# data[].attributes.body
https://digitalleadership.com/blog/bani-world/#:~:text=Understanding%20Modern%20Complexity%3A%20The%20BANI,non%2Dlinearity%2C%20and%20incomprehensibility.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past several decades, our world has undergone a profound transformation. From the moment the VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, Ambiguity) concept was first introduced in the 1980s, it has served as a valuable lens through which we've understood the challenges that define our daily lives. Yet, as time has passed and our global landscape has continued to evolve, it is essential to scrutinize whether VUCA remains the reigning framework or if a new paradigm, the BANI World, is asserting itself as the primary model to elucidate the intricacies of our modern existence. This leads us to the central question: Are we still entrenched in a VUCA paradigm nearly four decades later, or is the BANI World emerging as the dominant framework to explain the challenges of our contemporary existence?

The emergence of the BANI World concept is not merely a theoretical exercise; it represents a fundamental shift in our understanding of the world. BANI stands for Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Incomprehensible, and these four characteristics capture the essence of the challenges we face. Our world is increasingly characterized by fragility, heightened anxiety, nonlinear and unpredictable dynamics, and a level of complexity that often defies traditional comprehension.

In navigating this BANI World, we are compelled to rethink our strategies, adapt our approaches, and develop new coping mechanisms. The traditional tools and frameworks that served us well in the VUCA era may no longer suffice in this new landscape.

Innovation in the BANI World is confronted with unprecedented challenges. The brittleness of ideas and technologies demands constant reevaluation, while heightened anxiety underscores the importance of robust risk management. At Digital Leadership, our Innovation Consulting service assumes significant relevance in today's ever-evolving business environment, whether you're navigating the BANI World or the traditional VUCA framework. We specialize in helping organizations thrive amidst the complexities and uncertainties of these paradigms.

This article delves into the subtleties of the BANI World model, shedding light on its capacity to encompass the complexities of our modern-day existence. It explores the fragility inherent in our systems, the prevalent anxiety permeating our society, the non-linear nature of the challenges we face, and the inherent difficulty in comprehending our rapidly evolving world. By proactively understanding and embracing the principles of the BANI World, we can equip ourselves more effectively to flourish in an environment that necessitates adaptability, resilience, and a profound comprehension of the factors shaping our lives.

BANI

In navigating this BANI World, we are compelled to rethink our strategies, adapt our approaches, and develop new coping mechanisms. The traditional tools and frameworks that served us well in the VUCA era may no longer suffice in this new landscape.

What is BANI?

The BANI framework, represented by its acronym, encompasses the qualities of our contemporary world: Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Incomprehensible. It serves as a conceptual tool designed to articulate the unique traits of our modern environment, especially considering its intricacies, uncertainties, and swift transformations.

This framework was developed precisely to capture and tackle these defining characteristics of our present-day world. It offers a structured approach to comprehending the intricacies arising from the blend of complexity, uncertainty, rapid change, and ambiguity. By deconstructing the framework into its four constituent elements it provides a detailed understanding of how these challenges manifest and equips both individuals and organizations with the means to respond effectively.

What does the acronym BANI Stand for?

The BANI Framework

Brittle:

Brittle replaces Volatility. Our world is not just volatile. It has turned out that rapid change is a big problem especially when the system is inflexible. Brittle is exactly the right word to describe this condition: A brittle system usually looks very stable, but becomes porous and breaks over time, mostly unexpected. It gives the impression of being strong and robust until it reaches a critical point of failure. This unexpected collapse can have far-reaching and devastating consequences, catching individuals, organizations, and even societies off guard.

The consequences of such a brittle system are worsened by the surprise factor. A brittle system can give the impression that it is strong and sturdy, but a critical point of failure can lead to a sudden collapse with devastating consequences.
This is caused by two factors:

1. Overemphasis on Profit and Efficiency: The unrelenting pursuit of profit and the drive to maximize efficiency are common objectives for many organizations. However, when these goals are prioritized at the expense of other equally critical factors, it can create vulnerabilities. For instance, neglecting employee relations and well-being can result in a shortage of skilled and motivated workers. This internal brittleness weakens the organization from within, impairing its ability to adapt and thrive in a dynamic environment. To mitigate this, organizations are recognizing the importance of emotional intelligence and empathy in fostering a workplace culture that values both profitability and sustainability.

2. Ignoring or Failing to Address Weaknesses: Within organizations, there often exist gaps or weaknesses in the system that, if left unattended, can contribute to brittleness. These issues might be overlooked, deliberately ignored, or left unaddressed due to a lack of skills, awareness, or resources. The reluctance to confront and remedy these brittle factors within the organization can result in long-term vulnerabilities that hinder resilience and adaptability.

Global Interconnectedness and Cascading Effects:
In today's highly interconnected world, a failure in one part of the system can trigger a chain reaction of failures across various sectors and regions. The global financial crisis of 2007 is a poignant example of how a seemingly isolated event can rapidly escalate into a worldwide economic downturn. This underscores the need for resilient and well-distributed structures that can withstand shocks and disruptions.

The Role of Emotional Intelligence and Adaptability:
To address brittleness, organizations must prioritize factors like emotional intelligence and empathy. These qualities can help build better employee relations, foster a more supportive work environment, and enhance adaptability. In a world where change is constant, adaptability is a critical trait for organizations seeking to thrive.

Anxious:

Anxiety and Its Connection to Uncertainty: Anxiety within the BANI framework is closely tied to the broader notion of uncertainty. It stems from the fear that something significant can unravel or break apart at any moment. In essence, anxiety acts as a mechanism for safeguarding security in an unpredictable environment. When a system or world is marked by uncertainty, it can generate profound anxiety as individuals and organizations grapple with the unpredictability of events.

Consequences of an Anxious World:

1. Passivity and Risk Aversion: Living in an anxious world can lead to a more passive attitude. Anxiety often makes individuals and organizations risk-averse. This aversion to risk can hinder an individual's ability to take initiative or an organization's capacity to make bold decisions, especially in business contexts. The fear and anxiety can result in inaction or excessive analysis, preventing forward momentum.

2. Negative Impact on Decision-Making: The pervasive fear and anxiety can also lead to a constant sense of despair, which, in turn, negatively influences the decision-making process. Decisions made under the cloud of anxiety may be overly cautious, lacking the creativity and innovation needed to drive progress.

Media's Role in Fostering Anxiety: The media plays a significant role in shaping the collective anxiety of a society. Media often utilizes language and narratives that promote fear and uncertainty. Positive news stories can be overshadowed by a constant stream of negative or sensationalized news, further contributing to feelings of anxiety.

Overcoming Anxious Tendencies for Innovation: While it's natural for humans to have a degree of pessimism as a protective mechanism, it can become cumbersome when seeking to create innovative future scenarios and advance in fields like artificial intelligence, data science, big data, and business model innovation. Overcoming this risk aversion and embracing a more optimistic and proactive mindset is essential for driving technological progress, fostering innovation, and redefining business models to stay competitive in a rapidly changing world.

Non-Linear:

Non-Linear Complexity: Non-linearity represents an additional layer of complexity in our understanding of the modern world. This complexity arises from the fact that the systems in which we live and operate are inherently intricate. Within these complex systems, the traditional linear link between cause and effect is not always straightforward or evident.

Challenging Cause-and-Effect Assumptions: In many instances, our attempts to make sense of these complex systems involve assuming a linear progression from cause to effect, where A leads to B, which in turn leads to C. However, this linear model often falls short of capturing the true nature of complexity. In reality, the relationship between cause and effect is multifaceted, with a myriad of factors, constructs, and synergies at play behind each consequence. Similarly, a single cause (A) can result in multiple outcomes, making it challenging to predict or recognize the precise impact of actions taken.

Unpredictability in Outcomes: This non-linearity implies that the measures we implement cannot always be neatly connected to their results in a recognizable or predictable manner. Sometimes, significant efforts yield minimal effects, while seemingly minor decisions can have a disproportionately significant impact.

Global Warming as an Illustrative Example: Consider global warming as a prime illustration of non-linearity. The lag between the causes of climate change and their effects is so extensive that it becomes challenging to comprehend the connection fully. Even if immediate actions were taken to mitigate the present symptoms, the consequences on the climate would extend far beyond our lifetimes, affecting generations to come.

