4 The ‘four Ps’ of leadership
Hartley and Allison (2003), in their work exploring health and social care services, identified three different components in leadership: the person, the position and the process. Rogers and Reynolds (2003) subsequently added a fourth P to this list – purpose. Rather than focusing only on the characteristics, behaviours and skills of leaders as people and the role individuals play in shaping events, these ‘4 Ps’ of leadership stress the importance of the wider context as well.
The attributes of person, position, process and purpose are useful when thinking critically about how leadership operates in practice, and why there is no one simple way to do leadership. They also encourage more critical thinking and dispel notions of leadership based on the characteristics of an individual apparently ‘born to lead’ (Rogers and Reynolds, 2003). Similarly, a singular emphasis on ‘position’ ignores the influence that those without formal office may exert and overemphasises the authority of high office (which does not in itself guarantee leadership). Rather, to understand how leadership operates in practice, it is more useful to think about the ways in which the characteristics of the ‘person’ and ‘position’ intersect with the ‘process’ (collaborative work with individuals, groups and organisations) and the contribution of the underlying values, vision and goals (‘purpose’) (Table 2.1). The ‘four Ps’ provide a comprehensive way of thinking about leadership in action as something which can be done in different ways depending on context.
| Leadership aspect | Focus |
| Person (character) | The character, behaviour, skill and interpersonal style (e.g. charismatic, controlling, supportive, aloof) |
| Position (role) | The office held (e.g. chief executive, senior manager, activist, service user, carer) |
| Process (how) | How leaders work with individuals, groups and organisations to find solutions to problems |
| Purpose (vision) | The contribution of the underlying strategic values, vision and objective |
In the next activity you will apply this framework to the leaders you identified previously.
Activity 4
In Activity 3 you identified your own examples of a ‘good’ and a ‘bad’ leader. Now, using those examples, complete the following table to see how their leadership relates to the 4 Ps:
| A ‘good’ leader | A ‘bad’ leader | |
|---|---|---|
| Your example... | ||
| Person | ||
| Position | ||
| Process | ||
| Purpose |
Comment
Here’s an example of how one person completed the table:
| A ‘good’ leader | A ‘bad’ leader | |
|---|---|---|
| Your example... | My choir leader | My ex-line manager |
| Person | She’s personable, friendly, bubbly, caring. | She came across as friendly enough at first, but I discovered she didn’t really listen to people, and didn’t seem to have very good interpersonal skills. She seemed to lack empathy. |
| Position | She’s in a paid position as a regional leader in a national organisation. | She started as my line manager, then became head of department and then took on a senior management role. Which on the positive side, took her away from direct day-to-day management of people! |
| Process | She’s very approachable and uses humour in her teaching. | She followed rules and procedures with no humanity or sense of compassion. It’s like she saw rules and the organisation, not the people who make up that organisation. |
| Purpose | She loves singing and music. You can see it in how passionate she is. | I’m not sure. It’s difficult to tell. She talked the organisational line, but never showed any true passion for anything. Maybe her passion was to climb the management ladder. |
Having explored different examples of leadership, and how the person, their position, process and purpose all influence their approach, you are now going to consider your own capacity as a leader.