LEADERSHIP THEORY

The Major Contributors to Leadership Theory In Light Of a Postulated Leadership Theory Suitable For the Global 21st Century

The Major Contributors to Leadership Theory In Light Of a Postulated Leadership Theory Suitable For the Global 21st Century

Introduction

Leadership theory has evolved over the last fifty years in the Western context. Researchers agree with most scholars who postulate a difference between leadership and management and who see leadership as being one of the four management functions (planning? organising? leading and controlling). Management so defined is broader than leadership. A manager can be a manager without being a true leader if he/ she? for instance? lacks the ability to influence others. In reverse? there are also leaders who are not managers. The best example is the informal leader of a group. Researchers further agree with the majority of scholars that different leadership theories have made valuable contributions to the understanding of leadership? but that no single theory can exhaustively explain leadership behaviour nor predict accurately leadership potential.

Northouse (2007) pressurees the need to connect leadership with values and ethics and how to relate the leadership approaches and concepts in realistic situations in organizations. When leadership concepts and leadership theory are spelled out as convincingly and evidently, their application in organizations becomes clear. This paper therefore evaluates the Major contributors to leadership theory in light of a postulated leadership theory suitable for the global 21st Century.

Discussion

At best? it is wise to draw on the totality of the established leadership theories and concepts in order to best explain the complex phenomena of leadership behaviour. Such a list of established theories would include classical leadership theories (trait? behavioural? situational); behavioural leadership theories (two-dimensional? leadership grid? charismatic? transformational? transactional and symbolic leadership); and situational leadership theories (contingency? leadership continuum? path-goal? normative? situational and leadership substitutes). These theories are addressed in some detail by Lussier (1997: 388 414).

Researchers also concur with most scholars and practitioners with international work experience that the above mentioned established theories have to be further expanded and broadened to accommodate crosscultural variance. Since the ground breaking empirical study of Hofstede (1980)? it is appreciated that US based leadership theories clearly do not apply to many non-US situations and have to be adapted to local norms and values in order to become accepted and hence be effective. Hofstede (1980: 259) pointed out for instance that trying to develop "leadership" as if it were an independent characteristic which a person could acquire is naive: leadership is a complement to subordinateship. Cultural values are present in both the leader and the subordinate? hence cultural differences also necessitate a cultural adaptation to fit a country's predominant cultural prelerences (Yiu & Saner? 2000). According to Hofstede (1980: 259): . . . the only US leadership theory which allows for a certain amount of cultural relativity? although indirectly? is Fiedler's 'Contingency Theory of Leadership' which states that different leader personalities are needed for 'difficult' and 'easy' situations? and a cultural gap between superior and subordinates is one ...