simple convenience sampling method. Informationis collected only from a representative part of the population; the method of

collection is called sampling. This is based on law of statistical regularity.

Sample Size

The total population of employees in Various Luxury hotels at Maduri Tamilnadu

Beach Orchid International is 150. Out of which the sample size taken is 100

Tools for data analysis

Questionnaire is the tool used for data analysis.

21

Leadershp in Hotels

Documents

Transcript of Leadershp in Hotels