LEADERSHIP

Leadership

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

The term leadership, by its very nature, is laden with meaning often derived from the interpreter's varied life history. For some, this represents an internalized identity, shared processes, or civic engagement grounded in experiences as social activists, with developmental mentors, or from positive group experiences. For others, the term may elicit a more negative interpretation associated with abuses of power, positionality, or an impersonal focus on end goals. These interpretations are often the effect of socio historical marginalization or negative encounters with those that inappropriately wielded influence. Both ends of this interpretive spectrum can also be found in the body of literature representing leadership theory. Contemporary theory, however, has attempted to reframe the term with a greater focus on moral discourse and social purpose, shifting away from previous theory that favored management, production, and authority.

Discussion

In exploration of contemporary leadership theory is best understood in the context of its theoretical evolution. This is in large part due to the enduring influences of past conceptualizations of leadership on contemporary practice and thinking both in academic and mainstream cultures. This section will present an abbreviated narrative of this evolution and highlight how emerging philosophical traditions of inquiry have shaped this advancement. (Heifetz, Linsky, 2002)

Theoretical Evolution

Early 20th-century perspectives on leadership typically reflected leader-centric approaches focusing on the leader as a positional authority. Largely examined in organizational or management contexts, these perspectives led to theories and research on how positional leaders accomplished goals in organizational settings, on what traits and styles were effective to achieve outcomes, and eventually on how the leader influenced others in the organization. These theories reflected prevailing social constructions of leadership that were associated with traditionally masculine, industrial, and structural approaches such as hierarchical relationships, achievement orientations, and leveraging of power. Families of leadership theory consistent with this approach include great man theories and trait-based leadership models. This body of theory contributed to the creation of a heroic leader archetype further linking leadership to the individual and to the extraordinary. (Heifetz, Linsky, 2002)

Over time, leadership theories began to explore the topic from more of a production orientation, examining not only individuals as positional authorities, but also the role followers' play in the leadership process. These theories still emphasized positional roles, but they acknowledged that outcome achievement was often dependent on the degree to which the leader could mobilize, motivate, and otherwise influence the commitment and productivity of followers. Thus, leadership became synonymous with effective management and influence of human resources. Leadership theories consistent with this interpretation include behavioral theories, contingency and situational theories, path-goal theory, and leader-member exchange theory (LMX). (Heifetz, Linsky, 2002)

It has been suggested that perhaps the most dramatic and noted shift in the evolution of leadership theory occurred in the late 1970s with the release of James MacGregor Burns's book Leadership (1978). This seminal work reconceptualized leadership as not only process oriented but also as necessarily focused on follower development. This reframing situated the end goal as equally important and as more easily achieved in a process that valued ...