1.

Introduction

Leadership remains one of the most relevant aspects of organizational context. For more than

five decades ago, the term leadership has been a researchable topic. Mostly, the research work

focuses on issues of quality of leadership, ability of a leader, or leadership effectiveness, or

leadership styles. According to Adlam (2003), leadership is a complex concept. This has been

proved true since several approaches have been employed to provide meaning to the term

leadership and effectiveness. Therefore, leadership has been defined from different sources and

some of the definitions are discussed below.

The traditional perspectives of leadership perceive the concept of leadership as inducing

compliance, respect and cooperation. In other words, the leader exercises power over the

followers to obtain their cooperation. In addition to that, the old leadership perspectives are

based on leader’s role as formulating goals, and ensuring their efficient accomplishment.

Mcswain (2010), of Lincoln University also defines leadership as a capacity, which implies

that, the capacity of a leader is to listen and observe, and to use their expertise as a starting

point to encourage dialogue between all levels of decision-making, to establish processes and

transparency in decision making, and to articulate their own values and visions clearly but not

to impose them. Furthermore, Hunt and Osborn (2000) define leadership as a case of

interpersonal influence that get individuals, or groups of people to do what the leader wants to

be done. This implies that the leader’s focus is on what he/she wants from people. Therefore,

followers‟ input is not encouraged with regard to what it is to be done.

However, Maxwell (1999) has a different opinion; he argues that the leader’s attention is on

what he/she can put into people rather than what he/she can get out of them, so as to build the

kind of relationship that promotes and increase productivity in the organization. Recently, the

focus of leadership has shifted from bureaucracy (in which the leader tends to directs others

and make decision for others to implement) to non-bureaucracy, the perception where
leadership appears to emphasise motivation, inclusion and empowerment of followers. For

example, Jaques and Clement (1991) define leadership as a process in which an individual sets

direction for other people and carries them along in that direction with competence and

productivity. This approach emphasis is on transformation that brings positive change in the

organization, groups, interpersonal relationships and the environment.

Both the old and new concepts of leadership appear to agree on some characteristics of

leadership. For example, both agree that leadership does not take place in isolation. Rather, it

takes place in the process of two or more people interacting and the leader seeks to influence

the behaviour of other people. However, to a large extent, the old concept of leadership is based

on exercising power over followers to maintain the status quo, while the new perspective is

based on continuous improvement and power sharing with the followers. The old concept of

leadership is based on downward exercise of power and authority while the new seeks to

develop respect and concern for the followers and see them as a powerful source of knowledge,

creativity and energy for improving the organization.

2. Concept of Leadership

Leadership is a concept that originally developed in folk psychology to explain social influence

on groups (Calder, 1977). Many people believe that leadership is simply being the first, biggest

or most powerful. Leadership in organizations has different and more meaningful definitions.

Very simply put, a leader is interpreted as someone who sets direction in an effort and

influences people to follow that direction. Leadership is the process by which a person exerts

influence over people and inspires, motivates, and directs their activities to help achieve groups

or organizational goals. Therefore leadership is the ability to influence a group towards the

achievement of goals.

The source of this influence may be formal as a result of one possessing a managerial rank in

an organization or informal such as non-sanctioned leadership, which is the ability to influence

that arises outside the formal structure of the organization. The informal structure of leadership

is as important if leadership is the result of the interaction among leaders, the followers and the

leadership situation. The leadership process contains all these elements. Leadership generally

is regarded as essential to group and organizational effectiveness. Thus, leadership contributes

significantly in the success and failure of organization. It tends to be based on position,

authority and seniority; for example, commitment is highly associated with loyalty to the top

boss in China (Chen and Francesco, 2000). Effective leadership in organization, therefore,

creates vision of the future that considers the legitimate long term interest of the parties

involved in the organization to develop a strategy for moving forward towards that vision

enlists the support of employees to produce the movement and motivates employees to

implement the strategy.

Likert (1961) identified several leadership classifications systems. First, it is the exploitative

approach, which manages all decisions and informs subordinates of those decisions. Secondly,

it is the benevolent autocrat who employs a paternalistic approach to leadership. Thirdly, it is

the consultation style, where the manager asks subordinate for input in decision-making and

typically exercises general rather than close supervision. The participative style totally

integrates workers in the decision making process. Leadership and supervision by supervisors

is presumed to be necessary in order to initiate structure and direct subordinates towards

organizational goals.

3. Leadership theories

Various leadership paradigms have been used to describe leadership and leadership

effectiveness. Leadership paradigm has changed over the last decades; it has transited from the

traditional leadership to the new perspectives. Chen and Tjosvold, (2006) categorize trait,

behavioural and situational or contingency theories under traditional leadership perspectives,

and charismatic and transformational leadership theories under the new leadership
perspectives. The focus of all theories on leadership is to determine organizational

effectiveness.

3.1. Great Man and Trait Theories

The great man theory is based on the idea that leaders are born with innate, unexplainable

leadership skills, which cause other people to see them as heroes. It is based on the opinion that

leaders are right and leadership is rooted in the authority of their righteousness. Leaders are

elevated by their followers on the ground of their unique qualities that others do not have. As

a result, followers do not doubt their leaders‟ judgments.

Trait theories are based on great man theories. Trait approach to the understanding of leadership

perceives leadership as the core of organization effectiveness and performance. Like the great

man theories, trait perspective assumes that great leaders are born with distinguished

traits/characteristics that make them different from other people. According to Sashkin and

Sashkin (2003), researchers like Ralph Stogdill, in his quest for the secret of great leaders,

review many research reports on leadership, based on the assumption that great leaders are

born. Sashkin and Sashkin (2003) indicate that Ralph Stogdill found that leaders were a bit

more intelligent, outgoing, creative, assertive, responsible, taller and heavier than average

people.

3.2. Behavioural Theories

The results of the trait studies were inconclusive. Traits, amongst other things, were hard to

measure. How, for example, do we measure traits such as honesty, integrity, loyalty, or

diligence? Another approach in the study of leadership had to be found. Behavioural leadership

perspective assumes, like trait leadership perspectives, that leadership is central to

organizational performance. However, the focus is on leader’s behaviour rather than leader’s
personal traits/characteristics. The behavioural types of leadership that will be examined are

McGregor‟s Theory X and Theory Y Managers and Blake and Mouton's leadership grid.

3.2.1. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y Managers

McGregor (1960) proposed that leadership strategies are influenced by a leader's assumptions

about human nature. As a result of his experience as a consultant, McGregor summarized two

contrasting sets of assumptions made by managers in industry. He developed two attitude

profiles, or assumptions, about the basic nature of people. These attitudes were termed „Theory

X and Theory Y. McGregor maintained that many leaders in essence subscribe to either Theory

X or Theory Y and behave accordingly.

3.2.2. Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid

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. The grid, with concern for production on the horizontal axis and a concern

for people on the vertical axis, plots five basic leadership styles. The first number refers to a

leader's production or task orientation and the second, to people or employee orientation.

Blake and Mouton propose that “Team Management” - a high concern for both employees and

production - is the most effective type of leadership behaviour.

3.3. The Contingency or Situational School

Whilst behavioural theories may help managers develop particular leadership behaviours they

give little guidance as to what constitutes effective leadership in different situations. Indeed,

most researchers today conclude that no one leadership style is right for every manager under

all circumstances. Instead, contingency-situational theories were developed to indicate that the

style to be used is contingent upon such factors as the situation, the people, the task, the
organization, and other environmental variables. The major theories contributing towards this

school of thought are described below.

