# data[].attributes.body
on all major leadership theories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For decades, leadership theories have been the source of numerous studies. In reality as well as in practice, many have tried to define what allows authentic leaders to stand apart from the mass! Hence, there as many theories on leadership as there are philosophers, researchers and professors that have studied and ultimately published their leadership theory. A great article to read before diving into the theories is the The Philosophical Foundations of Leadership

Theories are commonly categorized by which aspect is believed to define the leader the most. The most widespread one's are: Great Man Theory, Trait Theory, Behavioural Theories, Contingency Theories, Transactional Theories and Transformational Theories.

The Great Man theory evolved around the mid 19th century. Even though no one was able to identify with any scientific certainty, which human characteristic or combination of, were responsible for identifying great leaders. Everyone recognized that just as the name suggests; only a man could have the characteristic (s) of a great leader.

The Great Man theory assumes that the traits of leadership are intrinsic. That simply means that great leaders are born...

they are not made. This theory sees great leaders as those who are destined by birth to become a leader. Furthermore, the belief was that great leaders will rise when confronted with the appropriate situation. The theory was popularized by Thomas Carlyle, a writer and teacher. Just like him, the Great Man theory was inspired by the study of influential heroes. In his book "On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History", he compared a wide array of heroes.

In 1860, Herbert Spencer, an English philosopher disputed the great man theory by affirming that these heroes are simply the product of their times and their actions the results of social conditions.

The trait leadership theory believes that people are either born or are made with certain qualities that will make them excel in leadership roles. That is, certain qualities such as intelligence, sense of responsibility, creativity and other values puts anyone in the shoes of a good leader. In fact, Gordon Allport, an American psychologist,"...identified almost 18,000 English personality-relevant terms" (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003, p. 3).

The trait theory of leadership focused on analyzing mental, physical and social characteristic in order to gain more understanding of what is the characteristic or the combination of characteristics that are common among leaders.

There were many shortfalls with the trait leadership theory. However, from a psychology of personalities approach, Gordon Allport's studies are among the first ones and have brought, for the study of leadership, the behavioural approach.

In the 1930s the field of Psychometrics was in its early years.

Personality traits measurement weren't reliable across studies.

Study samples were of low level managers

Explanations weren't offered as to the relation between each characteristic and its impact on leadership.

The context of the leader wasn't considered.

Many studies have analyzed the traits among existing leaders in the hope of uncovering those responsible for ones leadership abilities! In vain, the only characteristics that were identified among these individuals were those that were slightly taller and slightly more intelligent!

In reaction to the trait leadership theory, the behavioural theories are offering a new perspective, one that focuses on the behaviours of the leaders as opposed to their mental, physical or social characteristics. Thus, with the evolutions in psychometrics, notably the factor analysis, researchers were able to measure the cause an effects relationship of specific human behaviours from leaders. From this point forward anyone with the right conditioning could have access to the once before elite club of naturally gifted leaders. In other words, leaders are made not born.

The behavioural theories first divided leaders in two categories. Those that were concerned with the tasks and those concerned with the people. Throughout the literature these are referred to as different names, but the essence are identical.

Associated Theories

The Contingency Leadership theory argues that there is no single way of leading and that every leadership style should be based on certain situations, which signifies that there are certain people who perform at the maximum level in certain places; but at minimal performance when taken out of their element.

To a certain extent contingency leadership theories are an extension of the trait theory, in the sense that human traits are related to the situation in which the leaders exercise their leadership. It is generally accepted within the contingency theories that leader are more likely to express their leadership when they feel that their followers will be responsive.

Associated Theories

Transactional theories, also known as exchange theories of leadership, are characterized by a transaction made between the leader and the followers. In fact, the theory values a positive and mutually beneficial relationship.

For the transactional theories to be effective and as a result have motivational value, the leader must find a means to align to adequately reward (or punish) his follower, for performing leader-assigned task. In other words, transactional leaders are most efficient when they develop a mutual reinforcing environment, for which the individual and the organizational goals are in sync.

The transactional theorists state that humans in general are seeking to maximize pleasurable experiences and to diminish un-pleasurable experiences. Thus, we are more likely to associate ourselves with individuals that add to our strengths.

Associated Theories

The Transformational Leadership theory states that this process is by which a person interacts with others and is able to create a solid relationship that results in a high percentage of trust, that will later result in an increase of motivation, both intrinsic and extrinsic, in both leaders and followers.

The essence of transformational theories is that leaders transform their followers through their inspirational nature and charismatic personalities. Rules and regulations are flexible, guided by group norms. These attributes provide a sense of belonging for the followers as they can easily identify with the leader and its purpose.

Associated Theories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leadership Theories - In Chronological Order

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For decades leadership theories have been the source of numerous studies. In reality as well as in practice, many have tried to define what detaches authentic leaders from the mass! Hence, there as many theories on leadership as there are philosophers, researchers and professors that have studied and ultimately publish their leadership theory.

