Inl. Studies of Man. i Org.. Vol. XIV. No. 2-3. pp.

86-98
M. E. Sharpe. Inc.. 1984

JAI B . P. SINHA (INDIA)

A Model of Effective
Leadership Styles in India

The model

It is generally agreed that the effectiveness of a leadership style in

a work organization is contingent on task characteristics and the
nature of the leader-subordinate relationship. Task characteris-
tics are much less crucial in Indian work organizations than in
many other countries because of the cultural preference to view
work in the context of relationship. Work in itself is not quite
valued in India.' For a leader who is liked and respected, it is
performed with involvement; otherwise, it gets perfunctory at-
tention.
Indian subordinates prefer a personalized rather than a
contractual relationship. An ideal superior is not just a boss
whose authority is clearly delimited by the organizational manual
or task requirements: he represents a benevolent source on which
subordinates can depend for indulgence: Subordinates readily
accept the boss's higher status and respect and obey him willingly

The author is Professor of Social Psychology, A.N.S. Institute of Social

Studies, Patna, Bihar, 800 001, India. This paper was presented at the Inter-
national Conference on Leadership, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan, 23-25
August 1984.

86
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 87

provided he extends support to them and caters to their work,

personal, and social needs.^
In other words, a leader in such a situation has to be nurturant.
A nurturant leader "cares for his subordinates, shows affection,
takes personal interest in their well-being, and above all is com-
mitted to their growth."^ In order to be effective, however, he
makes his nurturance contingent on the subordinate's task ac-
complishment. He structures his and his subordinates' roles and
interactions in such a way that the subordinates understand and
accept the goals and the normative structure of the group and
cultivate commitment to them. He guides and directs them to
work hard and maintain a high level of productivity. Those who
meet his expectations are reinforced by nurturance. In the pro-
cess, there develops a relationship of understanding, warmth,
and interdependence, leading to higher productivity and better
growth of both subordinates and leader.
The growth process is based on a reciprocal influence relation-
ship between the leader and his subordinates. Initially the subor-
dinates (5) depend heavily on the leader not only for guidance and
direction but also for support and encouragement (at t-l). But as
they work hard, they develop skill and experience and hence gain
self-confidence. They start enjoying hard work and tend to as-
sume greater responsibility. They now need less direction. As
they mature and acquire commitment to their work, they strive
for recognition, influence, and participation in decision making
(5-1 a.tt-2). If the leader responds to these altered expectations of
the subordinates by reducing the quantum of direction, retaining
the warmth, and delegating more responsibility and autonomy
(ntip), the subordinates feel more encouraged and involved and
thus make further efforts to increase productivity. In the process,
they become more prepared for greater participation (5-2).
Eventually, the leader and the subordinates create a participative
system (at t-2) in which they participate fully aind freely—al-
though the cultural flavor of deference and affection blended in a
personalized relationship still persists. There is a possibility,
although a distant one, that they might even create an autonomous
88 JAl B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

group* in which the distinction between leader and subordinates

is minimized. The leader represents the group to outsiders, and
the members run the group with full involvement of the leader.
The progression from nurturant-task to participative style is a
gradual and interactive process. In certain instances the process
can become regressive. A nurturant-task leader, because of his
successful experience in the first phase of the work relationship,
may continue to insist on close supervision and paternal affec-
tion, which the matured subordinates may not relish anymore.
Their frustrations and the resultant resentment may threaten the
leader, who, as a result, may regress toward an authoritarian
style.^ If he does, he will disrupt the interaction system and put
the subordinates on the defensive. Consequently, all—the leader,
the subordinates, and the group—may suffer.

The evidence

In order to test the model, over 30 field and laboratory studies

over the course of a decade have been conducted by Sinha and his
co-workers. Fifteen of therii have been published in the book The
nurturant-task leader (1980) *; a report on 12 appeared later, in
1982,' and a number of them are still in progress.* Taken together
they examine the meaning, the structure, and the overlap among
authoritarian, nurturant-task, and participative styles, their cor-
relates, and their relationship with some outcome variables such
as the effectiveness of subordinates, units, or departments, job
satisfaction, etc. A selective presentation of the findings is at-
tempted below.

Relationships among leadership

styles

The first major concern was to differentiate the nurturant-task

{NT) style from the participative (P) style, on the one hand, and
tbe authoritarian (JF) on the other. Some critics have contended
that NT is almost identical with (9,9) style, or high on
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 89

Consideration-initiating Structure.^ It is true that nurturant and

participative styles share a concern for subordinates, their needs,
and feelings. Yet the people orientation ofthe participative style
is fraternal in nature, assuming the values of equality. The
nurturance style contains the affection, care, and warmth of a
benevolent, paternal symbol; it reflects a difference in status in
which the nurturance of a superior is symbiotically related to the
dependence ofthe subordinates. The two, however, do overlap,
and thus entertain a possibility of a smooth transition from NT to
P under conducive circumstances.'"
Similarly, critics argue that nurturance in a basically feudal and
authoritarian culture such as India's is a glorified facade to cover
up an underlying authoritarian stance. The facade is likely to
disappear as soon as the leader is put under stress. In other words,
an authoritarian leader in a favorable condition can afford the
luxury of bestowing affection and care on his subordinates, but
basically he is a self- and power-oriented person."
There is no unequivocal evidence that Indian culture is authori-
tarian. There are some overt authoritarian features, such as an
emphasis on hierarchy, discipline, obedience, power, structured
relationships, etc.; but the presence of the corresponding
psychodynamics of authoritarianism—of anxiety, insecurity,
cynicism, ego-alien sexuality, and paranoid dispositions—is
doubtful. There may be some overlap between authoritarian and
NT styles in terms of the preference for structure, but whether
this preference reflects secondary authoritarianism is a matter of
dispute.
A number of studies have been conducted to shed light on these
issues. In two ofthe studies,'^ leaders were induced to conduct
their groups in either F (i.e., authoritarian), NT, or P (i.e.,
participative) styles. The subsequent ratings by the group mem-
bers, who were blind to the experimental manipulations, dis-
closed that A^rieaders were perceived as similar to authoritarian
ones in being strict, in pushing their ideas through, and in control-
ling the members' ideas and activities. A^rieaders were, however,
close to P leaders in encouraging the members to contribute to the
90 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

Table 1

Intercorrelations of Three Major Leadership Factors with the

Remaining Factors

First three factors of leadership

Subordinate-
Other based Leader- Authori-
factors participa- centered tarian
of ieadership tion nurturance styie

Guidance &
encouragement 37* 53* -14*
Direction 56* 25* 12**
Task orientation 58* 20* 22**
Friendly orientation 60* 55* -03
Power' -16* -49* 57*
Role performance 07 -05 15*
Distance & discipline -12** -11** 37*
Note: Decimal points have been omitted.
*P < 0.01.
**P < 0.05; N = 523.

group task, for which they were given due credit. The most
striking finding was that whereas P leaders were perceived as
being interested in getting members' participation and F ones in
maintaining their leadership, NT leaders showed concern for get-
ting the work done.
Leaders rating themselves on a Likert-type scale revealed a
moderate overlap of A^rwith F ( r = 0.31) and P (r = 0.39); the
latter two were almost unrelated (r = 0.11).>^A factor structure
of leadership styles'" based on the self-ratings of 523 executives
of a large public enterprise generated ten dimensions of leader-
ship, the first three being subordinate-based participation,
leader-centered nurturance, and authoritarian style. The
subordinate-based participation was strongly related to the fac-
tors friendly, task orientation, and direction. The nurturance
factor was strongly positively related to friendly orientation,
guidance, and encouragement, and negatively to power, which,
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 91

along with distance and discipline, was strongly associated with

an authoritarian style (see Table 1).
A unique feature of this study was the emergence of a distinct
factor of task orientation, which was found to be more or less
independent of the factors of either participation or nurturance.
In other words, an executive can be task oriented without being
either participative or nurturant. Research in government depart-
ments and public enterprises subsequently indicated a widespread
prevalence of a bureaucratic style. Hence, the leadership-style
scale was expanded to incorporate five dimensions —bureaucrat-
ic (JS), authoritarian (F), nurturant (AO, participative (P), and task
oriented (7)—each having ten items in a Likert-type format. The
items were written in such a way that an executive could rate his
own styles and those of his superior.
Two attempts to examine the stability in the factor structures of
the styles yielded a rather complicated picture. One study'' iden-
tified ten factors. A people-oriented style emerged first, and a
personal task-oriented (nearest to NT) style was second. Partici-
pation emerged as a different configuration, in seventh place.
The three were highly correlated Xr = 0.64, N = 196, P
< 0.01). Surprisingly, the three were closely related to the factor
close supervision Xr = 0.50, P < 0.01). On the other hand, the
authoritarian style was fragmented into the factors power orien-
tation, suspicion and limited role, and closed-mindedness. The
three were highly interrelated (Xr = 0.43, P < 0.01). The factor
impersonal orientation, as expected, was associated with
bureaupathic style (r = 0.55, P < 0.01).
In the second study'* task mastership emerged as the first
factor and structured task orientation as the third. The participa-
tive style was differentiated into pure participative and equity-
oriented styles. Nurturant came out as the tenth factor and includ-
ed some of the participative items. The three factors clustered
together, reflecting a people-oriented style. Task-oriented factors
in this study combined with closed-mindedness and power orien-
tation, which are components of an authoritarian style.
When the executives' ratings ofthe styles of their departmental
92 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

heads were factor analyzed, task-oriented style again emerged as

the first factor, authoritarian as the second, bureaucratic as the
third, participative as the sixth, and nurturant as the seventh
factor. Some items of the bureaucratic style got clustered around
restricted role relationship or rigidity in role performance.
In summary, when particular styles are experimentally induced
in group leaders, subordinates perceive them as such, although
there are some meaningful overlaps. In reality, however, the
styles get mixed up. Executives do not adopt an exclusive style.
They always have a mix, and the nature of the mix depends partly
on the commonness of the styles and partly on the specific organi-
zations.
By and large, the nurturant and participative styles and their
derivatives cluster together, meaning that these styles belong to a
more generalized style of people's orientations. Hence, it may
not be difficult for an executive to move from one style to another.
Similarly, the authoritarian and bureaucratic styles and their de-
rivatives are often combined. Task orientation is a distinct config-
uration, which in some organizations aligns with the people's
orientation and in others with the authoritarian-bureaucratic com-
plex.

Correlates of leadership styles

A field study'' of self-ratings on the NT and P styles disclosed

great similarity (r = 0.88,7V = 165). A^Thad a moderately posi-
tive correlation with F (r = 0.27). P and F were negatively
related (r = -0.18). Despite this unusually high overlap between
NT and P, the two had distinctly different patterns of relationship
with the perception of their subordinates. When the subordinates
were perceived to be neither efficient, dedicated to work, nor
willing to work on their own, the appropriate styles were either F
or NT, the former getting higher weight than the latter (Table 2).
However, F was reported to be ineffective, and caused dissatis-
faction among subordinates. NT, on the other hand, led to greater
effectiveness. But in the opposite condition, NT was quite
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 93

Table 2

Correlations between Leadership Styles and Perception of

Subordinates

Perception Styles
of subordinates F NT P

1. Efficiency -43* -17** 01

2. Dedication to
work -34* -24* -07
3. Willingness to
work without
supervision -55* -29* 01
4. Need for personal
care 17** 14 -15**
5. Being difficult to
supervise 10 18** 06
Noie: Decimal points have been omitted. F = Authoritarian, NT = Nurturant-task,
P = Participative style.
•P < O.Ot.
*»P < 0.05.

ineffective—that is, when the subordinates were efficient, dedi-

cated to work, and willing to work on their own, it was the P
style, rather that the NT,, that was reported to be effective. The
participative style was conducive to greater satisfaction irrespec-
tive of the work orientation of the subordinates (Table 3).
In a survey,'* leadership styles were correlated with the indica-
tors of effectiveness in fertilizer and coal organizations. Manag-
ers who rated themselves as nurturant also perceived their subor-
dinates, their superiors, themselves, their department, and their
organization as effective. Those who were task oriented and
people oriented also found their subordinates effective. Bureau-
cratic and authoritarian leaders, however, did not find either their
subordinates, departments, or organizations effective.
In another study, conducted in university departments, the
leadership styles of department heads were correlated with educa-
tional climate and quality of education. First, a sample of post-
graduate students was asked to spell out the various leadership
94 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

Table 3

Correlations among Leadership Styies and Leader's Effectiveness,

Unit's Efficiency, and Subordinates' Satisfaction for Groups
According to Preparedness

Subordinates' Leadership styles

preparedness F NT P

Leader's effectiveness
High (N = 84) 17 -58* 38*
Low(N = 81) 19 29* 04

Unit's efficiency
High (N = 84) -27** -37* 09
Low(N = 81) -22** + 30* -16

Subordinates' satisfaction
High (N = 84) -31* -22** 47*
Low(N = 81) -24** 11 38*
Note: Decimal points have been omitted.
•P < 0.01.
•*P < 0.05.

acts that a university head performs. Then a sample of 250 post-

graduate students rated their heads on the various acts. The acts
generated three distinct styles: authoritarian, nurturant-task, and
participative. The styles were correlated with the most dominant
factors of educational climate and teaching methods. The general
factor educational climate reflected a "situation in which people
resort to flattery, but at the same time, communication is open
and free, and the growth of the organization also takes place.
Other items forming the cluster . . . contained ideas . . . which
included closeness to the head, concern for establishing authority,
willingness to share information, and vigilance." This kind of
educational climate was very highly associated with NT
(r = 0.83) and P ( r = 0.57) and negatively with F ( r = -0.67).
Similarly, teaching by directive methods combined with encour-
agement and emotional support was again highly correlated with
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 95

NT (r = 0.68) and P (r = 0.42) and negatively with F {r = -

0.50).
Further support for the thesis of the effectiveness of the NT
style was provided by a study by Singhal'' in which she tried to
determine the causal relationship between an NT style on the part
of college teachers and students' commitment to education. She
reported satisfactory consistency in the measurement of both.
Furthermore, she provided statistical evidence to show that NT
resulted in greater commitment than the other way around.

Evidence from an experimental

study

As stated in the beginning, the model suggests that if subordinates

prefer dependency and a personalized relationship, accept status
differences, and are not quite work motivated, the A^r style may
be expected to be effective. A phase of the NT style, it is further
postulated, prepares subordinates for a P style of supervision,
which thereafter will be more effective.
An experimental study^° was designed to test these hypotheses.
First, a,23-item Belief and Preference Scale measuring one's
preference for a personalized and dependency relationship and a
belief in status difference was administered to a sample of 150
freshmen students. The 40 with the highest scores were selected
for 20 2-person groups. Twenty randomly selected students from
the senior classes were assigned the role of leaders—one for each
group. The 20 3-person groups thus formed were randomly as-
signed to 4 treatment conditions, each having 2 phases of leader-
ship with an interval of 24 hours between.
The design was as follows:
Conditions Phase 1 Phase
1 NT NT
2 NT P
3 P NT
4 P P
96 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

In condition 1, the leaders adopted an A^rstyle and continued with

the same style in phase 2; in condition 2, the leaders adopted an
NT style in phase 1, but switched over to P in phase 2, and so on.
Leadership styles were verbally induced, and sufficient rationale
was provided for continuing with the same style or switching to
another. The group members worked on ten social problems,
discussed one problem at a time, and suggested possible solu-
tions, which were either accepted or rejected by the other mem-
bers and the leader of the group. A group's performance was
measured in terms of (a) number of ideas, (b) degree of appropri-
ateness of the ideas, and (c) extent of involvement of the group
members.
Thefindingsprovided strong evidence in support of the model:
1. The highest scores on all three variables were reported
under a P style of leadership when it was preceded by a phase of
NT leadership.
2. The NT—P- combination yielded the best results on all
variables.
3. NT leadership, when it followed P leadership, led to a
reversal on all three counts.
The members and the leader were also asked to indicate their
support for each other's ideas. The findings were again unequivo-
cal. The NT—P- combination was the best. Prolonged use of A^r
(i.e., NT—NT- combination) or of TVr following P reduced the
effectiveness of a leader.

