The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum

Background

The Continuum of Leadership Behavior was introduced by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. Schmidt in 1958 in the article ”How to Choose a Leadership Pattern” in Harvard Business Review.

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum is a simple model of leadership theory which shows the relationship between the level of freedom that a manager chooses to give to a team, and the level of authority used by the manager.

About the model

The model addresses the problem of how modern managers can be ”democratic” in the relations with subordinates and at the same time maintain the necessary authority and control in the organisations for which they are responsible.

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum of Leadership behavior is often shown as a simple graph. Now follows a discussion of the structure of the model.

The model goes from Boss-centered leadership where it is all about use of authority by manager to Subordinate-centered leadership where the freedom for subordinates takes up most of the area. Sometimes also called employees or nonmanagers.

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt continuum can be related to McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. Boss-centered leadership is towards theory X and subordinate-centered leadership is towards theory Y.

Tannenbaum and Schmidt identified a continuum of seven distinct leadership styles. Each type of style is related to the degree of authority used by the boss and to the amount of freedom available to subordinates in reaching decisions. By understanding this continuum, you can see some of the options available to you, and these help you think about which leadership style is most appropriate in a given situation.

Now we shall review each style individually. 

Style 1

The manager makes the decision and announces it. In this case the boss identifies a problem, considers alternative solutions, chooses one of them, and then announces this decision to the subordinates for implementation. None of the employees are heard. It is an order.

Style 2

The manager ”sells” the decision. The manager takes responsibility for identifying the problem and arriving at a decision. But rather than simply announcing it, the manager takes the additional step of persuading the subordinates to accept it. The manager seeks to reduce resistance from the employees by telling them ”what’s in it for you”.

Style 3

The manager presents ideas and invites questions. The employees can then better understand what the manager is trying to accomplish. This ”give and take” also enables the manager and the employees to explore more fully the implications of the decision. This may sometimes affect the manager's ideas. But the employees have very little influence on the final decision.

Style 4

The manager presents a tentative decision subject to change. Before finalizing it, the manager presents the proposed solution for the reaction of those who will be affected by it. The manager says ”I’d like to hear what you have to say about this plan that I have developed. I’ll appreciate your frank reactions but will reserve for myself the final decision”. You could say he consults his employees. This kind of behavior permits the employees to exert some influence on the decision. 

Style 5

The manager presents the problem, gets suggestions, and then makes decision. Up to this point the boss has come before the group with a solution of his or her own. Not so in this case. The subordinates now get the first chance to suggest solutions. The manager’s initial role involves identifying the problem. He or she might, for example say something of this sort: ”We are faced with a number of complaints from newpapers and the general public on our service policy. What is wrong here? What ideas do you have for coming to grips with this problem!”

The purpose is to capitalize on the knowledge and experience of those who are on the ”firing line”. From the expanded list of alternatives developed by the manager and the subordinates, the manager then selects the solution that he or she regards as most promising.

Style 6

The manager defines the limits and requests the group to make a decision. At this point the manager delegates to the group the right to make decisions. Before doing so, however, he or she defines the problem to be solved and the boundaries within which the decision must be made. An example might be the handling of a parking problem at a plant. The boss decides that this is something that should be worked on by the people involved. The boss tells the people: ”There is the open field just north of the plant which has been designated for additional employee parking. We can build underground or surface multilevel facilities as long as the cost does not exceed $ 1,000,000. Within these limits we are free to work out whatever solution makes sense to us. After we decide on a specific plan, the company will spend the available money in whatever way we indicate”. The decision is a joint effort within the boundaries defined by the manager

Style 7

The manager permits the group to make decisions within prescribed limits. The manager abdicates the decision power to the group. This represents an extreme degree of group freedom only occasionally encountered in formal organizations, as, for instance, in many research groups.

Types of leadership

Now let us turn from the types of leadership which are possible in a company situation to the question of what types are practical and desirable.

Three factors are of particular importance when a manager considers how to manage. These are

• Forces in him or herself – as the manager
• Forces in the subordinates
• And forces in the situation. The strength of each of these three factors will, of course, vary from instance to instance, but managers who are sensitive to them can better assess the problems that face them and determine which mode of leadership behavior is most appropriate for them. 

Criticism of model

The model don’t discuss how the different leadership styles are perceived by employees. Leadership style six and seven can be perceived as laissez-faire from the employees point of view.