Communication and effective leadership of self-managing work groups

Effective leadership of a self-managing group requires balancing authority and responsibility between group members and leaders; a good balance is thought to be difficult to achieve. This research explored this balance through directly observing and comparing the communication behaviors used by more and less effective leaders of self-managing work groups in two manufacturing plants within a large electronic equipment company. Communication behavior was chosen as the focus of the research because (a) a large proportion of what managers do involves communication and (b) communication is a common and powerful means for establishing, maintaining, and changing degrees of interpersonal control.; Six highly effective and six less effective leaders (as designated by their superiors and human resources managers) were observed, using both structured and unstructured observation methods, for four consecutive work days. Interview and questionnaire data also were collected from each of the group leaders and from a crossection of co-workers.; Leader communication behaviors clustered into two patterns: task-focus and context-focus. Task-focus included giving information to others, especially subordinates, and close management of the work group's production task. Context-focus included gathering information from others, especially peers and engineers, and close management of the resources needed for the group to get its work done. Technological and organizational differences between the two plants were linked to the differing prevalence of task-focused and context-focused patterns in the two plants.; The more effective leaders within each plant communicated more actively overall. Specifically, effective leaders attended to both the task of their work group and the context in which their group operated, while less effective leaders neglected one or the other area. Whether task or context received greater attention varied as a function of the demands of the technology and organization of the plant; but the more effective leaders actively managed both aspects of their work. Individual characteristics did not provide compelling explanations of the differences. Implications for theory, for future research, and for managerial practice were explored.