Incomprehensible:

Incomprehensibility in a Non-Linear World: Incomprehensibility represents the culmination of the complexities inherent in our non-linear world, taking us a step beyond mere ambiguity. To illustrate this concept, consider a scenario from the realm of software development. There may be lines of code that appear redundant or non-essential to the explicit function of a program. However, removing this seemingly extraneous code can lead to a program crash or render it unworkable. The baffling part is that there's no definitive explanation for this phenomenon.

Importance of Understandability: Understandability is pivotal because it offers orientation and clarity, which are invaluable in times of rapid change. It also serves to reduce the element of surprise, which can exacerbate the impact of subsequent events. A crisis, for instance, loses some of its potency if it's not entirely unpredictable and doesn't catch us off guard. Understandability, therefore, empowers us to take at least a cognitive step toward finding solutions.

The Overwhelming Nature of Incomprehensibility: When faced with something we cannot comprehend, it tends to be overwhelming. Incomprehensibility often arises in today's information-rich environment, characterized by an overwhelming flood of data or information overload. The silver lining is that what we don't understand today doesn't necessarily mean we cannot understand it in the future. Actively fostering understanding is possible by establishing an organizational culture marked by transparency. However, as the COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated, achieving this can be a complex endeavor.

The Age Of Chaos: Why We Need BANI?

We need the BANI framework to adapt and thrive in an ever-evolving and increasingly complex world. Here are key reasons why the BANI framework is essential:

1. Understanding Modern Complexity: The BANI framework helps us comprehend the complexities of our contemporary world. It acknowledges that our environment is not just volatile and uncertain (as in the VUCA model) but also characterized by brittleness, anxiety, non-linearity, and incomprehensibility. Recognizing these features is the first step toward addressing them effectively.

2. Guiding Decision-Making: BANI provides a structured approach for decision-makers in various domains, from business to policy, to navigate the challenges of the modern landscape. By understanding the nuances of brittleness, anxiety, non-linearity, and incomprehensibility, leaders can make more informed and adaptive decisions.

3. Fostering Resilience: In a BANI world, resilience becomes paramount. Organizations, communities, and individuals must build the capacity to withstand unexpected shocks and disruptions. BANI helps identify vulnerabilities and promotes proactive resilience-building strategies.

4. Encouraging Innovation: BANI acknowledges that traditional linear thinking and problem-solving may fall short in this complex environment. It encourages innovative thinking and approaches that can better address non-linear challenges, including business model innovation, technology advancements, and creative problem-solving.

5. Adaptive Learning: Embracing the BANI framework promotes a culture of adaptive learning. It encourages organizations and individuals to continuously learn and adapt to changing circumstances, improving their ability to thrive in an uncertain world.

6. Addressing Global Challenges: Many global challenges, such as climate change, pandemics, and geopolitical shifts, exhibit characteristics outlined in the BANI framework. To effectively tackle these challenges, we need a comprehensive understanding that goes beyond the limitations of VUCA.

7. Promoting Collaboration: BANI emphasizes the interconnectedness of our world. It underscores the importance of collaboration, both locally and globally, to address challenges that no single entity can solve in isolation.

8. Strategic Planning: BANI informs strategic planning by considering the multifaceted nature of challenges. Organizations and policymakers can better anticipate potential disruptions and formulate strategies that account for brittleness, anxiety, non-linearity, and incomprehensibility.

Amidst an increasingly turbulent world, economic and social uncertainties are on the rise, casting a shadow of doubt over our future.

We find ourselves in the midst of an array of uncertainties and substantial global challenges, including the ominous specter of a new Cold War, the intensifying crisis of global warming and the associated climate-related catastrophes, and, perhaps most profoundly, the ongoing global health crisis that has effectively pressed pause on our lives.

As creatures inherently inclined towards routine and familiarity, we grapple with the discomfort of uncertainties and the disruptions they bring. Our cognitive wiring predisposes us to seek out patterns and structured environments.

So, how should we navigate a world where the once-familiar patterns seem to be unraveling, while new systems are still in the process of taking form? How can we safeguard our mental well-being amidst this chaotic backdrop?

The initial step towards finding our bearings lies in acquiring knowledge. Already, several models have been devised to unravel the intricate tapestry of chaotic patterns. The former VUCA model has outlived its relevance.

In light of this, futurist and author Jamais Cascio presents a novel model in his recent article, titled " Facing the Age of Chaos," referred to as BANI. This model is poised to assist us in comprehending and navigating the labyrinthine landscape of complex changes characterizing our contemporary world.

The importance of the 4 Waves of Industrial Revolution model in this context, can provide valuable insights and strategies for individuals and organizations seeking to thrive amidst the chaos of our times. You can download this model to gain a deeper understanding of the transformative forces at play in our world today.

The BANI World framework provides a lens through which we can understand the challenges and uncertainties that arise from the Fourth Wave of Industrial Revolution, characterized by digital technologies, AI, and IoT. The Fourth Wave introduces non-linearity, anxiety about the rapid pace of change, and incomprehensibility of complex systems, all of which align with the BANI World concept.

In essence, the Four Waves of Industrial Revolution model helps us comprehend the technological transformations underway, while the BANI World framework aids us in navigating the broader implications of these changes in a world marked by brittleness, anxiety, non-linearity, and incomprehensibility. Together, they provide a comprehensive toolkit for individuals and organizations seeking to thrive in our modern age of complexity and uncertainty.

VUCA WORLD VS BANI WORLD

In exploring the BANI concept, it becomes evident that the , once a prevailing framework for understanding disruption, is no longer the sole lens through which we view our complex reality.

VUCA, an acronym denoting , originated as a model conceived by the US Army War College in response to the post-Cold War era. Initially designed to address geopolitical shifts, it later found its way into the business world at the turn of the millennium.

However, the landscape has shifted dramatically since its inception. What made sense in the past may not hold the same relevance today. The organizational culture has undergone profound transformations, and adapting to the challenges of an increasingly digitalized world necessitates new skill sets and tools to navigate volatility and comprehend intricate systems.

As an explanatory model, VUCA now falls short in elucidating the intricacies of contemporary business models, challenges faced by companies, and the broader societal landscape. In this evolving world, a new thought model emerges as a requisite paradigm to grapple with the shifting dynamics-a model known as BANI.

Related: https://digitalleadership.com/blog/vuca-world/

In our book "How to Create Innovation" - the ultimate guide to business innovation - we delve into the intricate dynamics of the VUCA world, unearthing its profound implications for modern enterprises. You can download it now.

Conclusion

The world has evolved from a (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous) environment to a BANI (Brittle, Anxious, Non-Linear, Incomprehensible) one. BANI reflects the current challenges, such as brittleness in seemingly stable systems, anxiety-driven decision-making, non-linear cause-and-effect relationships, and incomprehensible complexities.

Recognizing and leveraging unfair advantages, like brand recognition and market knowledge, can set businesses apart and drive innovation. In a world of constant change, understanding these frameworks and strategies is essential.

Frequently Asked Questions

1- What is the Bani effect?

The BANI effect refers to the impact of living in a BANI world, which stands for Brittle, Anxious, Non-Linear, and Incomprehensible. In a BANI world, systems are fragile, people are anxious due to uncertainty, cause-and-effect relationships are non-linear, and complexity can be overwhelming. The BANI effect represents the challenges and disruptions caused by these characteristics.

2- What BANI means for leadership?

BANI presents unique challenges for leadership. Leaders need to be adaptable, resilient, and transparent in their decision-making. They should address the brittleness of systems by promoting flexibility and resilience. Handling anxiety among team members requires providing clarity and fostering a culture of psychological safety. Dealing with non-linear complexities means embracing adaptability and promoting innovative thinking. Transparency is crucial in addressing incomprehensible situations, enabling teams to collaborate effectively.

3- How do you deal with a BANI world?

Dealing with a BANI world requires a proactive approach. Emphasize resilience to withstand challenges, pay attention to anxieties and provide clarity, adapt to non-linear situations, and promote transparency to enhance understanding. Collaboration, innovation, and continuous learning are essential in navigating a BANI world. It's also vital to recognize and leverage unfair advantages and be open to change and uncertainty.

4- What is the BANI in corporate?

In a corporate context, BANI represents the characteristics of the current business environment. It signifies that corporate systems may become fragile, employees may experience anxiety due to uncertainty, cause-and-effect relationships can be non-linear, and the complexities of the business world can be incomprehensible. Understanding BANI in corporate settings helps organizations adapt, innovate, and lead effectively in this challenging environment.

5- What good are acronyms like BANI and VUCA?

