THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO LEADERSHIP

Theoretical Approaches to Leadership



Theoretical Approaches to Leadership

Introduction

The mystery of how leaders can ignite the best performance from their subordinates dates back thousands of years. Numerous “leadership experts” have based their careers on researching, developing, and testing theories related to leadership. Leadership is defined as “the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of goals.” (Barney 1985 pp 1-46) Another definition of leadership is “to provide the recognition of roles and functions within the group that will permit each member to satisfy and fulfill some major motive or interest.” When asking a group of professionals “What do leaders do or what makes a good leader?” normally, a variety of answers emerge. These responses may include: setting strategy, creating a mission, or building a culture. Ultimately, a uniform answer is “getting results.” (Vroom Jago 1988 pp 81-92)

Some people become leaders because they have or develop certain talents and dispositions, or because of their wealth, military might, or position. Others lead because they possess great minds and ideas or they tell compelling stories. And then there are people who stumble into leadership because of the times or circumstances in which they find themselves. No matter how people get to be leaders, no one is a leader without willing followers. Managers and generals can act like playground bullies and use their power and rank force to force their will on people, but this is coercion, not leadership. Leadership is not a person or a position. It is a complex moral relationship between people, based on trust, obligation, commitment, emotion, and a shared vision of the good(Smith 1984 pp 489-512).

There are different leadership theories and models. Without getting into a discussion about what leadership is, (a topic that can and should be discussed at length) it is sufficient to state that for the purpose of this paper leadership will be considered to be the art of influencing others in the manner desired by the leader. Under such a broad definition it is possible to assume that effective leadership may be dependent on the leader, the follower, the situation, or any combination of these factors(Smith 1984 pp 489-512).

Comparison between Trait Theories and contingency theories

Trait Theories

Trait theories intended to identify traits to assist in selecting leaders since traits are related to leadership effectiveness in many situations. The trait approach to understanding leadership supports the use of tests and interviews in the selection of managers. The interviewer is typically attempting to match the traits and characteristics of the applicant to the position. For example, most interviewers attempt to evaluate how well the applicant can work with people.

Trait theory has not been able to identify a set of traits that will consistently distinguish leaders from followers. Trait theory posits key traits for successful leadership (drive, desire to lead, integrity, self-confidence, intelligence, and job-relevant knowledge) (Barney 1985 pp 1-46)yet does not make a judgment as to whether these traits are inherent to individuals or whether they can be developed through training and education. No two leaders are ...