# data[].attributes.body
This theory may apply to many of your leadership speech topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transformational Leadership occurs where the leader takes a visionary position and inspires people to follow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Hersey and Blanchard's approach

Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions

Hersey and Blanchard (1999) and other books suggest leaders should adapt their style to follower development style (or 'maturity'), based on how ready and willing the follower is to perform required tasks (that is, their competence and motivation).

There are four leadership styles (S1 to S4) that match the development levels (D1 to D4) of the followers.

The four styles suggest that leaders should put greater or less focus on the task in question and/or the relationship between the leader and the follower, depending on the development level of the follower.

Style

Leadership style in response to follower development level

Follower development level

Low

High

R4

R3

R2

R1

Task / directive behavior

Low

High

Relationship / supportive
behavior

High

Low

S3
Partici-
pating

S2
Selling

S4
Dele-
gating

S1
Telling

S1: Telling / Directing

Follower: R1: Low competence, low commitment / Unable and unwilling or insecure

Leader: High task focus, low relationship focus

When the follower cannot do the job and is unwilling or afraid to try, then the leader takes a highly directive role, telling them what to do but without a great deal of concern for the relationship. The leader may also provide a working structure, both for the job and in terms of how the person is controlled.

The leader may first find out why the person is not motivated and if there are any limitations in ability. These two factors may be linked, for example where a person believes they are less capable than they should be may be in some form of denial or other coping. They follower may also lack self-confidence as a result.

If the leader focused more on the relationship, the follower may become confused about what must be done and what is optional. The leader thus maintains a clear 'do this' position to ensure all required actions are clear.

S2: Selling / Coaching

Follower: R2: Some competence, variable commitment / Unable but willing or motivated

Leader: High task focus, high relationship focus

When the follower can do the job, at least to some extent, and perhaps is over-confident about their ability in this, then 'telling' them what to do may demotivate them or lead to resistance. The leader thus needs to 'sell' another way of working, explaining and clarifying decisions.

The leader thus spends time listening and advising and, where appropriate, helping the follower to gain necessary skills through coaching methods.

Note: S1 and S2 are leader-driven.

S3: Participating / Supporting

Follower: R3: High competence, variable commitment / Able but unwilling or insecure

Leader: Low task focus, high relationship focus

When the follower can do the job, but is refusing to do it or otherwise showing insufficient commitment, the leader need not worry about showing them what to do, and instead is concerned with finding out why the person is refusing and thence persuading them to cooperate.

There is less excuse here for followers to be reticent about their ability, and the key is very much around motivation. If the causes are found then they can be addressed by the leader. The leader thus spends time listening, praising and otherwise making the follower feel good when they show the necessary commitment.

S4: Delegating / Observing

Follower: R4: High competence, high commitment / Able and willing or motivated

Leader: Low task focus, low relationship focus

When the follower can do the job and is motivated to do it, then the leader can basically leave them to it, largely trusting them to get on with the job although they also may need to keep a relatively distant eye on things to ensure everything is going to plan.

Followers at this level have less need for support or frequent praise, although as with anyone, occasional recognition is always welcome.

Note: S3 and S4 are follower-led.

Discussion

Hersey and Blanchard (of 'One Minute Manager' fame) have written a short and very readable book on the approach. It is simple and easy to understand, which makes it particularly attractive for practicing managers who do not want to get into heavier material. It also is accepted in wider spheres and often appear in college courses.

It is limited, however, and is based on assumptions that can be challenged, for example the assumption that at the 'telling' level, the relationship is of lower importance.

See also
Situational Leadership

Buy Me

A simple on Situational Leadership from Hersey and Blanchard. Slim, chatty and apparently simplistic. Yet hugely influential with both managers and academics.

=UK=

=USA=

=CAN=

Buy Me

The original classic first published in 1972 by Hersey and Blanchard and now with Johnson and in its 9th edition. Lots more detail than the popular One-Minute Manager book. Not cheap, though.

=UK=

=USA=

=CAN=

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Hersey and Blanchard's approach Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also Hersey and Blanchard (1999) and other books suggest leaders should adapt their style to follower development style (or 'maturity'), based on how ready and willing the follower is to perform required tasks (that is, their competence and motivation).

# data[].attributes.body
This is a straightforward model

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Trait theory of management assumes that leaders are born, and not made.

# data[].attributes.headline
Web resource with all leadership theories

# data[].attributes.subject
Web resource with all leadership theories

# data[].attributes.body
for additional exploration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over time, a number of different theories of leadership have evolved.

# data[].attributes.body
Which of these qualities does your speech subject demonstrate?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 5M Model of Leadership Effectiveness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 5M Model of Leadership Effectiveness