Even the founder of the acronym states that the above approaches are rather reactions than actual solutions. Nevertheless, such word creations can remind us where to start. In addition, they enable us to name the feeling of uncertainty and thus create more clarity. Clarity is much needed in these times.

It is certain that everything will change, as systems exist everywhere: be it on a state and economic level or even people's personal lives and relationships with friends and family.

BANI does not guide developing organizations. It will neither prepare us for change nor deliver all the answers, but it at least can help us understand.

Until a new acronym is needed, we can at least always rely on a quote, which is already over 2500 years old:

The only constant in life is change
"Heraclitus"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BANI World: What is it and Why We Need it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Age of Chaos: In an increasingly chaotic world, the level of economic and social uncertainty is on the rise, Do we need BANI World?

# data[].attributes.body
Kepimpinan Instruksional

# data[].attributes.body
Tadbir Urus boleh dikatakan mewakili pemilik, atau kumpulan kepentingan orang, yang mewakili firma, syarikat atau mana-mana institusi. Tadbir urus mewakili kehendak kumpulan minat yang menguruskan syarikat. Tadbir urus terdiri daripada badan pentadbir, yang mengarahkan pihak pengurusan ke atas semua aspek syarikat. Ia adalah badan yang mengawal fungsi keseluruhan sesebuah organisasi.

# data[].attributes.body
SUMBER KUASA PEMIMPIN

1) Kuasa Sah

-Punca kuasa yang diberikan kepada seorang pemimpin oleh pihak yang lebih berkuasa melalui syarat dan prosedur. Contoh : jawatan guru besar SAKNJ yang dilantik oleh SUKJ

2) Kuasa Ganjaran

- Seorang pemimpin ada kuasa untuk mengurniakan ganjaran kepada pekerjanya seperti menaikkan gaji , bonus dan pengiktirafan.

3) Kuasa Paksaan

-Kuasa ini berpunca daripada kawalan seseorang pemimpin melalui hukuman agar pekerja patuh kepada pemimpin.

4) Kuasa Pakar

-Kuasa yang ada pada seorang pemimpin disebabkan oleh kepakaran/kemahirannya/pengetahuan dalam sesuatu bidang/perkara.

5) Kuasa Rujukan

- Pemimpin yang mempunyai ciri-ciri yang menarik perhatian orang lain . Orang ramai sanggup mengikut arahannya disebabkan rasa hormat dan ingin mencontohinya.

# data[].attributes.body
Peralatan k4

# data[].attributes.body
Kuasa Ganjaran

# data[].attributes.body
Senarai perkara menarik dalam video ini

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Navy Seal William McRaven: If You Want To Change The World, Make Your Bed!

# data[].attributes.headline
PERBEZAAN ANTARA PENTADBIR DAN PENGURUSAN

# data[].attributes.subject
PERBEZAAN ANTARA PENTADBIR DAN PENGURUSAN

# data[].attributes.body
Rm35 100

# data[].attributes.body
Analisis Jurang

# data[].attributes.body
Perbezaan antara pengurus dan pemimpin

# data[].attributes.body
Oren

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leadership, both as a research area and as a practical skill, encompasses the ability of an individual, group, or organization to " lead", influence, or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations.

In his treatise The Prince, the diplomat Niccolò Machiavelli argued that it is better for rulers to be feared than to be loved, if they cannot be both

An APEC leader setting the tone for the 2013 APEC CEO summit with an opening speech

"Leadership" is a contested term.[1] Specialist literature debates various viewpoints on the concept, sometimes contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) North American versus European approaches.[2]

Some U.S. academic environments define leadership as "a process of social influence in which a person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common and ethical task".[3][4]-in other words, as an influential power-relationship in which the power of one party (the "leader") promotes movement/change in others (the "followers").[5] Some have challenged the more traditional managerial views of leadership (which portray leadership as something possessed or owned by one individual due to their role or authority), and instead advocate the complex nature of leadership which is found at all levels of institutions, both within formal[6] and informal roles.[7]

Studies of leadership have produced theories involving (for example) traits,[8] situational interaction,[9] function, behavior,[10] power, vision[11] and values,[12] charisma, and intelligence,[13] among others.[4]

The Chinese doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven postulated the need for rulers to govern justly, and the right of subordinates to overthrow emperors who appeared to lack divine sanction.

Pro- aristocracy thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's "blue blood" or genes. Monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction (see the divine right of kings). On the other hand, more democratically inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent.

In the autocratic/ paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them "emotionally attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies".

Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on 'right living' relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a tradition of filial piety.

Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline... Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate to its function, then one can be a leader.

Machiavelli's , written in the early-16th century, provided a manual for rulers ("princes" or "tyrants" in Machiavelli's terminology) to gain and keep power.

Prior to the 19th century, the concept of leadership had less relevance than today-society expected and obtained traditional deference and obedience to lords, kings, master-craftsmen, and slave-masters. The Oxford English Dictionary traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as 1821. Historically, industrialization, opposition to the ancien regime, and the phasing out of chattel slavery meant that some newly developing organizations ( nation-state republics, commercial corporations) evolved a need for a new paradigm with which to characterize elected politicians and job-granting employers-thus the development and theorizing of the idea of "leadership". The functional relationship between leaders and followers may remain, but acceptable (perhaps euphemistic) terminology has changed.

Starting in the 19th century, the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. One response to this denial of élitism came with Leninism- Lenin (1870-1924) demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, which was to bring into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship of divinely-provided resources-human and material-and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan. Compare this with servant leadership.

For a more general view on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the statesperson.

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has continued for centuries. Philosophical writings from Plato's Republic[25] to Plutarch's Lives have explored the question "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership[26] and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the " trait theory of leadership".

A number of works in the 19th century - when the traditional authority of monarchs, lords, and bishops had begun to wane - explored the trait theory at length: especially the writings of Thomas Carlyle and of Francis Galton. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869) examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when his focus moved from first-degree to second-degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited.

Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) believed that public-spirited leadership could be nurtured by identifying young people with "moral force of character and instincts to lead", and educating them in contexts (such as the collegiate environment of the University of Oxford) that further developed such characteristics. International networks of such leaders could help to promote international understanding and help "render war impossible". This vision of leadership underlay the creation of the Rhodes Scholarships, which have helped to shape notions of leadership since their creation in 1903.[27]

In the late 1940s and early 1950s, a series of qualitative reviews[28] prompted researchers to take a drastically different view of the driving forces behind leadership. In reviewing the extant literature, Stogdill and Mann found that while some traits were common across a number of studies, the overall evidence suggested that people who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations. Subsequently, leadership was no longer characterized as an enduring individual trait-situational approaches (see alternative leadership theories below) posited that individuals can be effective in certain situations, but not others. The focus then shifted away from traits of leaders to an investigation of the leader behaviors that were effective. This approach dominated much of the leadership theory and research for the next few decades.

New methods and measurements were developed after these influential reviews that would ultimately reestablish trait theory as a viable approach to the study of leadership. For example, improvements in researchers' use of the round-robin research design methodology allowed researchers to see that individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks.[29] Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct meta-analyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and summarize the findings from a wide array of studies. This advent allowed trait theorists to create a comprehensive picture of previous leadership research rather than rely on the qualitative reviews of the past. Equipped with new methods, leadership researchers revealed the following:

Individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks.[29]

Significant relationships exist between leadership emergence and such individual traits as:

While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, its reemergence has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in sophisticated conceptual frameworks.[36]

focus on a small set of individual attributes such as the "Big Five" personality traits, to the neglect of cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills, expertise, and problem-solving skills

fail to consider patterns or integrations of multiple attributes

do not distinguish between the leadership attributes that are generally not malleable over time and those that are shaped by, and bound to, situational influences

do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the behavioral diversity necessary for effective leadership

Considering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several researchers adopted a different perspective of leader individual differences-the leader-attribute-pattern approach.[35][37][38] In contrast to the traditional approach, the leader-attribute-pattern approach is based on theorists' arguments that the influence of individual characteristics on outcomes is best understood by considering the person as an integrated totality rather than a summation of individual variables.[38][39] In other words, the leader-attribute-pattern approach argues that integrated constellations or combinations of individual differences may explain substantial variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness beyond that explained by single attributes, or by additive combinations of multiple attributes.

