SAURABH GUPTA

SAURABH GUPTA..PGDM in HR, LL.B Delhi University. Presently working as Sr. HR Executive with a Media Company.

Monday, August 17, 2009

Managerial Grid


The managerial grid model (1964) is a behavioral leadership model developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. This model originally identified five different leadership styles based on the concern for people and the concern for production. On the grid, concern for production is represented on a one to nine scale on the horizontal axis (x-axis). Concern for people is represented on a one to nine scale on the vertical axis (y-axis).


Understanding the Model
The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions:
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
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:


Country Club Leadership– (High concern for People/Low concern for Production)
This style has a high concern for people and a low concern for production. Managers using this style pay much attention to the security and comfort of the employees, in hopes that this would increase performance. The resulting atmosphere is usually friendly, but not necessarily productive.


Produce or Perish Leadership– (High concern for Production/Low concern for People)
With a high concern for production, and a low concern for people, managers using this style find employee needs unimportant; they provide their employees with money and expect performance back. Managers using this style also pressure their employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals. This style is based on Theory X, and is commonly applied by companies on the edge of failure.


Impoverished Leadership – (Low concern for Production/ Low concern for People)
In this style, managers have low concern for both people and production. Managers use this style to avoid getting into trouble. The main concern for the manager is not to be held responsible for any mistakes, which results in less innovative decisions.


Middle-of-the-Road Leadership– (Medium concern for Production/Medium concern for People)
This style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns. It may at first appear to be an ideal compromise. Therein lies the problem, 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.


Team Leadership – (High concern for Production/High concern for People)
According to the Blake Mouton model, this is the pinnacle of managerial style. These leaders stress production needs and the needs of the people equally highly. The premise here is that employees are involved in understanding organizational purpose and 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 .


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 universally accepted, there are times that call for more attention in one area than another. If your company is in the midst of a merger or some other significant change, it is often acceptable to place a higher emphasis on people than on production. Likewise, when 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.



2 comments: