were criticized for their excessive reliance on the middle and lower-level skills of interpersonal
behaviors and tactical involvement in operational matters. They were lacking the higher-level skills of
influencing the strategic direction of the organization. Lombardo and Eichinger (2000) drew similar
conclusions from their analysis of competency ratings of executives in a range of industries.
3.4 CONTINUITY PERSPECTIVE
0DKRQH\HWDO¶V(1965) work represents one of the early examples of the continuity perspective of the
leadership skill requirements across organizational levels. They reported thaW ³QR QRWLFHDEOH
differences were found; the job of top management and those of supervisory management within a
JLYHQ MRE W\SH DSSHDU VLPLODU LQ WHUPV RI SHUIRUPDQFH SURILOHV ́(p.109). Mumford et al. (2007)
proposed the Leadership Skills Strataplex of leadership development. According to this model, jobs at
the successively higher strata (i.e., levels in an organized system) require all those skills of the lower
strata. Their research showed that top-level jobs require higher levels of all leadership skills. Skills
important for lower levels, such as interpersonal skills, were also required at higher levels in the
organization. Zaccaro (2001) likewise claimed that managers at all levels must carry out the
supervisory leadership roles involved in interpersonal influence as well as the indirect leadership
activities such as strategic direction setting. This pattern reflects the continuity perspective of
management transition. In comparison with the discontinuity perspective, there is less evidence for the
continuity perspective, where leaders increase their behavioral repertoire as they move up through the
organizational hierarchy.
3.5 CONCLUSION
The continuity perspective posits that skills associated with leadership effectiveness lower
organizational levels are also important at higher organizational levels. In contrast, the discontinuity
perspective theorizes that effective leadership behaviors for one organizational level can become
ineffective for another level. Consequently, it is necessary that managers abandon these former
leadership behaviors that do not work anymore after a management transition. Which perspective is
true holds primary value for the relationship between strategic and supervisory leadership. Following
the continuity perspective, lower-level managers add strategic leadership behaviors to their behavioral
repertoire, which already contains supervisory leadership behaviors. If however, the discontinuous
perspective holds, lower-level managers may need to unlearn their supervisory leadership behaviors
and replace these with strategic leadership behaviors. On the one hand the pure manifestation of these
different behaviors at different organizational levels would bring light one this issue. But even more,
the link with effectiveness, allows one to conclude which behaviors should be developed and
potentially which behaviors should be unlearned as one moves up the corporate ladder. Chapter seven