In response to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to research leadership as a set of behaviors by evaluating the behavior of successful leaders, determining a behavior taxonomy, and identifying broad leadership styles.[40] David McClelland, for example, posited that leadership requires a strong personality with a well-developed positive ego. To lead, self-confidence and high self-esteem are useful, perhaps even essential.[41]

A graphical representation of the managerial grid model

Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal work on the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers evaluated the performance of groups of eleven-year-old boys under different types of work climate. In each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of group decision making, praise and criticism ( feedback), and the management of the group tasks ( project management) according to three styles: authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire.[42]

In 1945, Ohio State University conducted a study which investigated observable behaviors portrayed by effective leaders. They identified particular behaviors that were reflective of leadership effectiveness. They narrowed their findings to two dimensions.[43] The first dimension, "initiating structure", described how a leader clearly and accurately communicates with the followers, defines goals, and determines how tasks are performed. These are considered "task oriented" behaviors. The second dimension, "consideration", indicates the leader's ability to build an interpersonal relationship with their followers, and to establish a form of mutual trust. These are considered "social oriented" behaviors.[44]

The Michigan State Studies, which were conducted in the 1950s, made further investigations and findings that positively correlated behaviors and leadership effectiveness. Although they had similar findings as the Ohio State studies, they also contributed an additional behavior identified in leaders: participative behavior (also called "servant leadership"), or allowing the followers to participate in group decision making and encouraged subordinate input. This entails avoiding controlling types of leadership and allows more personal interactions between leaders and their subordinates.[45]

The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964. It suggests five different leadership styles, based on the leaders' concern for people and their concern for goal achievement.[46]

Positive reinforcement

B. F. Skinner is the father of behavior modification and developed the concept of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement occurs when a positive stimulus is presented in response to a behavior, which increases the likelihood of that behavior in the future.[47] The following is an example of how positive reinforcement can be used in a business setting. Assume praise is a positive reinforcer for a particular employee. This employee does not show up to work on time every day. The manager decides to praise the employee for showing up on time every day the employee actually shows up to work on time. As a result, the employee comes to work on time more often because the employee likes to be praised. In this example, praise (the stimulus) is a positive reinforcer for this employee because the employee arrives at work on time (the behavior) more frequently after being praised for showing up to work on time.[48]

Positive reinforcement is a successful technique used by leaders to motivate and attain desired behaviors from subordinates. Organizations such as Frito-Lay, 3M, Goodrich, Michigan Bell, and Emery Air Freight have all used reinforcement to increase productivity.[49] Empirical research covering the last 20 years suggests that applying reinforcement theory leads to a 17 percent increase in performance. Additionally, many reinforcement techniques such as the use of praise are inexpensive, providing higher performance for lower costs.

Situational theory is another reaction to the trait theory of leadership. Social scientists argued that history was more than the result of intervention of great men as Carlyle suggested. Herbert Spencer (1884) (and Karl Marx) said that the times produce the person and not the other way around.[50] This theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics: no single optimal psychographic profile of a leader exists. According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions."[51]

Some theorists synthesized the trait and situational approaches. Building upon the research of Lewin et al.,[52] academics normalized the descriptive models of leadership climates, defining three leadership styles and identifying which situations each style works better in. The authoritarian leadership style, for example, is approved in periods of crisis but fails to win the "hearts and minds" of followers in day-to-day management; the democratic leadership style is more adequate in situations that require consensus building; finally, the laissez-faire leadership style is appreciated for the degree of freedom it provides, but as the leaders do not "take charge", they can be perceived as a failure in protracted or thorny organizational problems.[53] Theorists defined the style of leadership as contingent to the situation; this is sometimes called contingency theory. Three contingency leadership theories are the Fiedler contingency model, the Vroom-Yetton decision model, and the path-goal theory.

The Fiedler contingency model bases the leader's effectiveness on what Fred Fiedler called situational contingency. This results from the interaction of leadership style and situational favorability (later called situational control). The theory defines two types of leader: those who tend to accomplish the task by developing good relationships with the group (relationship-oriented), and those who have as their prime concern carrying out the task itself (task-oriented).[54] According to Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both task-oriented and relationship-oriented leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation. When there is a good leader-member relation, a highly structured task, and high leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable situation". Fiedler found that task-oriented leaders are more effective in extremely favorable or unfavorable situations, whereas relationship-oriented leaders perform best in situations with intermediate favorability.

Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton[55] and later with Arthur Jago,[56] developed a taxonomy for describing leadership situations. They used this in a normative decision model in which leadership styles were connected to situational variables, defining which approach was more suitable to which situation.[57] This approach supported the idea that a manager could rely on different group decision making approaches depending on the attributes of each situation. This model was later referred to as situational contingency theory.[58]

The path-goal theory of leadership was developed by Robert House and was based on the expectancy theory of Victor Vroom.[59] According to House, "leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviors that complement subordinates' environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance".[60] The theory identifies four leader behaviors, achievement-oriented, directive, participative, and supportive, that are contingent to environment factors and follower characteristics. In contrast to the Fiedler contingency model, the path-goal model states that the four leadership behaviors are fluid, and that leaders can adopt any of the four depending on what the situation demands. The path-goal model can be classified both as a contingency theory, as it depends on the circumstances, and as a transactional leadership theory, as the theory emphasizes the reciprocity behavior between the leader and the followers.

General Petraeus talks with U.S. soldiers serving in Afghanistan.

Functional leadership theory[61] addresses specific leader behaviors that contribute to organizational or unit effectiveness. This theory argues that the leader's main job is to see that whatever is necessary to group needs is taken care of; thus, a leader can be said to have done their job well when they have contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion.[62] While functional leadership theory has most often been applied to team leadership,[63] it has also been effectively applied to broader organizational leadership as well.[64] In summarizing literature on functional leadership, researchers[65] observed five broad functions a leader performs when promoting organization's effectiveness. These functions include environmental monitoring, organizing subordinate activities, teaching and coaching subordinates, motivating others, and intervening actively in the group's work.

Various leadership behaviors facilitate these functions. In initial work identifying leader behavior, Fleishman observed that subordinates perceived their supervisors' behavior in terms of two broad categories referred to as consideration and initiating structure.[66] Consideration includes behavior involved in fostering effective relationships. Examples of such behavior would include showing concern for a subordinate or acting in a supportive manner towards others. Initiating structure involves the actions of the leader focused specifically on task accomplishment. This could include role clarification, setting performance standards, and holding subordinates accountable to those standards.

The Integrated Psychological Theory of leadership attempts to integrate the strengths of the older theories (i.e. traits, behavioral/styles, situational and functional) while addressing their limitations, introducing a new element - the need for leaders to develop their leadership presence, attitude toward others, and behavioral flexibility by practicing psychological mastery. It also offers a foundation for leaders wanting to apply the philosophies of servant leadership and authentic leadership.

Integrated psychological theory began to attract attention after the publication of James Scouller's Three Levels of Leadership model (2011).[67] Scouller argued that older theories offered only limited assistance in developing a person's ability to lead effectively.[67]: 34-35  He pointed out, for example, that:

Traits theories, which tend to reinforce the idea that leaders are born not made, might help us select leaders, but they are less useful for developing leaders.

An ideal style (e.g. Blake & Mouton's team style) would not suit all circumstances.

Most of the situational/contingency and functional theories assume that leaders can change their behavior to meet differing circumstances or widen their behavioral range at will, when in practice many find it hard to do so because of unconscious beliefs, fears, or ingrained habits. Thus, he argued, leaders need to work on their inner psychology.

None of the older theories successfully addressed the challenge of developing "leadership presence"-that certain "something" in leaders that commands attention, inspires people, wins their trust, and makes followers want to work with them.

Scouller's model aims to summarize what leaders have to do, not only to bring leadership to their group or organization, but also to develop themselves technically and psychologically as leaders. The three levels in his model are public, private, and personal leadership:

The first two-public and private leadership-are "outer" or behavioral levels. These behaviors address what Scouller called "the four dimensions of leadership". These dimensions are: (1) a shared, motivating group purpose; (2) action, progress and results; (3) collective unity or team spirit; and (4) individual selection and motivation. Public leadership focuses on the 34 behaviors involved in influencing two or more people simultaneously. Private leadership covers the 14 behaviors needed to influence individuals one-to-one.

The third-personal leadership-is an "inner" level and concerns a person's growth toward greater leadership presence, know-how, and skill. Working on one's personal leadership has three aspects: (1) Technical know-how and skill, (2) Developing the right attitude toward other people, which is the basis of servant leadership, and (3) Psychological self-mastery, the foundation for authentic leadership.

Scouller argued that self-mastery is the key to growing one's leadership presence, building trusting relationships with followers, and dissolving one's limiting beliefs and habits. This enables behavioral flexibility as circumstances change, while staying connected to one's core values (that is, while remaining authentic). To support leaders' development, he introduced a new model of the human psyche and outlined the principles and techniques of self-mastery, which include the practice of mindfulness meditation.[67]: 137-237

Bernard Bass and colleagues developed the idea of two different types of leadership: transactional which involves exchange of labor for rewards, and transformational which is based on concern for employees, intellectual stimulation, and providing a group vision.[68]

The transactional leader[69] is given power to perform certain tasks and reward or punish for the team's performance. It gives the opportunity to the manager to lead the group and the group agrees to follow his lead to accomplish a predetermined goal in exchange for something else. Power is given to the leader to evaluate, correct, and train subordinates when productivity is not up to the desired level, and reward effectiveness when expected outcome is reached.

Leader-member exchange theory

Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory addresses a specific aspect of the leadership process,[70] which evolved from an earlier theory called the vertical dyad linkage model.[71] Both of these models focus on the interaction between leaders and individual followers. Similar to the transactional approach, this interaction is viewed as a fair exchange whereby the leader provides certain benefits such as task guidance, advice, support, and/or significant rewards and the followers reciprocate by giving the leader respect, cooperation, commitment to the task and good performance. However, LMX recognizes that leaders and individual followers will vary in the type of exchange that develops between them.[72] LMX theorizes that the type of exchanges between the leader and specific followers can lead to the creation of in-groups and out-groups. In-group members are said to have high-quality exchanges with the leader, while out-group members have low-quality exchanges with the leader.[73]

In-group members

Out-group members

Out-group members often receive less time and more distant exchanges than their in-group counterparts. With out-group members, leaders expect no more than adequate job performance, good attendance, reasonable respect, and adherence to the job description in exchange for a fair wage and standard benefits. The leader spends less time with out-group members, they have fewer developmental experiences, and the leader tends to emphasize his/her formal authority to obtain compliance to leader requests. Research shows that out-group members are less satisfied with their job and organization, receive lower performance evaluations from the leader, see their leader as less fair, and are more likely to file grievances or leave the organization.[72]

Leadership can be an emotion-laden process, with emotions entwined with the social influence process.[74] A leader's mood affects his/her group. These effects can be described in three levels:[75]

The mood of individual group members

Members of groups whose leaders are in a positive mood experience more positive mood than do group members with leaders in a negative mood. Leaders transmit their moods to other group members through the mechanism of emotional contagion.[75] Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which charismatic leaders influence followers.[76]

The affective tone of the group

Group affective tone represents the consistent or homogeneous affective reactions within a group. Group affective tone is an aggregate of the moods of the individual members of the group and refers to mood at the group level of analysis. Groups with leaders in a positive mood have a more positive affective tone than do groups with leaders in a negative mood.[75]

Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy

Public expressions of mood impact how group members think and act. When people experience and express mood, they send signals to others. Leaders signal their goals, intentions, and attitudes through their expressions of moods. For example, expressions of positive moods by leaders signal that leaders deem progress toward goals to be good. The group members respond to those signals cognitively and behaviorally in ways that are reflected in the group processes.[75]

Beyond the leader's mood, her/his behavior is a source for employee positive and negative emotions at work. The leader's behavior creates situations and events that lead to emotional response, for example by giving feedback, allocating tasks, and distributing resources. Since employee behavior and productivity are affected by their emotional states, it is imperative to consider employee emotional responses to organizational leaders.[78] Emotional intelligence-the ability to understand and manage moods and emotions in the self and others-contributes to effective leadership within organizations.[77]

The neo-emergent leadership theory (from the Oxford Strategic Leadership Programme[79]) sees leadership as an impression formed through the communication of information by the leader or by other stakeholders,[80] not through the actions of the leader. In other words, the reproduction of information or stories form the basis of the perception of leadership by the majority. It is well known by historians that the naval hero Lord Nelson often wrote his own versions of battles he was involved in, so that when he arrived home in England, he would receive a true hero's welcome.[81] In modern society, various media outlets, including the press and blogs, present their own interpretations of leaders. These depictions can stem from actual circumstances, but they might also arise from political influences, monetary incentives, or the personal agendas of the author, media, or leader. Consequently, the impression of leaders is often constructed and may not accurately mirror their genuine leadership attributes. This highlights the historical role of concepts like royal lineage, which once stood as a substitute for evaluating or comprehending adept governance abilities.

Leadership emergence is the idea that people born with specific characteristics become leaders, and those without these characteristics do not become leaders.

Many personality characteristics are reliably associated with leadership emergence. The list includes, but is not limited to: assertiveness, authenticity, Big Five personality factors, birth order, character strengths, dominance, emotional intelligence, gender identity, intelligence, narcissism, self-efficacy for leadership, self-monitoring, and social motivation. Other areas of study in relation to how and why leaders emerge include narcissistic traits, absentee leaders, and participation. Today's sophisticated research methods look at personality characteristics in combination to determine patterns of leadership emergence.

Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, and Nelson Mandela share traits that an average person does not. Research indicates that up to 30% of leader emergence has a genetic basis. No research has found a "leadership gene"; instead we inherit certain traits that might influence our decision to seek leadership. Anecdotal and empirical evidence support a stable relationship between specific traits and leadership behavior. Using a large international sample researchers found three factors that motivate leaders: affective identity (enjoyment of leading), non-calculative (leading earns reinforcement), and social-normative (sense of obligation).

The relationship between assertiveness and leadership emergence is curvilinear: individuals who are either low in assertiveness or very high in assertiveness are less likely to be identified as leaders.

Individuals who are more aware of their personality qualities, including their values and beliefs, and are less biased when processing self-relevant information, are more likely to be accepted as leaders.

Those who emerge as leaders tend to be more extroverted, conscientious, emotionally stable, and open to experience, although these tendencies are stronger in laboratory studies of leaderless groups. However, introversion-extroversion appears to be the most influential quality in leadership emergence; specifically, leaders tend to be high in extroversion. Introversion-extroversion is also the quality that can be judged most easily among those in the Big Five Traits. Agreeableness, the last factor of the Big Five personality traits, does not seem to play any meaningful role in leadership emergence.

Those born first in their families, and only children, are hypothesized to be more driven to seek leadership and control in social settings. Middle-born children tend to accept follower roles in groups, and later-borns are thought to be rebellious and creative.

Those seeking leadership positions in a military organization had elevated scores on a number of indicators of strength of character, including honesty, hope, bravery, industry, and teamwork.

Individuals with dominant personalities (they describe themselves as high in the desire to control their environment and influence other people, and are likely to express their opinions in a forceful way) are more likely to act as leaders in small-group situations.

Individuals with high emotional intelligence have increased ability to understand and relate to people. They have skills in communicating and decoding emotions and they deal with others wisely and effectively. Such people communicate their ideas in more robust ways, are better able to read the politics of a situation, are less likely to lose control of their emotions, are less likely to be inappropriately angry or critical, and in consequence are more likely to emerge as leaders.

Individuals with higher intelligence exhibit superior judgement, higher verbal skills (both written and oral), quicker learning and acquisition of knowledge, and are more likely to emerge as leaders. Correlation between IQ and leadership emergence was found to be between .25 and .30. However, groups generally prefer leaders that do not exceed in intelligence the prowess of average member by a wide margin, as they fear that high intelligence may be translated to differences in communication, trust, interests, and values

An individual's belief in their ability to lead is associated with an increased willingness to accept a leadership role and find success in its pursuit.

There are no set conditions for this characteristic to become emergent. However, it must be sustained by an individual's belief that they have the ability to learn and improve it with time. Individuals partly evaluate their own capabilities by observing others; working with a superior who is seen as an effective leader may help the individual develop a belief that he or she can perform in a similar manner.

Individuals who closely manage and adjust their behavior based on the social context, often referred to as high self-monitors, have a greater tendency to assume leadership roles within a group. This propensity is attributed to their heightened interest in elevating their status and their readiness to conform their actions to match the requirements of the given situation.

People who exhibit both a drive for achievement and a desire for social connections tend to participate actively in group-based efforts to solve problems. Additionally, they have a higher likelihood of being chosen as leaders within these groups.