3.3.1. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory

Fiedler was the first to develop this leadership theory, which shows that situational variable

interacts with a leader’s personality and behaviour. Fiedler (1967) believes that there is no

single best way for managers to lead. Situations will create different leadership style

requirements for a manager. The solution to a managerial situation is contingent on the factors

that impinge on the situation. For example, in a highly routine (mechanistic) environment

where repetitive tasks are the norm, a relatively directive leadership style may result in the best

performance. However, in a dynamic environment a more flexible, participative style may be

required.

Fiedler looked at three situations that could define the condition of a managerial task:

(i) Leader member relations: How well do the manager and the employees get along?

(ii) Task structure: Is the job highly structured, fairly unstructured, or somewhere in

between?

(iii) Position power: How much authority does the manager possess?

3.3.2 The Hersey-Blanchard Model of Leadership

The Hersey-Blanchard Leadership Model also takes a situational perspective of leadership.

(Hersey and Blanchard1977) work was based on Ohio studies on leadership. This model posits

that the developmental levels of a leader's subordinates play the greatest role in determining

which leadership styles (leader behaviours) are most appropriate. Their theory is based on the

amount of direction (task behaviour) and socio-emotional support (relationship behaviour) a

leader must provide given the situation and the "level of maturity" of the followers Hersey and

Blanchard’s (1993).
• Task behaviour is the extent to which the leader engages in spelling out the duties and

responsibilities to an individual or group. This behaviour includes telling people what to do,

how to do it, when to do it, where to do it, and who's to do it. In task behaviour the leader

engages in one-way communication.

• Relationship behaviour is the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multi-way

communications. This includes listening, facilitating, and supportive behaviours. In

relationship behaviour the leader engages in two-way communication by providing socio

emotional support.

• Maturity is the willingness and ability of a person to take responsibility for directing his or

her own behaviour. People tend to have varying degrees of maturity, depending on the

specific task, function, or objective that a leader is attempting to accomplish through their

efforts. In summary therefore leader behaviours fall along two continuum:

For Hersey and Blanchard the key situational variable when determining the appropriate

leadership style is the readiness or developmental level of the subordinate(s). As a result, four

leadership styles result:

• Directing: The leader provides clear instructions and specific direction. This style

is best matched with a low follower readiness level.

• Coaching: The leader encourages two-way communication and helps build

confidence and motivation on the part of the employee, although the leader still has

responsibility and controls decision making. Selling style is best matched with a

moderate follower readiness level.

• Supporting: With this style, the leader and followers share decision making and no

longer need or expect the relationship to be directive. Participating style is best

matched with a moderate follower readiness level.

 • Delegating: This style is appropriate for leaders whose followers are ready to

accomplish a particular task and are both competent and motivated to take full

responsibility. Delegating style is best matched with a high follower readiness level.

3.3.3 Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum

Contingency theorists Tannenbaum and Schmidt suggested the idea that leadership behaviour

varies along a continuum and that as one moves away from the autocratic extreme the amount

of subordinate participation and involvement in decision taking increases. They also suggested

that the kind of leadership represented by the democratic extreme of the continuum will be

rarely encountered in formal organizations.

Four main leadership styles can be located at points along such a continuum:

• Autocratic: The leader takes the decisions and announces those expecting subordinates

to carry them out without question (the Telling style).

• Persuasive: At this point on the scale the leader also takes all the decisions for the

group without discussion or consultation but believes that people will be better

motivated if they are persuaded that the decisions are good ones. He or she does a lot

of explaining and 'selling' in order to overcome any possible resistance to what he or

she wants to do. The leader also puts a lot of energy into creating enthusiasm for the

goals he or she has set for the group (the Selling style).

• Consultative: In this style the leader confers with the group members before taking

decisions and, in fact, considers their advice and their feelings when framing decisions.

He or she may, of course, not always accept the subordinates' advice but they are likely

to feel that they can have some influence. Under this leadership style the decision and

the full responsibility for it remain with the leader but the degree of involvement by

subordinates in decision taking is very much greater than telling or selling styles (the

Consulting style).
 • Democratic: Using this style the leader would characteristically lay the problem before

his or her subordinates and invite discussion. The leader's role is that of conference

leader, or chair, rather than that of decision taker. He or she will allow the decision to

emerge out of the process of group discussion, instead of imposing it on the group as

its boss (the Joining style).

What distinguishes this approach from previous discussions of leadership style is that there will

be some situations in which each of the above styles is likely to be more appropriate than the

others.

• Telling: In an emergency, a telling style may be most appropriate and would normally

be considered justified by the group (as long as the general climate of that group is

supportive and mature).

• Selling: The selling style would tend to fit situations in which the group leader, and he

or she alone, possesses all the information on which the decision must be based and

which at the same time calls for a very high level of commitment and enthusiasm on

the part of group members if the task is to be carried through successfully.

• Consulting: The consulting style is likely to be most appropriate when there is time in

which to reach a considered decision and when the information on which the decision

needs to be based lies among the members of the group.

• Joining: The joining style is appropriate under similar conditions, with the important

exception that this is likely to be appropriate only in those instances where the nature

of the responsibility associated with the decision is such that group members are willing

to share it with their leader, or alternatively the leader is willing to accept responsibility

for decisions which he or she has not made personally.

3.3.4 Adair’s Action-Centred Leadership Model

The Adair model is that the action centred leader gets the job done through the work team and

relationships with fellow managers and staff. According to Adair's explanation an action-

centred leader must:

• direct the job to be done (task structuring)

• support and review the individual people doing it

• co-ordinate and foster the work team as a whole FHis famous three-circle diagram is

a simplification of the variability of human interaction, but is a useful tool for thinking

about what constitutes an effective leader/manager in relation to the job he/she has to

do. The effective leader/manager carries out the functions and exhibits the behaviours

depicted by the three circles. Situational and contingent elements call for different

responses by the leader. Hence imagine that the various circles may be bigger or

smaller as the situation varies, the leader will give more or less emphasis to the

functionally-oriented behaviours according to what the actual situation involves. The

challenge for the leader is to manage all sectors of the diagram:

3.3.5 The Path-Goal Leadership Model

Path-goal model is rooted in motivation theories of goal setting and expectancy. The authors,

House and Mitchell (as reported by Oluwatoyin, 2006) use this leadership model to explain

how a leader’s behaviour influences the performance and satisfaction of the subordinates.

According to Oluwatoyin (2006), the fundamental principle of this model is that leadership

behaviour should be motivating and satisfying to the extent that it increases goal attainment by

subordinates and clarifies the behaviour that will lead to these goals/rewards. The following

are the four kinds of leaders‟ behaviour:

(a) Directive leadership style

Directive leadership style is similar to the task-oriented style. The leader who uses this type of

leadership style provides teachers with specific guidelines, rules and regulations with regard to

planning, organizing and performing activities. This style is deemed to be appropriate when

subordinates‟ ability is low and or the task to be performed is complex or ambiguous. Job

satisfaction is increased when the leader gives more directives (Hoy and Miskel 2001).

(b) Supportive leadership style

Supportive leadership style is more of a relationship-oriented style. It requires the leader to be

approachable and friendly. He/she displays concern for the well-being and personal needs of

the subordinates. He/she creates an emotionally supportive climate. This style is effective when

subordinates lack self-confidence, work on dissatisfying or stressful tasks and work does not

provide job satisfaction (Hoy and Miskel 2001).