A note of precaution

The success story of the model will be misleading if it is not

pointed out that there have been cases of failures. In a number of
studies, the A^r style did not lead to greater effectiveness of the
subordinates. At times it worked through the organizational cli-
mate, which then infiuenced effectiveness of the subordinates. At
others, its infiuence was probably overshadowed by other factors,
such as power or organizational norms.
We have yet to conduct longitudinal studies in which we can
 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STYLES IN INDIA 97

follow and facilitate the interactive process of the leader-subor-

dinate relationship as it evolves from A^r through nt/p to P styles
and thus helps the subordinates as well as the leader realize
greater effectiveness and personal growth. The conceptualization
of the shift from NT to P suggests that a leadership style is not
linked with personality traits and that a leader can employ a
"cafeteria" approach in adopting different styles for different
subordinates. There is some support for these contentions, but
the evidence is not yet conclusive.

Notes

1. See J. B. P. Sinha (1978) "Superior Subordinate Relationship and

Alienation." National Labour Institute Bulletin, 4(3). 209-223. Kahar states
that what an Indian is "sensitive to (and concerned with) are not the goals of
work and productivity that are external to the relationship, but the relationship
itself, the unfolding of emotional affinity" (S. Kakar [1978] The Inner World: A
Psycho-Analytic Study of Hindu Childhood and Society. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press). McClelland supports this view further when he observes that
Indiansperform their work as a "favor" to someone (D. C. McClelland [1975]
Power: The Inner Experience. New York: The Free Press).
2. J. B. P. Sinha (1980) The Nurturant Task Leader. New Delhi: Concept
Publishing House.
3. Ibid., p. 55.
4. P. G. Herbst (1976) Alternatives to Hierarchies. Leiden: Martinus
Nijhoff, Social Science Division.
5. A. Nandy (1975) "Master Builders." The Sunday Statesman. P. 12.
6. Sinha (1980) Op. cit.
7. J. B. P. Sinha (1982) "Further Testing of a Model of Leadership
Effectiveness." Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 19(2). 143-60.
8. A. Hassan, "Subordinate and Task Characteristics as Moderators of
Leadership Effectiveness." Ph.D. thesis, Patna University, Patna, India; C. B.
P. Singh, "Behaviour Strategic in Power Relationship." Ph.D. thesis. Patna
University, Patna, India; N. Verma. "The Implicit Theory of NT Leadership."
ICSSR project. New Delhi, India.
9. R. R. Blake and J. S. Monton (1964) The Managerial Grid. Houston,
TX: Gulf Publishing; J. K. HcmphiU (1954) A Proposed Theory of Leadership
in Small Groups. Columbus, Ohio: Personnel Research Board. Ohio State
University.
10. Sinha (1980) Op. cit. In fact, the Indian culture prescribes such a
transition in father-son relationships. As a son matures, the father is expected
to treat him as an equal and to fade away eventually as the son takes charge of
the family.
98 JAI B. P. SINHA (INDIA)

11. A. Nandy (1976) "Adorno in India: Revisiting the Psychology of

Fascism." Indian Journal of Psychology, 51, 168-78.
12. Sinha (1980) Op. cit., pp. 171-92.
13. J. Verma, quoted by Sinha (1980) Op. cit., p. 99.
14. A. H. M. HabibuUah and J. B. P. Sinha (1980) "Motivational Climate
and Leadership." Vikalpa, 5, 85-93.
15. Hassan, Op. cit. Research in progress.
16. Singh, Op. cit. Research in progress.
17. J. B. P. Sinha and G. P. Chowdhary (1981) "Perception of Subordi-
nates as a Moderator of Leadership Effectiveness in India." Journal of Social
Psychology, 113, 115-21.
18. S. B. P. Singh (1982) "A Study of Leadership Styles and Their Effec-
tiveness." Ph.D. thesis, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, India.
19. S. Singhal (1981) "Effective Leaders and Leadership Styles in a College
Context: Some Research Evidence." Paper presented at the Workshop on
Organizational Research in India, Department of Psychology, Allahabad Uni-
versity, 1-2 October.
20. J. B. P. Sinha and T. N. Sinha, quoted by Sinha (1980), Op. cit., pp.
179-92.