Narcissism, hubris and other negative traits

A number of negative traits of leadership have also been studied. Individuals who take on leadership roles in turbulent situations, such as groups facing a threat or ones in which status is determined by intense competition among rivals within the group, tend to be narcissistic: arrogant, self-absorbed, hostile, and very self-confident.

Existing research has shown that absentee leaders-those who rise into power, but not necessarily because of their skills, and who are marginally engaging with their role-are actually worse than destructive leaders, because it takes longer to pinpoint their mistakes.

A willingness to participate in a group can indicate a person's interest as well as their willingness to take responsibility for how the group performs. Those who do not say much during a group meeting are less likely to emerge as a leader than those who speak up. There is however some debate over whether the quality of participation in a group matters more than the quantity.

A hypothesis termed the 'babble effect' or the 'babble hypothesis' has been studied as a factor in the emergence of leaders. It posits that leader emergence is highly correlated with the quantity of speaking time-specifically, those who speak a lot in a group setting are more likely to become a group leader.

The quantity of participation is more important that the quality of these contributions when it comes to leader emergence. However, some studies indicate that there must be some element of quality combined with quantity to support leader emergence. Thus, while sheer quantity does matter to leadership, when the contributions made are also of high-quality leader emergence is further facilitated.

A leadership style is a leader's way of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. It is the result of the philosophy, personality, and experience of the leader. Rhetoric specialists have also developed models for understanding leadership.

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader, as with dictators.

Autocratic leaders do not ask for or entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. Autocratic management can be been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision to him/herself until he/she feels it needs to be shared with the rest of the group.

The democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing decision-making abilities with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by practicing social equality. This has also been called shared leadership.

In laissez-faire or free-rein leadership, decision-making is passed on to the subordinates. (The phrase laissez-faire is French and literally means "let them do"). Subordinates are given the right and power to make decisions to establish goals and work out the problems or hurdles, and are given a high degree of independence and freedom to formulate their own objectives and ways to achieve them..

Task-oriented leadership is a style characterized by a leader's concentration on the necessary tasks to achieve specific production objectives. Leaders following this approach emphasize the creation of systematic solutions for given problems or goals, ensuring strict adherence to deadlines, and achieving targeted outcomes.

Unlike leaders who prioritize accommodating group members, those with a task-oriented approach concentrate on obtaining precise solutions to fulfill production aims. Consequently, they are skilled at ensuring timely goal attainment, although the well-being of their group members might be compromised. These leaders maintain an unwavering focus on both the overall goal and the assigned tasks for each team member.

Relationship-oriented leadership is a style in which the leader focuses on the relationships amongst the group and is generally more concerned with the overall well-being and satisfaction of group members. Relationship-oriented leaders emphasize communication within the group, show trust and confidence in group members, and show appreciation for work done.

Relationship-oriented leaders are focused on developing the team and the relationships in it. The positives to having this kind of environment are that team members are more motivated and have support. However, the emphasis on relations as opposed to getting a job done might make productivity suffer.

Paternalism leadership styles often reflect a father-figure mindset. The structure of team is organized hierarchically where the leader is viewed above the followers. The leader also provides both professional and personal direction in the lives of the members. Members' choices are limited due to the rigid direction given by the leader.

The term paternalism is from the Latin pater meaning "father". The leader is most often a male. This leadership style is often found in Russia, Africa, and Pacific Asian Societies.

With the transformation into a knowledge society, the concept of servant leadership has become more popular, notably through modern technology management styles such as Agile. In this style, the leadership is externalized from the leader who serves as a guardian of the methodology and a "servant" or service provider to the team they lead. The cohesion and common direction of the team is dictated by a common culture, common goals and sometimes a specific methodology. This style is different from the laissez-faire in that the leader constantly works towards reaching the common goals as a team, but without giving explicit directions on tasks.

Transactional leadership refers to an exchange relationship between a leader and followers in which they both strive to meet their own self-interests. The term transactional leadership was introduced by Weber in 1947. There are several forms of transactional leadership, the first being contingent reward, in which the leader outlines what the follower must do to be rewarded for the effort. The second form of transactional leadership is management-by-exception, in which the leader monitors performance of the follower and takes corrective action if standards are not met. Finally transactional leaders may be laissez-faire, avoiding taking any action at all.

Transformational leadership refers to a leader who moves beyond immediate self interests using idealized influence ( charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation ( creativity), or individualized consideration. Idealized influence and inspirational motivation are when a leader is able to envision and communicate a mutually desirable future state. Intellectual stimulation is when a leader helps their followers to become more creative and innovative. Individualized consideration is when a leader pays attention to the developmental needs of their followers, supporting and coaching them. A transformational leader is one who lead others to lead themselves.

Another factor that affects leadership style is whether the leader is male or female. When men and women come together in groups, they tend to adopt different leadership styles. Men generally assume an agentic leadership style. They are task-oriented, active, decision focused, independent, and goal oriented. Women, on the other hand, are generally more communal when they assume a leadership position; they strive to be helpful towards others, warm in relation to others, understanding, and mindful of others' feelings. In general, when women are asked to describe themselves to others in newly formed groups, they emphasize their open, fair, responsible, and pleasant communal qualities. They give advice, offer assurances, and manage conflicts in an attempt to maintain positive relationships among group members. Women connect more positively to group members by smiling, maintaining eye contact, and responding tactfully to others' comments. Men, conversely, describe themselves as influential, powerful, and proficient at the task that needs to be done. They tend to place more focus on initiating structure within the group, setting standards and objectives, identifying roles, defining responsibilities and standard operating procedures, proposing solutions to problems, monitoring compliance with procedures, and emphasizing the need for productivity and efficiency in the work that needs to be done. As leaders, men are primarily task-oriented, but women tend to be both task- and relationship-oriented. However, these sex differences are only tendencies, and do not manifest themselves within men and women across all groups and situations. Meta-analyses show that people associate masculinity and agency more strongly with leadership than femininity and communion. Such stereotypes may have an effect on leadership evaluations of men and women.

In times of crisis, women tend to lead better than men due to a show of empathy and confidence during briefings and other forms of communication. This has been critical during the COVID-19 pandemic as female governed states showed fewer deaths than male led states.

Many things contribute to barriers to women's entrance into leadership. These barriers also differ among cultures. Despite the increasing number of female leaders in the world, only a small fraction come from non- westernized cultures. Although the barriers listed below may be more severe in non-western cultures, this does not imply that westernized cultures do not have these barriers as well. These subsections aim to compare the differences between the two:

Research and Literature

Maternity Leave

Studies have shown the importance of longer paid maternity leave and the positive effects it has on a female employee's mental health and return to work. In Sweden, it was shown that the increased flexibility in timing for mothers to return to work decreased the odds of poor mental health reports. In non-western cultures that mostly follow paternalism, lack of knowledge on the benefits of maternity leave impacts the support given to the women during an important time in their life.

Society and Laws

Countries that follow paternalism, such as India, allow for women to be treated unjustly. Issues such as child marriage and minor punishments for perpetrators in crimes against women shape society's view on how women should be treated. This can prevent women from feeling comfortable speaking out in personal and professional settings.

Glass Ceilings and Glass Cliffs

Some researchers argued that the influence of leaders on organizational outcomes is overrated and romanticized as a result of biased attributions about leaders. Despite these assertions, however, it is largely recognized and accepted by practitioners and researchers that leadership is important, and research supports the notion that leaders do contribute to key organizational outcomes. To facilitate successful leadership performance it is important to understand and accurately measure it.

Job performance generally refers to behavior that contributes to organizational success. Campbell identified a number of specific types of performance dimensions; leadership was one of them. There is no consistent, overall definition of leadership performance. Many distinct conceptualizations are often lumped together under the umbrella of leadership performance. "Leadership performance" may refer to the career success of the individual leader, performance of the group or organization, or even leader emergence. Each of these measures can be considered conceptually distinct. While they may be related, they are different outcomes and their inclusion should depend on the applied or research focus.

Another way to conceptualize leader performance is to focus on the outcomes of the leader's followers, group, team, unit, or organization. In evaluating this type of leader performance, two general strategies are typically used. The first relies on subjective perceptions of the leader's performance from subordinates, superiors, or occasionally peers or other parties. The other type of effectiveness measures are more objective indicators of follower or unit performance, such as measures of productivity, goal attainment, sales figures, or unit financial performance.

Measuring leadership has proven difficult and complex-even impossible. Attempts to assess leadership performance via group performance bring in multifarious different factors. Different perceptions of leadership itself may lead to differing measuring methods. Nevertheless, leadership theoreticians have proven perversely reluctant to abandon the vague subjective qualitative popular concept of "leaders".