(c) Participative leadership style

The leader who employs this style consults with subordinates for ideas and takes their ideas

seriously when making decisions. This style is effective when subordinates are well motivated

and competent (Lussier and Achua 2001).

(d) Achievement-oriented style

In this style, the leader sets challenging but achievable goals for the subordinates. He/she

pushes work improvement and sets high expectations for subordinates and rewards them when

the expectations are met. That is, the leader provides both high directive (structure) and high

supportive (consideration) behaviour. This style works well with achievement oriented

subordinates (Lussier and Achua 2001).

3.3.6 The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Normative Contingency Model

Vroom and Jago (1988) assert that this model, like the path-goal theory, describes how a leader

should behave in certain contingencies to enhance effectiveness. It is based on one aspect of

leader behaviour and that is subordinates‟ involvement in decision-making. The authors

assume that a leader may exhibit different leadership styles; this is particularly important when

it comes to the decision-making process. The leader should be able to know when to take charge

and when he/she should allow the group to take decisions (Vroom and Jago 1988).

Vroom and Jago (1988) propose that there is no leadership style that is appropriate for all

situations. It therefore follows that a leader develops a series of responses ranging from

autocratic to consultative and applies the leadership style that is appropriate to the decision

situation. The assumption is that the leader has to adapt his/her style to the situation. These

authors suggest five decision-making styles, each requiring a different degree of participation

by the subordinates. The styles are based on two variable factors: individual or group decisions

and time-driven or development-driven decisions.

3.4 Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership is a process in which the leaders take actions to try to increase

their associates' awareness of what is right and important, to raise their associates' motivational

maturity and to move their associates to go beyond the associates' own self-interests for the

good of the group, the organization, or society. Such leaders provide their associates with a

sense of purpose that goes beyond a simple exchange of rewards for effort provided. The

transformational leaders are proactive in many different and unique ways. These leaders

attempt to optimize development, not just performance. Development encompasses the

maturation of ability, motivation, attitudes, and values. Such leaders want to elevate the

maturity level of the needs of their associates (from security needs to needs for achievement

and self-development). They convince their associates to strive for a higher level of

achievement as well as higher levels of moral and ethical standards. Through the development

of their associates, they optimize the development of their organization as well. High

performing associates build high performing organizations.

Hooper and Potter (1997) extend the notion of transformational leadership to identify seven

key competences of “transcendent leaders”: those able to engage the emotional support of their

followers and thus effectively transcend change.

(i) Setting direction

(ii) Setting an example

(iii) Communication

(iv) Alignment

(v) Bringing out the best in people

(vi) The leader as a change agent

(vii) Providing decision in a crisis and on the ambiguous

3.5 Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership has been the traditional model of leadership with its roots from an

organisational or business perspective in the „bottom line‟. Bass and Avolio (1997) describe

the transactional leadership style as based on traditional bureaucratic authority and legitimacy.

Transactional leaders are able to entice subordinates to perform and thereby achieve desired

outcomes by promising those rewards and benefits for the accomplishment of tasks (Bass,

1990).

Bass describes the transactional leader’s relationship with the subordinates as having three

phases. Firstly, he recognises what subordinates want to get from their work and ensures that

they get what they want given that their performance is satisfactory. Secondly, rewards and

promises of rewards are exchanged for employee’s effort. Lastly, the leader responds to his

employee’s immediate self-interests if they can be met through completing the work.

Transactional leaders are those leaders who implement structure and are understanding towards

their employees (Senior, 1997).

The focal point of transactional leadership is on role elucidation. The leader assists the follower

in understanding precisely what needs to be achieved in order to meet the organisation’s

objectives (Bass, 1985). Leaders who display a transactional leadership style define and

communicate the work that must be done by their followers, how it will be done, and the

rewards their followers will receive for completing the stated objectives (Burns, 1978, et al).

3.6 Democratic Leadership

Democratic leadership style is exhibited where the focus of power is more towards the group

as a whole, and where there is greater interaction within the group (Mullins, 2002), the manager

shares the leadership functions with members of the group where he or she takes part as a team

member. The manager would characteristically lay the problem before the subordinates and

invite discussion. In this respect the manager’s role is to be a conference leader rather than that

of decision taker. The manager allows the decision to emerge out of the process of the group

discussion, instead of imposing it on the group as a boss. This leadership style is appropriate

only in instances where the nature of the responsibility associated with the decision is such that

group members are willing to share with their manager, or alternatively the manager is willing

to accept responsibility for decisions, which he or she has not made personally.

3.7 Autocratic Leadership

In autocratic leadership, the manager retains most authority for himself and makes decision

with the mind that subordinates will implement it. He is not bothered about attitudes of the

subordinates toward a decision; he is rather concerned about getting the task done. He tells the

staff what to do and how to do it, asserts himself and serves as an example for the subordinates.

This style is viewed as task-oriented (Dubrin, 1998). This style is similar to Likert’s I and II

leadership styles.
With the authoritarian style, the focus of power is more with the manager, and all interactions

within the group also move towards the manager. According to Mullins (2002), the manager

solely exercises decision-making and authority for determining policy, procedures for

achieving goals, work tasks and relationships, and control of rewards or punishments.

However, this style would be most appropriate in emergency situations, and would normally

be considered justified by the group, that is, where the general climate of the group is supportive

and mature.

3.8 Laissez-Faire Leadership

Mullins (2006) describes laissez-faire style as genuine and it is where the manager observes

subordinates‟ working well on their own. The manager consciously makes a decision to

delegate the focus of power to subordinates, and allow them freedom of action „to do as they

think best‟ and not to interfere; but is readily available if help is needed. According to Mullins,

there is often confusion over this style of leadership behaviour. The word „genuine‟ described

by Mullins (2006) is emphasised because it is to be contrasted with the manager who could not

care, or who deliberately keeps away from the trouble spots and does not want to get involved.

Furthermore, the manager allows subordinates to get on with their work at hand, and again they

are left to face decisions, which rightly belong with the manager. The manager gives almost all

authority and control to subordinates. There is no person of authority in the organisation.

3.9 Paternalistic Leadership

Paternalistic leadership is an approach that is based, intentionally or unintentionally, on the

idea that the leader is in a better position than the followers to know best what is good for the

organization, or the followers. In a nutshell it's the "leader as expert father figure”. In today's

climate where participation and involvement in the workplace are much more popular than

before, the paternalistic leader often acts in ways that many leadership gurus would criticize.
The reality is that most leaders sometimes act in paternalistic ways, and make decisions on

behalf of followers that work out well, and it's also a reality that leaders sometimes (or in fact,

often) are in positions that allow them to have information and expertise that others in the

organization may lack. The issue is whether leaders acting in paternal type roles make decisions

that would be better than if followers made them or had extensive input into them. However,

when paternalistic leadership incorporates an over inflated ego, and a strong refusal to keep in

touch with followers in an organization, it's often the case that the leader becomes harmfully

dictatorial and makes poor decisions.

