Through an empirical study of the heads of the UK's top independent companies, comparing them with sample norms and a management control group, the paper re-examines the question of whether there is an entrepreneurial leadership personality profile. Several distinctive features are reported and discussed. Contrary to common stereotypes, the leaders are not openminded risk-takers so much as singleminded, thickskinned, dominating individuals. Results are discussed within the frame of the new discipline of evolutionary psychology.
Table of Contents
Chapter One: Introduction5
Overview5
Purpose of the Study5
Research Question6
Chapter Two: Literature Review7
Definition7
Influence of a Leader7
Historical Development8
Trait Approach9
Leader Behavior Approach10
Contingency (Situational) Approach14
Recent Developments18
Leader-Member Exchange Theory18
Transformational Leadership Theories20
Substitutes For Leadership Theory21
Servant Leadership22
Leaders are Sort of Born25
Leaders are always made27
A Leader's Growth is Never Done29
Examples of Contingency Theory30
Contingency theory of leadership30
Fiedler's contingency theory31
Hersey & Blanchard's situational theory31
Contingency theory of decision making31
Vroom and Yetton's decision participation contingency theory or the Normative decision theory32
Contingency rules theory32
Conceptual Model33
Leadership Personality33
Entrepreneurial Leadership: an Evolutionary Approach39
Hypotheses44
Chapter Three: Methodology46
Research Methods46
Qualitative Research51
Literature Selection Criteria52
Search Technique52
Theoretical Framework52
Quantitative Research52
Sampling and Procedure54
Measures and Sample Characteristics57
Chapter Four: Discussion59
Results59
Leaders Vs Neo Norms59
(a) Leaders Vs Managers61
(b) Predicted Absent Scores63
Discussion65
Chapter Five: Conclusion69
References71
Chapter One: Introduction
Overview
Leaders born or are they made? This is a question that is often debated but is still, in many people's eyes, unresolved. However, it remains an important issue to address because the notion that leadership is largely innate still underpins the way that many people think about leaders, their beliefs about their own capacity for leadership, and their views about the self-leadership potential of their followers. Common-sense assumptions about employees' innate leadership qualities are also used frequently by organizations when making hiring, firing and promotion decisions.
Purpose of the Study
Leadership is probably the most frequently studied topic in the organizational sciences. Thousands of leadership studies have been published and thousands of pages on leadership have been written in academic books and journals, business-oriented publications, and general-interest publications. Despite this, the precise nature of leadership and its relationship to key criterion variables such as subordinate satisfaction, commitment, and performance is still uncertain, to the point where Fred Luthans, in his book Organizational Behavior (2005), said that "it [leadership] does remain pretty much of a 'black box' or unexplainable concept." In this paper we will be studying leadership traits with respect to difference theories and we will be trying to analyse whether leaders born or they are made.
Research Question
Are leaders born or are they made? Discuss
Chapter Two: Literature Review
Definition
Leadership can be defined as a process by which one individual influences others toward the attainment of group or organizational goals. Three points about the definition of leadership should be emphasized. First, leadership is a social influence process. Leadership cannot exist without a leader and one or more followers. Second, leadership elicits voluntary action on the part of followers. The voluntary nature of compliance separates leadership from other types of influence based on formal authority. Finally, leadership results in followers' behavior that is purposeful and goal-directed in some sort of organized setting. Many, although not all, studies of leadership focus on the nature ...