4.1 What is a team

Teamwork and teambuilding are closely connected with teams. At the beginning we need to

know what the term team means. It can be perceived as an abbreviation of words Together,

Everybody, Achieves and More. But here is a difference between a group and a team. In a team

people cooperate to accomplish a time limited goal and they are depended on each other. On

the other hand in a group people can work separately. There is a big difference when it comes

to a number of members. There are usually five to nine members in a team while in a group

there is no limit. Another indicators which define a team are equality, rules, specified team

roles, good and effective communication, a trust and many more. (Horváthová, 2008,

Kolajová, 2008)

4.1 Importance of teams

In today's world people could not work without a team in a wide range of jobs. A lot of work

could not be done just by one person because of its demands which need more people's effort,

they can inspire each other and share their skills, they can put their heads together and come

up with more solutions, they are successful as a collective. But it does not mean that an

individual cannot benefit from being a member of a team. One can improve a huge number of

skills such as better communication, new findings and knowledge, cooperation with other
people and participation in a bigger unit and working in an effective way. (Mears, Peter, and

Frank Voehl, 1994, Horváthová, 2008)

4.2 Functions of a team

Functions of the team can be divided into two elemental groups – formal team and informal

team.

4.2.1 Formal team

Formal team is created for example by a boss of an organization. It has several functions such

as solving complicated task, forming new ideas and creative solutions, cooperation among

company's departments, finding alternatives, learning and developing members in a

professional way. Formal team can be long-lasting as well as temporary just for a purpose to

solve a problem.

4.2.2 Informal team

Informal team serves as an implement for accomplishing goal which are not connected with a

job but for example with free time activities. They develop naturally without directions from

management. Its functions are: strengthening friendship and necessity of appreciation,

restriction of uncertainty, help with interpersonal problems. If there is a formal team in a

workplace it does not mean there cannot arise an informal team.

(Kolajová, 2008)

4.3 Types of teams

Teams are used for different purposes and can be classified according to their intention. There

are many types of teams we can define, I would like to focus on the most common ones.

4.3.1 Permanent teams

Permanent teams work on a permanent basis. They are usually not created for solving a

particular task and dissolved after achieving a goal. They are long-lasting. But even it is

permanent, such team's work can change and members are replaced if needed.
4.3.2 Temporary teams

Temporary teams function as long as a project is not finished. Such teams are formed usually

for shorter time and team members can work in some other tasks. It can also happen that a

temporary team can be formed in order to help the permanent team especially when there is

excess of work in a company.

4.3.3 Virtual teams

Virtual teams consist of people who are not located in a same place or are separated. They can

be in different cities or even countries. They use technology, especially computers, to

communicate among team members.

4.3.4 Task force

Task force is a team which is created for a special purpose. Existence of such team is usually

temporary. Task force consists of very well skilled people, usually experts, whose work is to

solve a specific a clearly-defined problem.

4.3.5 Cross – functional teams

Cross-functional teams consist of people from different areas but they should be on the same

(hierarchical) level. Their task is to put their heads together and come up with different views

and aspects to achieve a goal. They develop their ideas and exchange information

4.3.6 Self – managed teams

Self-managed teams operate without any leader or supervisor. As there is no position of

authority, members have to respect each other and every member has his own responsibility

for his performance. (Bay, 2000)

4.4 Creation of a team

While making a team we build grounds of its further development and course. We need to

consider who is suitable for being a leader, size of a team, composition of a team and a goal

which needs to be accomplished.

4.4.1 Team size

There are various opinions of a number of members. It is said that optimal number is seven.

Members in such team must represent sufficient diversity of their knowledge, experiences and

skills. The size must enable to transfer information and arguments among people. Every

member has a right to express himself and say his opinion. If a team is too big there is a danger

that sub-teams could appear. But sometimes, especially when a task is too complicated, sub-

teams can be created and have their own duties. (Horváthová, 2008) We can easily find out if

a team has an optimal size using seven questions:

1. Can the team meet regularly without any bigger demands on coordination?

2. Does anyone know roles and distribution of duties?

3. Has every member of the team a chance to express himself?

4. Do all members participate actively so it means that “chronic chatterboxes“ have no

chance and the others do not remain in a passive consumer attitude?

5. Do real team meetings exist or just debates between two or three people?

6. Does the team produce new impulses?

7. Has the team its necessary dynamics or members just sit through the whole time?

(Krüger, 2004)

4.4.2 Team members

Composition of a team is an important condition for its successful functioning. We need to take

into account several factors while choosing team members:

Professional qualification depends on assigned task which has to be solved by a team.

Before we start building a team we should collect all requirements which are connected

with the task. After that we can compare abilities of team members who have required

skills and then we can find out everything what is needed for the development of the

team.
 Personal characteristics are important factor while choosing team members.

Suitable attributes are: responsibility, creativity, self-reliance, flexibility, reliability,

loyalty, good communication skills, empathy etc. Unsuitable attributes are: conflict

behavior, pessimism, complaining, hostility etc. People with those characteristics

are appropriate for teamwork. (Horváthová, 2008)

4.5 Team stages

For building a strong team it is important to know how to work with other team members and

how to explore their strengths and weaknesses in order to maximize the effectiveness of the

team. Because the team goes through developing all the time it is necessary to go through four

team stages.

4.5.1 Forming

Forming is the starting stage when a team is formed for a first time, individuals first meet and

come together and set up the rules. Some anxiety connected with high expectations can appear

so there is needed a lot of patience and understanding. In forming stage the team should focus

on establishing a purpose, goals and roles. The team leader deals with team direction, trust and

strengthening his authority.

4.5.2 Storming

Storming is the most difficult stage. Team members tend to realize that the task is difficult and

they can start to panic. Conflict, power and control are the most common issues confronting

the team and its leader. The team leader should focus on trust and review the ground rules and

there is also time for discussions.

4.5.3 Norming

Norming is the point when team members start to cooperate, help one another, become

dependent and get over conflicts. The main issues of norming are understanding each other,

respect and sharing responsibility. In this stage everybody knows what to do and why. The
team leader should delegate more responsibility on other team members. This is also a good

time for feedback.

4.5.4 Performing

Performing is the most important and highly effective stage because the team already performs

as a team and not as individuals. Team members are satisfied with the team's progress and they

support one another. They can also handle their interpersonal conflicts. The main issue of

performing is moving ahead to achieve the goal. (Mears, Peter, and Frank Voehl, 1994)

4.6 Team roles

There are many theories how we can define team roles. One of the most popular is Belbin's

theory.

4.6.1 People oriented roles

 Coordinator
This person can also be called a chairman. This role is connected with democratic and gentle

style of direction. He can lead the other people to fulfill their collective goal. Coordinator is a

self-confident person who trusts the team. He is able to recognize which abilities are beneficial

for a good-working team. He is kind and friendly, sensitive and trustful and he can improvise

very well. He prefers success of the whole team before himself but he is easily suggestible by

the other team members. Development of the team and self-realization of his subordinates

motivate him.

Team worker

It is a friendly person who is interested in other's opinions. He likes helping the others. Team

worker is perceptive and he perceives positive sides of people. He prevents conflicts, he is a

good listener and he can empathize with the others. He is happy when the others are happy too.

He can make nice atmosphere and weld the other members together, he is easygoing and

sensitive. On the other hand team worker is a feeble person who cannot take a stand and decide

in key situations. Good interpersonal relationships and atmosphere in the team motivate him.
 Resource investigator

This one is very dynamic, communicative, lively and energetic team member. He is able to

discover new contacts, opportunities and sources. Everything new is a challenge for him and it

makes him behave actively. He makes contribution to negotiate relationships between the team

and the rest of the world, he is able to establish crucial contacts. Resource investigators are

creative, open-minded, flexible and quick-witted. Sometimes he can be too impulsive and

optimistic, his enthusiasm for a given thing is usually not longlasting. Changes and achieving

new goals motivate him.

4.6.2 Action oriented roles

 Shaper
This team role is connected with authoritative and directive style of team direction. He creates

rules and explains the others what should be done. He is very energetic, patient, purposeful,

competitive and stubborn, he reacts very emotionally to every form of incompetence. He

pressures people to work and is very concerned about deadlines. Other members consider him

impulsive, quick-tempered and sometimes he inclines to insult the others. Performance, good

results and competitiveness motivate him.

 Implementer

This is a very practical, disciplined and task-oriented person. He likes rules and regulations

and he struggles to observe them. He does not like breaking the rules and chaos. Implementer

is very reliable, conscientious, responsible and has good organizational abilities. He can put

ideas into action. But he can be very inflexible and strict. He is respectful to other's rules but

he likes especially creating his own rules. Set of rules, clearly defined goals and regulations

motivate him.

Completer finisher
He has a talent to feel what could go wrong. He is a perfectionist concentrated on details. He is

a typical introvert. He is not very trustful, does not like delegating tasks and consider the other

member to be unreliable. Completer ensures there have been no errors or omissions and he

pays attention to the smallest details. He is very concerned with deadlines and pushes the team

to make sure the job is completed on time. Sometimes he can be neurotic and anxious. Perfect

result of the work motivates him.

4.6.3 Thought oriented roles

 Specialist
This is someone who has specialized technical skills. The only thing he is interested in is field

of his activity. He is ready to sacrifice his free time, career and even health for his development.

He never leaves a work unfinished. He is very purposeful and devoted to his job. He is usually

interested in one area what leads to isolation and discourages him from staying on top of things.

Developments of his technical skills and knowledge and gaining new experiences motivate

him.

Plant

This team member is very creative and he always comes with new ideas. Plant is a bearer of

changes. While working he prefers his own methods which can be unusual. He uses his

imagination. Plant is not very communicative, he is silent and usually work apart from the

team. Because his ideas are often so original, they can be impractical. He may tend to ignore

given parameters and deadlines. New solutions and ideas and creative access motivate him.

Monitor-evaluator

He is the best at analyzing and evaluating ideas that other people come up with. He can be

critical and objective. He always carefully weighs pros and cons of all options before coming

to a decision. He is rarely mistaken. Monitor-evaluator is cautious and conscientious but also

can be pessimistic and neurotic. He gives impression of being boring and too critical person.

Success, prevention of mistakes and a clear outcome motivate him. (Horváthová, 2008)

4.7 Team leadership

On the one hand leading team is considered to be the most important factor which influences

quality of team work, on the other hand team leading has a tendency to be overestimated what

lead to unrealistic expectations and requirements for leading a team. The term leading can be

shortly defined as conditions which allow workers fulfill their tasks effectively and

individually. A team always needs to be leaded but it depends on the situation how much it

needs to be directed.

4.7.1 Team leader

The leader is responsible for being sure that everything gets according to the plan and has to

make the team work together to finish the project successful. Good leaders know how to

motivate and inspire the team in all situations. A good leader never leaves his team without

offering his support and guidance because he understands how much and what kind of support

each team member needs in order to fulfill his duty in a task. A leader understands and respects

all strengths and weaknesses of the people who work for him as well as his own. Those

strengths should be used effectively in every part of a project and it means that leader has to

choose right people.

A team could never work efficiently unless everyone knows his role because there are many

people working together who need to be organized.. A leader gives team members specific

responsibilities according to their experience and job description. Team leader's responsibilities

are building an effective and strong team and of course a successful outcome of a task or

project.
The leader's job is not to do all the work himself, but his role is rather observational. He should

supervise projects and he is empowered to make any needed changes while achieving work

goals. Effective leaders must develop in team members a taste for work. (Plamínek, 2005)

4.7.2 Duties of a team leader

Duties of a team leader focus mainly on reaching work goals through other people – we can

say that he uses people to achieve results. As it was already mentioned, s team leader supervises

the rest of the team and is responsible for the work of team members. Team leader's job

descriptions typically include training, supervising, informing, helping and evaluating a group

of people to complete tasks or projects.

Like all types of managers and supervisors, team leaders must motivate and inspire their group

to work in the best interest of the company. Team leaders take an unconditional responsibility

for the team's performance and it does not matter if it's good or bad. A leader's best interest is

to make sure that every team member is contributive and works to his fullest potential.

Team leaders must always bolster group relationships by building respect and trust between the

members. When team members work together successfully and receive help and support a

working group becomes strong and productive.

Team leaders typically assemble team meetings. At the beginning a team leader gives clear

instructions and he should also ask members if they have any ideas and suggestions. A good

leader usually combines ideas from members with his own visions.

4.7.3 Team motivation

Team motivation belongs to basic features which a team leader has to deal with. Motivational

factors are always various and they differ in approach to every team member. We can say that

team motivation is very individual. Individual approach is a necessary factor for successful

motivation. Even a good leadership and a commitment of a leader can motivate the team. A

good team leader has to know how and when motivate individual team members and how
influence the whole team as one unit. It is not just high salary that can motivate. There are

several factors which are important for team members:

In what way are they led and if the leadership is high-quality.

If their work is attractive and brings satisfaction.

If there are good working conditions which support their effective work.

How suitable is a reward and on the other hand how much are they penalized in case

of bad performance. (Horváthová, 2008, Plamínek, 2005)

4.7.4 Coaching
Nowadays coaching means a specialized activity of a coach which includes an interaction with

a team. Its aim is establishing of goals, finding possibilities for reaching goals and overcoming

obstacles and planning movements of goals reaching. Coaching helps teams to develop and

make better performance. It is an individual form of workers' progress. The coach teaches new

skills and knowledge and workers participate actively.

There are three basic principles of coaching:

Setting the goals - a leader does not set the goals directive. He should determine

particular goals together with a worker and such goals lead to achieving the final goal.

The worker is more motivated when he is involved in setting his goals and at the same

time he is able to evaluate if the goals are achievable. In coaching is important to set

the goals gradually so that every further goal is just a little more complicated than the

previous one. This leads to successful overcoming all possible obstacles. A very

difficult task assigned at one fling can become discouraging. In that case it is necessary

to divide such task into several partial steps.

Asking questions - instead of giving orders, a leader should ask questions which lead to

worker's participation in particular problem and makes him think about the problem,

not just carry out the order without hesitation. The worker can find the solution himself
 and that makes him understand the point of his work and how and why the work has to

be done in a specific way. Quality of his work is higher and in case of changes of

conditions he can flexibly react to new conditions.

Feedback - it is necessary to be concrete, not to assess a worker but his work. Leaders

often evaluate a work in general not concrete. They do not explain what was done right

and wrong, they just give general information about overall quality of performance. It

is better to give concrete information about priorities and imperfections of the work

which was done.

4.7.5 Synergy

Team synergy is an important effect of teams. Synergy is interaction among a team which

causes a bigger effectiveness. It means that the team is more productive working together than

working individually. Such thing can be demonstrated by synergistic equation 1+1=3. When

synergy is achieved a team can experience higher performance and the level of teamwork grows

because it works as a team energizer. Synergy is a state which a team can reach by a high

motivation, strong relationships and trust among team members. Team synergy usually appears

(and is essential) in self-managed teams because the members are equal and accountable to

each other not to a leader. Major elements of team synergy:

Listening and clarifying mean that team members pay attention and perceive

directions given by talking person. They have to concentrate on understanding of

what was said. When there is more than one conversation running it leads firstly

to interruption and secondly to loss of important information and ideas and to

misunderstanding. A good way how to get over difficulty of listening is using

visual aids (e.g. blackboards, presentations) to improve understanding of what was

said.
 Supporting involves creating a positive climate that encourages people to speak up

freely and offer their ideas. Team members must feel that they are all important

for a team.

Differing and confronting skills include the ability to present unpleasant or

opposing ideas openly without threatening anybody. It means avoiding

personalities and focusing only on the given problem.

Quality is a vital personal commitment. Team members must be ready to do quality

work, take their responsibilities and pay attention to details. Every team member

has to have a personal commitment to excellence.

Acceptance of any ideas which any of the team members come up with is needed.

Feedback is an essential condition for achieving goals. There two basic types of

feedback. The first one is expressed by achieving results and team effectiveness itself.

The second one is observation. A team member observes the rest of the team and after

that he informs the others at the meeting. (Wong, 2007)

5. Teambuilding

Teambuilding as a term firstly appeared in 1960s and it became a foundation stone of

management. Originally teambuilding was proposed as interpersonal relationships

improvement and social interaction between individuals. The main emphasis was put on trust,

harmony, making relationships and team cohesion. After that, when teambuilding became more

popular, attention was paid on realization of outcomes, achieving goals and fulfilling tasks.

Nowadays we use teambuilding in both aspects, how teams perform in their work and how

team members get on with one another.

Teambuilding is a tool for securing productive, effective and harmonic cooperation among

individuals and achieving goals. Teambuilding also is valuable for individual team members.

It helps the team to maximize their collective contribution to organization and connect their
personal goals with organization's goals. Teambuilding can be one event or sequence of events

in a longer period of time. (Payne, 2007, Horváthová, 2008)

Environment

Identify

the need
Evaluate Gain the

the impact commitment

Leader/trainer

Implement Assess needs

the results and give

Lead the

teambuilding

Environment

Picture 1: The six-step teambuilding process (Payne)

5.1 Necessity of teambuilding

There are several indicators which point to a necessity of teambuilding. Two most common

indicators are wrong task execution and bad interpersonal relationships. Teams usually need

teambuilding because their communication is poor, they do not meet deadlines, their attitude

to work is lax and many more similar problems.

Teambuilding helps the team solve problems faster. Postponing the teambuilding can endanger

team's productivity. Team leaders must start to solve team's problems on time and, what is

important, they must be interested in solving those problems.

5.2 Types of teambuilding activities

If there is an obvious need of teambuilding, a team leader (manager) has several possibilities

how to do teambuilding.
5.2.1 Experience method

It is a method how to learn from action and experience, how to gain maximum from the

experiences and get the knowledge which is needed. Experience method is a group learning.

The individuals can share their views (on the activity which they just finished) among

themselves and so they can learn together.

Experience method is built on several basic principles. One of them is the principle of the most

effective learning. The best way how to learn is to go through some actions and experience it

personally. The next principle is a feedback. When people do something together they can

speak about it. It is hard to speak about long-ago situations or about situations which

experienced just some of the participants. It is not necessary to learn everything, it is enough

to know what can help in particular situation.

The ground of the majority of experience methods is learning cycle (Kolb's cycle) which

consists of several points:

 CE - concrete experience

 RO - reflective observation - what actually happened and how it was perceived by

particular team members

 AC - abstract conceptualization - context understanding

 AE – active experimentation – how to use the known principles in the best way

5.2.2 Outdoor training

Outdoor training includes activities which are carried out outside the organization. This type of

teambuilding brings fun, action, unusual experience; it is done in an attractive environment and

is diverted from a work place. Outdoor trainings are more complicated for organizing because

of climatic conditions-they take place outside, often in nature.

5.2.3 Indoor training

Indoor training includes activities which are carried out on a work place, for example in

conference room or they can take place beyond the work place (but under the roof), for example

in a hotel. This type of teambuilding is less physically exacting, it is usually not so active and

attractive because it does not enable to do such activities which can be done in outdoors. Indoor

training is used together with educating and training. (Payne, 2007, Horváthová, 2008)

6. Mentorship

The concept of mentoring has been around for thousands of years, coming to us from Homers

Odyssey. Mentor was the teacher of Telemachus, the son of Odysseus. But Mentor was more

than a teacher. He was all things to all people half-god and half-human, half-male and half-

female. Mentor represented the union of both goal and path (Peterson, 1993).

As Mentor represented the yin and the yang of life, so also mentors must pull and push their

mentees. Mentoring requires strength in two different but complementary behaviors. First,

mentors must lead by guiding interaction with their mentees. Mentors invest themselves in

their mentees and uplift them. Secondly, Mentors must support mentees. Mentors push their

mentees to become their best by encouraging development in areas of expressed need in their

inventory.

Beyond these general parameters, what happens in a mentoring relationship has unlimited

potential. The appeal of mentoring is that it is oriented toward the needs of individuals.

Drawing a one-sizefits-all blueprint for effective mentoring would not be feasible. However,

mentoring is not a completely spontaneous endeavor. Based on years of experience, mentors

have collaborated and prepared guidelines for the many aspects of the mentoring relationship.

The following paragraphs will provide material to be used to further understanding of a

mentoring relationship, to initiate a relationship, and to enhance opportunities for success.

6.1. Who Is a Mentor?

A mentor plays many roles. In the historical sense, a mentor is one who:

• Is a loyal friend, confidant, and advisor.

• Is a teacher, guide, coach, and role model.

• Is entrusted with the care and education of another.

• Has knowledge or expertise to nurture another person of ability.

• Is willing to give what he or she knows with no expectation of reciprocation or

remuneration.

• Represents accomplishment, knowledge, skill, and virtue.

The most effective mentors offer support, challenge, patience, and enthusiasm while they guide

others to new levels of achievement. They expose their mentees to new ideas, perspectives, and

standards, and to the values and norms of society. Although mentors are more knowledgeable

and experienced, they do not view themselves as superior to those whom they mentor.

Once a person has decided to become a mentor, questions arise about how to establish a

productive mentoring relationship. Knowing the expected stages of a mentoring relationship,

as well as the mentees personal characteristics, family, and socio-economic status (race, gender,

age, economic status, family status) will alleviate many of these anxieties for the mentor.

Establishing a positive mentoring relationship is very much like establishing other valued

human relationships. Both parties must have a genuine desire to understand the values and

expectations of the other person, and both parties must become sensitive to the others feelings

and needs. At the same time, mentoring relationships differ from personal relationships because

they are professional in nature. Mentors are responsible for conveying and upholding the

norms, values, and goals that are mutually agreed upon in the mentoring contract.

For a mentoring relationship to be healthy, it must be evolutionary rather than static in

nature. The relationship changes because the purpose of the relationship is to enable the
mentee to acquire new knowledge, skills, and standards of social competence. The

perceptions of both members of the relationship evolve as the mentees performance reaches

new levels under the mentors guidance and support.

6.2. The Four Stages of a Mentoring Relationship

Any successful mentoring relationship will move through four definite stages. The time spent

in each one of these areas will differ from relationship to relationship, but the progression is

uniform.

6.2.1. Stage 1

The mentor and the mentee become acquainted and informally clarify their common interests,

shared values, and future goals and dreams. If taking time to become acquainted with one

anothers interests, values, and goals is given a high priority, the relationship seems to get off

to a better start.

In this stage, there may be a lack of communication, or difficulty in communicating. Mentees

may be reluctant to trust mentors, and may attempt to manipulate them. The relationship may

remain in this stage from one to six meetings.

In the professional world, individuals who have desired to become mentors have analyzed

aspiring newcomers in their field and have selected promising young protØgØs to nurture.

Most of these relationships work out very well. Even though the commonalities between the

mentor and the mentee in a community mentoring setting may be less than that of a mentoring

pair in a business setting, the methods of mentoring remain similar. Mentors must be careful

not to allow their preconceptions to dictate how they will approach the relationship and define

who they think the mentee should become.

While charting a course for her approach to the relationship, the mentor must consider three

factors:

• The relative eagerness the mentee brings to this relationship.

 • The similarities in your personal styles (animated, low-key; spontaneous, reflective;

gentle, harsh; reticent, boisterous).

• The similarities in your expected short- and long-term goals.

6.2.2. Stage 2

The mentor and mentee communicate initial expectations and agree upon some common

procedures and expectations as a starting point. In the less likely event that the two individuals

may not be compatible, the pair is able to part on a friendly basis. In stage 2, there will be more

listening, sharing, and confiding in one another. Values will be compared, and personal

concerns will be expressed. During this stage, the mentor will likely be introduced to the

mentees family. The relationship may remain in this stage from one to three months.

6.2.1. Stage 3

The mentor and the mentee begin to accomplish the actual purposes of mentoring. Gradually,

needs become fulfilled, objectives are met, and intrinsic growth takes place. New challenges

are presented and achieved. Stage 3 is the stage of acceptance, but it is also a stage of change,

where a mentee is more likely to exercise self-discipline.

6.2.2. Stage 4

The mentor and the mentee close their mentoring association and redefine their relationship.

Follow-up is conducted.

In summary, in the four stages the mentor and mentee will acquaint themselves with one

another, determine values and goals, achieve those goals, and close their relationship.
Benefits of Mentoring Strategy for Creating Organizational Teams

To be successful in today’s ever-changing business environment, leaders must learn and evolve

constantly, while also understanding followers’ needs, aspirations and motivations. A

structured workplace mentoring program can help cover all the bases. And these types of

initiatives are catching on: According to the Association for Talent Development, more than

70 percent of Fortune 500 companies have some type of mentorship program.

In lieu of a manager or coworker, employees can turn to their mentor for career guidance,

interpersonal development and to learn about company inner workings, for example. Some of

the benefits of using a mentoring program to dvelop teams include

Learning Culture

By publicizing a workplace mentoring program internally, a leader is creating a company

culture that values learning and development. Employees know their future is being invested

in if they’re paired with a mentor who can help guide their career development. Additionally,

a mentoring program promotes a collaborative learning environment where it is encouraged

that employees gain knowledge from those around them.

Personal and Professional Development

By pairing employees with a mentor who is tasked with guiding employees, a leader creates a

safe place for employees to learn. They are comfortable taking risks and making mistakes

because they understand they should constantly be learning. This feeds a culture of innovation

as well.

Cost of Learning

Many companies that have workplace mentoring programs also have formal learning and

development departments, but that doesn’t mean unlimited budgets. According to Brandon Hall

Group’s 2016 Training Benchmarking Study, companies choose the classroom for training
purposes 22 percent more than any modality, but coaching/mentoring is seen as more effective

(for the third consecutive year). In fact, coaching/mentoring was rated the most effective

method of learning. And its cost is minimal.

Stress and Anxiety

When faced with an issue at work, employees may think twice about going to their manager.

Teammates may not be able to help if they’ve never experienced the same issue. Or it may be

the case that an employee is having a problem with his/her manager or teammate. A workplace

mentor is someone they could always turn to for guidance no matter what the issue. Knowing

a mentor is always there to lend an ear can put an employee at ease.

Job Satisfaction and Turnover

According to a study published in the Plastic Surgical Nursing journal, the mentor

experience/relationship positively influenced job satisfaction of new hire nurse practitioners.

The mentoring experience provided a positive environment, leading to increased job

satisfaction. And a higher level of satisfaction is associated with reduced turnover and

improved retention and patient outcomes.

Mentor Benefits

The assumption is is that mentees will learn when paired with a mentor, but it turns out the

mentor actually benefits from the relationship too. According to a 2013 study, “Career Benefits

Associated with Mentoring for Mentors,” published in the Journal of Vocational Behavior,

mentors versus non-mentors were more satisfied with their jobs and had a stronger sense of

commitment to the organization as a whole.

Full Circle

When a new employee who’s assigned a mentor benefits from that relationship, the mentee will

be more likely to volunteer to do the same for the next onboarding employee. By creating a
formal program, employees will find it easier to join, follow guidelines and start making a

difference.
References

Adair, J. (1973), Action-Centred Leadership, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Adlam, R., & Villiers, P. (2003). Police leadership in the 21st century: Philosophy, doctrine
and developments. Waterside Press.
Amos, T.L., Ristow, A. and Ristow, L. 2004. Human Resource Management, 2nd Edition,
Lansdowne: Juta and Co Ltd.
Anderson, T.D., Ford, R. and Hamilton, M. (1998), Transforming Leadership: equipping a
leaderrself and coaching others to build leadership organization,6th edition, London:
St.Lucie Press.
Armstrong, M. and Baron, A. (1998), Performance Management – The New Realities, London:
IPD.
Baird, L. (1986), Managing Performance, New York: John Wiley.
Barling, J., Salter, F., and Kelloway, E.K. (2000), "Transformational leadership and EI: an
exploratory study", Learnership & Organizational Development Journal
Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1995), Changing the Role of Top Management Beyond Systems
to People, Harvard Business Review; 73(3), pp.132-142.
Bass, B. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Orgainizational Effectiveness through
Tranformational Leadership, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. and Goodheim, L. (1987). “Biography and the Assessment of
Transformational Leadership at a World Class Level”, Journal of Management
Bay, R. H. (2000). Účinné vedení týmů. Grada Publishing, as.
Belbin, R. M. (2012). Management teams. Routledge.
Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964), The Managerial Grid, Houston: Texas Gulf Publishing
Company.
Botha, J. (2001), The Relationship between Leadership, Internal Quality, and Customer
Satisfaction Levels of Dealerships in a South African Motor Vehicle Organisation.
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Grahamstown: Rhodes University.
Brand, C., Heyl, G. and Maritz, D. (2000). “Leadership”. In Meyer, M. and Botha, E.(eds).
Organisational Development and Transformation in South Africa. Durban:
Butterworths.
Brewster, C., Carey, L., Dowling, P., Grobler, P., Holland, P. and Warnich, S. (2003),
Contemporary Issues in Human Resource Management, Cape Town: Clyson Printers.
Burns, J.M., (1978), Leadership, New York; Harper and Row.
Cacioppe, R. (1997), Leadership Moment by Moment, Leadership and Organizational
Development Journal; 18(7), pp.335-345.
Calder, B. J. (1977). Focus groups and the nature of qualitative marketing research. Journal of
Marketing research, 14(3), 353-364.
Campbell, J., McCloy, R., Oppler, S. and Sager, C. (1993), The Theory of Performance, New
York: Jossey-Bass.
Chen, F. and Tjosvold, D. (2006), Participative leadership by American and Chinese managers
in China: The role of leadership, Journal of Management Studies; Vol. 43, Issue
8,pp.1725-1752.
Cherrington, D.J. (1994), Organisational Behaviour. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Collis, D.J. and Montgomery, C.A. (1995), Competing on Resources, Harvard Business
Review;73(4), pp.118-128.
Corvellec, H. (1995), Stories of Achievement: Narrative Features of Organizational
Performance, Sweden: Lund University Press.
Covey, S., (1992), Principle-Centered Leadership, Business e-COACH, Simon and Schuster.
Cummings, L.L. and Schwab D.P. (1973), Performance in Organizations: Determinants and
Appraisal, Glenview: Scott, Foresman ansd Company.
Dimma, W.A. (1989), Leadership, Business Qualities; Business Quaterly Report, 23(2),pp.20
41.121.
Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fiedler, F.E. (1987), Situational Theory: A theory of leadership effectiveness, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Fiedler, F.E. and House, R.J. (1988), Leadership Theory and Research, A Report of Progress
– International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Foot, M. and Hook, C. (1999), Introducing Human Resources Management, London:
Longman.
Gardener, L. and Stough, C. (2002), Examining the Relationship between Leadership and
Emotional Intelligence in Senior Level Managers, Leadership and Organization
Development Journal; 23(2), 66-78.
Goleman, et al (2002), Developing the leadership competencies of emotional intelligence.
London: Bloomsbury.
Griffin R. W. (1999), “Management”, 6th Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company Boston New
York.
Hater, J.J. and Bass, B.M. (1988), Superiors‟ evaluations and subordinates‟ perceptions of
transformational and transactional leadership: Journal of Applied Psychology.
Hayward, B.A., (2005), The Relationship between Employee Performance, Leadership and
Emotional Intelligence, a South African Parastatal Organization.
Hayward, G.A., Davidson, A.J., Pascoe, J.B., Tasker, M.L., Amos, T.L. and Pearse, N.J.
(2003), The Relationship between Leadership and Employee Performance in a South
African Pharmaceutical Company, Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology- 6th Annual Conference, pp.25-27, Sandton: Johannesburg.
Hellriegel, D., Jackson, S.E. and Slocum, J.W. (1999), Management, Cincinnati: South-
Western College Publishing.
Hendr ey, C. (1995), Human Resource Management: A Strategic Approach to
Employment,Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard K.H. (1977), Management of Organizagtional Behaviour,
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1988), Management of Organizational Behaviour: Utilizing
Human Resources, 5th Edition, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Holloway, J., Francis, G. and Hinton, M. (1999), A Vehicle for Change? A Case Study of
Performance Improvement in the New Public Sector, The International Journal of
Public Sector Management; Vol 12(4), pp.351-365.
Holy, W.K. and Miskel, C.G. (2001), Educational Administration: Theory, Research and
Practice. 6th edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hooper, P. and Potter, J. (1997), The Business of Leadership, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing
Company.
Horváthová, P. (2008). Týmy a týmová spolupráce. ASPI.
Howell, J.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993), Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership
Locus of Control and Support for Innovation: Key Predictors of Consolidated Business
Performance, Journal of Applied Psychology; Vol 78(1), pp.891-902.
Hughes, R., Ginnett, A. and Curphy, G. (1994), Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of
Experiences, New York: The Free Press.
Jacques, E., & Clement, S. D. (1991). Executive leadership. Arlington, VA: Cason-Hall & Co.
Jones, G.R. and George, J.M. (2000), Essentials of Managing Organisational Behaviour, Upper
Saddle River: Prentice-Hall
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), The Balance Scorecard, Boston: The Harvard Business
School Press
Kotter, J.P. (1988), The Leadership Factor, New York: The Free Press.
Krüger, W. (2004). Vedení týmů: jak sestavit, organizovat a povzbuzovat pracovní tým. Grada
Publishing as.
Likert, R. (1961), New Patterns of Management, McGraw-Hill.
Lussier, R.N. and Achua, C.F. (2001), Leadership: Theory, Application and Skill
Development, USA: South-West College Publishing.
Maritz, D., (1995), Leadership and Mobilizing Potential, Human Resource Management.
International Journal of Global Business; 10(1): 8-16.
Maxwell, C. (1999). “Spirituality? It’s the core of my leadership”: Empowering leadership in
an inclusive elementary school. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(2), 203-237.,
18(4), 319-340.
Maxwell, J.C. (1999), The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader: Becoming the Person Others
will want to Follow, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
McGregor, D. (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise, New York: McGraw Hill.
McSwain, L. L. (2010). Loving Beyond A leaderr Theology: The Life and Ministry of Jimmy
Raymond Allen. Mercer University Press.
Mears, P., & Voehl, F. (1994). Team building: A structured learning approach. CRC Press.
Mullins, L. (1999), Management and Organizational Behaviour, London: Pitman Publishing.
Mwita, J.I. (2000), Performance Management Model, A system-based approach to system
quality, the international Journal of Public Sector Management, Volume 13, No. 1,
pp.19-12
Neely, A., Gregory, M. and Platts, K. (1995). “Performance Measurement System Design”,
International Journal of Operational and Production Management.
Norton, D.P. (1999). The Balanced Scorecard: Participant‟s Workbook. Johannesburg:
Institute for International Research.
Osborn, R. N., & Hunt, J. G. J. (2007). Leadership and the choice of order: Complexity and
hierarchical perspectives near the edge of chaos. The Leadership Quarterly
Payne, V. (2001). The team-building workshop: a trainer's guide. Amacom Books.
Peterson, R. W. (1989, August). Mentor teacher handbook [8 sections]. Available online:
http://www.gse.uci.edu/doehome/edresource/publications/mentorteacher/contents.htm
l.
Plamínek, J. (2005). Vedení lidí, týmŧ a firem, praktický atlas managementu, 2., přepracované
vydání.
Ristow, A., Amos, T. and Staude, G. (1999), “Transformational leadership and organisational
effectiveness in the administration of cricket in South Africa”, South African Journal
of Business Management
Sashkin, M. and Sashkin, M. (2003), Leadership That Matters, San Francisco: Berrettkoehler
Publishers Inc.
Senior, B. (1997), Organizational Change, London: Pitman Publishing.
Shcermerhorn, K.R., Hunt, J.G. and Osborn, R.N. (2000), Organizational Behaviour, 7th
edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Stogdill, R.M. (1974), Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research, New York:
The Free Press.
Swanepoel, B., Erasmus, B., Van Wyk, M. and Schenk, H. (2000), South African Human
Resource Management: Theory and Practice, Kenwyn, Juta and Co. Ltd
Temple, B. (2002), “Avoid Downsizing Disasters: Empower A leaderr Employees”, San
Diego, Business Journal,
Tichy, N.M. and Devanna, M.A. (1986), The Transformational Leader, New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
Turner, N. and Barling, J. (2000), Moral Reasoning and Transformational Leadership: An
Exploratory Study, Thesis, Ontario: School of Business, Queen‟s University.
Vroom, V.H. and Jago, A.G. (1988), The New Leadership Managing: Participation in
Organization, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Wong, Z. (2007). Human factors in project management: concepts, tools, and techniques for
inspiring teamwork and motivation. John Wiley & Sons.
Yukl, G., (1998), Leadership in Orgainzations, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.