Julius Caesar, one of the world's greatest military leaders

Most theories in the 20th century argued that great leaders were born, not made. Later studies indicated that leadership is more complex and cannot be boiled down to a few key traits of an individual: One such trait or set of traits does not make an extraordinary leader. Scholars have found leadership traits of an individual that do not change from situation to situation-traits such as intelligence, assertiveness, or physical attractiveness.[130] However, each key trait may be applied to situations differently, depending on the circumstances.

Determination and drive include traits such as initiative, energy, assertiveness, perseverance, and sometimes dominance. People with these traits wholeheartedly pursue their goals, work long hours, are ambitious, and often are very competitive.

Cognitive capacity includes intelligence, analytical and verbal ability, behavioral flexibility, and good judgment. Individuals with these traits can formulate solutions to difficult problems, work well under stress or deadlines, adapt to changing situations, and create well-thought-out plans for the future. Steve Jobs and Abraham Lincoln had the traits of determination and drive as well as possessing cognitive capacity, demonstrated by their ability to adapt to their continuously changing environments.[130]

Self-confidence encompasses the traits of high self-esteem, assertiveness, emotional stability, and self-assurance. Leaders who are self-confident do not doubt themselves or their abilities and decisions. They also can project this self-confidence onto others, building their trust and commitment.

Integrity is demonstrated in leaders who are truthful, trustworthy, principled, consistent, dependable, loyal, and not deceptive. Leaders with integrity often share these values with their followers, as this trait is mainly an ethics issue. These leaders keep their word and are honest and open with their cohorts.

Few great leaders encompass all of the traits listed above, but many have the ability to apply a number of them to succeed.

Werner Erhard, Michael C. Jensen, Steve Zaffron, and Kari Granger described leadership as "an exercise in language that results in the realization of a future that was not going to happen anyway, which future fulfills (or contributes to fulfilling) the concerns of the relevant parties." In this definition leadership concerns the future and includes the fundamental concerns of the relevant parties. This differs from relating to the relevant parties as "followers" and calling up an image of a single leader with others following. Rather, a future that fulfills the fundamental concerns of the relevant parties indicates the future that was not going to happen is not the "idea of the leader", but rather is what emerges from digging deep to find the underlying concerns of those who are impacted by the leadership.

Organizations

An organization that is established as an instrument or as a means for achieving defined objectives has been referred to by sociologists as a formal organization. Its design specifies how goals are subdivided and this is reflected in subdivisions of the organization. Divisions, departments, sections, positions, jobs, and tasks make up this work structure. The formal organization is expected to behave impersonally in regard to relationships with clients or with its members. According to Weber's model, entry and subsequent advancement is by merit or seniority. Employees receive a salary and enjoy a degree of tenure that safeguards them from the arbitrary influence of superiors or of powerful clients. The higher one's position in the hierarchy, the greater one's presumed expertise in adjudicating problems that may arise in the course of the work carried out at lower levels of the organization. This bureaucratic structure forms the basis for the appointment of heads or chiefs of administrative subdivisions in the organization and endows them with the authority attached to their position.

In contrast to the appointed head or chief of an administrative unit, a leader emerges within the context of the informal organization that underlies the formal structure. The informal organization expresses the personal objectives and goals of the individual membership. Their objectives and goals may or may not coincide with those of the formal organization. The informal organization represents an extension of the social structures that generally characterize human life-the spontaneous emergence of groups and organizations as ends in themselves.

In prehistoric times, humanity was preoccupied with personal security, maintenance, protection, and survival. Now humanity spends a major portion of its waking hours working for organizations. The need to identify with a community that provides security, protection, maintenance, and a feeling of belonging has continued unchanged from prehistoric times. This need is met by the informal organization and its emergent, or unofficial, leaders.

Leaders emerge from within the structure of the informal organization. Their personal qualities, the demands of the situation, or a combination of these and other factors attract followers who accept their leadership within one or several overlay structures. Instead of the authority of position held by an appointed head or chief, the emergent leader wields influence or power. Influence is the ability of a person to gain co-operation from others by means of persuasion or control over rewards. Power is a stronger form of influence because it reflects a person's ability to enforce action through the control of a means of punishment.

A leader is a person who influences a group of people towards a specific result. In this scenario, leadership is not dependent on title or formal authority. Ogbonnia defines an effective leader "as an individual with the capacity to consistently succeed in a given condition and be viewed as meeting the expectations of an organization or society". John Hoyle argues that leaders are recognized by their capacity for caring for others, clear communication, and a commitment to persist. A person who is appointed to a managerial position has the right to command and enforce obedience by virtue of the authority of their position. However, they must possess adequate personal attributes to match this authority, because authority is only potentially available to them. In the absence of sufficient personal competence, a manager may be confronted by an emergent leader who can challenge her/his role in the organization and reduce it to that of a figurehead. However, only authority of position has the backing of formal sanctions. It follows that whoever wields personal influence and power can legitimize this only by gaining a formal position in a hierarchy, with commensurate authority. Leadership can be defined as one's ability to get others to willingly follow. Every organization needs leaders at every level.

The terms " management" and "leadership" have, in the organizational context, been used both as synonyms and with clearly differentiated meanings. However Bennis and Nanus were clear in their distinction in their frequently quoted phrase "Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing". Debate is common about whether the use of these terms should be restricted, and reflects an awareness of the distinction made by Burns between "transactional" leadership (characterized by emphasis on procedures, contingent reward, and management by exception) and "transformational" leadership (characterized by charisma, personal relationships, and creativity). The role of leader is one in which one can try to deal with trust issues and issues derived from lacking trust.

In contrast to individual leadership, some organizations have adopted group leadership. In this so-called shared leadership, more than one person provides direction to the group as a whole. It is furthermore characterized by shared responsibility, cooperation, and mutual influence among team members. Some organizations have taken this approach in hopes of increasing creativity, reducing costs, or downsizing. Others may see the traditional leadership of a boss as costing too much in team performance. In some situations, the team members best able to handle any given phase of the project become the temporary leaders. Additionally, as each team member has the opportunity to experience the elevated level of empowerment, it energizes staff and feeds the cycle of success.

Leaders who demonstrate persistence, tenacity, determination, and synergistic communication skills will bring out the same qualities in their groups. Good leaders use their own inner mentors to energize their team and organizations and lead a team to achieve success.

According to the National School Boards Association (U.S.A.), these group leaderships or leadership teams have these specific characteristics:

Characteristics of a Team

There must be an awareness of unity on the part of all its members.

There must be interpersonal relationship. Members must have a chance to contribute, and to learn from and work with others.

The members must have the ability to act together toward a common goal.

Ten characteristics of well-functioning teams

1. Purpose: Members proudly share a sense of why the team exists and are invested in accomplishing its mission and goals.

2. Priorities: Members know what needs to be done next, by whom, and by when to achieve team goals.

3. Roles: Members know their roles in getting tasks done and when to allow a more skillful member to do a certain task.

4. Decisions: Authority and decision-making lines are clearly understood.

5. Conflict: Conflict is dealt with openly and is considered important to decision-making and personal growth.

6. Personal traits: Members feel their unique personalities are appreciated and well utilized.

7. Norms: Group norms for working together are set and seen as standards for every one in the groups.

8. Effectiveness: Members find team meetings efficient and productive and look forward to this time together.

9. Success: Members know clearly when the team has met with success and share in this equally and proudly.

10. Training: Opportunities for feedback and updating skills are provided and taken advantage of by team members.

Self-leadership is a process that occurs within an individual. Self-leadership is having a developed sense of who you are, what you can achieve, and what are your goals are, coupled with the ability to affect your emotions, behaviors, and communication. At the center of leadership is the person who is motivated to make the difference. Self-leadership is a way toward more effectively leading other people.

Mark van Vugt and Anjana Ahuja in Naturally Selected: The Evolutionary Science of Leadership present cases of leadership in non-human animals, from ants and bees to baboons and chimpanzees. They suggest that leadership has a long evolutionary history and that the same mechanisms underpinning leadership in humans appear in other social species, too. They also suggest that the evolutionary origins of leadership differ from those of dominance. In one study, van Vugt and his team looked at the relation between basal testosterone and leadership versus dominance. They found that testosterone correlates with dominance but not with leadership. This was replicated in a sample of managers in which there was no relation between hierarchical position and testosterone level.

Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson, in Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, present evidence that only humans and chimpanzees, among all the animals living on Earth, share a similar tendency for a cluster of behaviors: violence, territoriality, and competition for uniting behind the one chief male of the land. This position is contentious. Many animals apart from apes are territorial, compete, exhibit violence, and have a social structure controlled by a dominant male (lions, wolves, etc.), suggesting Wrangham and Peterson's evidence is not empirical. However, we must examine other species as well, including elephants (which are matriarchal and follow an alpha female), meerkats (which are likewise matriarchal), sheep (which "follow" in some sense castrated bellwethers), and many others.

By comparison, bonobos, the second-closest species-relatives of humans, do not unite behind the chief male of the land. Bonobos show deference to an alpha or top-ranking female that, with the support of her coalition of other females, can prove as strong as the strongest male. Thus, if leadership amounts to getting the greatest number of followers, then among the bonobos, a female almost always exerts the strongest and most effective leadership. (Incidentally, not all scientists agree on the allegedly peaceful nature of the bonobo or with its reputation as a " hippie chimp".)

Leadership has been described as one of the least understood concepts across all cultures and civilizations. Many researchers have stressed the prevalence of this misunderstanding, stating that several flawed assumptions, or myths, concerning leadership interfere with people's conception of what leadership is about.

According to some, leadership is determined by distinctive dispositional characteristics present at birth (e.g., extraversion, intelligence, or ingenuity). However, evidence shows that leadership also develops through hard work and careful observation. Thus, effective leadership can result from nature (i.e., innate talents) as well as nurture (i.e., acquired skills).

Although leadership is certainly a form of power, it is not demarcated by power over people. Rather, it is a power with people that exists as a reciprocal relationship between a leader and his/her followers. Despite popular belief, the use of manipulation, coercion, and domination to influence others is not a requirement for leadership. People who seek group consent and strive to act in the best interests of others can also become effective leaders.

The validity of the assertion that groups flourish when guided by effective leaders can be illustrated using several examples. For instance, the bystander effect (failure to respond or offer assistance) that tends to develop within groups faced with an emergency is significantly reduced in groups guided by a leader. Moreover, group performance, creativity, and efficiency all tend to climb in businesses with designated managers or CEOs.

The difference leaders make is not always positive in nature. Leaders sometimes focus on fulfilling their own agendas at the expense of others, including their own followers. Leaders who focus on personal gain by employing stringent and manipulative leadership styles often make a difference, but usually do so through negative means.

In Western cultures it is generally assumed that group leaders make all the difference when it comes to group influence and overall goal-attainment. This romanticized view of leadership-the tendency to overestimate the degree of control leaders have over their groups and their groups' outcomes-ignores the existence of many other factors that influence group dynamics. For example, group cohesion, communication patterns, individual personality traits, group context, the nature or orientation of the work, as well as behavioral norms and established standards influence group functionality. For this reason, it is unwarranted to assume that all leaders are in complete control of their groups' achievements.

Not all groups need have a designated leader. Groups that are primarily composed of women, are limited in size, are free from stressful decision-making, or only exist for a short period of time (e.g., student work groups; pub quiz/trivia teams) often undergo a diffusion of responsibility, in which leadership tasks and roles are shared amongst members.

Group members' dependence on group leaders can lead to reduced self-reliance and overall group strength. Most people prefer to be led than to be without a leader. This "need for a leader" becomes especially strong in troubled groups that are experiencing some sort of conflict. Group members tend to be more contented and productive when they have a leader to guide them. Although individuals filling leadership roles can be a direct source of resentment for followers, most people appreciate the contributions that leaders make to their groups and consequently welcome the guidance of a leader.

One approach to team leadership examines action-oriented environments, where effective functional leadership is required to achieve critical or reactive tasks by small teams deployed into the field. Some examples of action-oriented leadership include extinguishing a rural fire, locating a missing person, leading a team on an outdoor expedition, or rescuing a person from a potentially hazardous environment.

Leadership of small groups is often created to respond to a situation or critical incident. In most cases, these teams are tasked to operate in remote and changeable environments with limited support or backup ("action environments"). Leadership of people in these environments requires a different set of skills to that of leaders in front-line management. These leaders must effectively operate remotely and negotiate the needs of the individual, team, and task within a changeable environment.

Other examples include modern technology deployments of small/medium-sized IT teams into client plant sites. Leadership of these teams requires hands-on experience and a lead-by-example attitude to empower team members to make well thought-out and concise decisions independent of executive management and/or home-base decision-makers. Early adoption of Scrum and Kanban branch development methodologies helped to alleviate the dependency that field teams had on trunk based development. This method of just-in-time action oriented development and deployment allowed remote plant sites to deploy up-to-date software patches frequently and without dependency on core team deployment schedules, satisfying the clients' needs to rapidly patch production environment bugs.

Carlyle's 1840 " Great Man theory", which emphasized the role of leading individuals, met opposition (from Herbert Spencer, Leo Tolstoy, and others) in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Karl Popper noted in 1945 that leaders can mislead and make mistakes-he warns against deferring to "great men".

Noam Chomsky and others have subjected the concept of leadership to critical thinking and assert that people abrogate their responsibility to think and will actions for themselves. While the conventional view of leadership may satisfy people who "want to be told what to do", these critics say that one should question subjection to a will or intellect other than one's own if the leader is not a subject-matter expert.

Concepts such as autogestion, employeeship, and common civic virtue, challenge the fundamentally anti-democratic nature of the leadership principle by stressing individual responsibility and/or group authority in the workplace and elsewhere and by focusing on the skills and attitudes that a person needs in general rather than separating out "leadership" as the basis of a special class of individuals.

Similarly, various historical calamities (such as World War II) can be attributed to a misplaced reliance on the principle of leadership as exhibited in dictatorship.

Bitar, Amer (2020). Bedouin Visual Leadership in the Middle East: The Power of Aesthetics and Practical Implications. Springer Nature. ISBN 9783030573973.

Carlyle, Thomas (1841). On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic History. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-1-4069-4419-8.

Ladkin, Donna (2011). Rethinking Leadership : A New Look at Old Leadership Questions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. ISBN 978-0-85793-131-3.

Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational Behavior: Behavior 1: Essential Theories of Motivation and Leadership. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.

Montana, Patrick J.; Bruce H. (2008). Management. Hauppauge, NY: Barron's Educational Series, Inc. ISBN 978-0-944740-04-0.

Hiebert, Murray; Klatt, Bruce (2000). The Encyclopedia of Leadership: A Practical Guide to Popular Leadership Theories and Techniques (1st ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780071363082.

Schultz, Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen (2010). Psychology and work today : an introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. p. 171. ISBN 978-0205683581.

Tittemore, James A. (2003). Leadership at all Levels. Canada: Boskwa Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9732914-0-7.

Journal articles

Ahlquist, John S.; Levi, Margaret (2011). "Leadership: What It Means, What It Does, and What We Want to Know About It". Annual Review of Political Science. 14 (1): 1-24

Avolio, Bruce J.; Walumbwa, Fred O.; Weber, Todd J. (2009). "Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions". Annual Review of Psychology. 60 (1): 421-449.

Bouilloud, Jean-Philippe; Deslandes, Ghislain; Mercier, Guillaume (2019). "The Leader as Chief Truth Officer: The Ethical Responsibility of "Managing the Truth" in Organizations". Journal of Business Ethics. 157: 1-13. doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3678-0. S2CID 149433917.

Hadley Cantril (1958) "Effective democratic leadership: a psychological interpretation", Journal of Individual Psychology 14: 128-38, and pages 139-49 in Psychology, Humanism and Scientific Inquiry (1988) edited by Albert H. Cantril, Transaction Books.

The dictionary definition of Leadership at Wiktionary

Quotations related to Leadership at Wikiquote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leadership, both as a research area and as a practical skill, encompasses the ability of an individual, group, or organization to " lead", influence, or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations. "Leadership" is a contested term.[1] Specialist literature debates various viewpoints on the concept, sometimes contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) North American versus European approaches.[2] Some U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Blue Ocean Leadership was created by world-renowned professors Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne. The same way that blue ocean strategy can create uncontested market space, blue ocean leadership can unleash the ocean of untapped talent and employee potential in organizations.

Unlike most research in the field of leadership that has largely drawn on psychology and cognitive science, blue ocean leadership developed by Kim and Mauborgne looks to the field of strategy to inform the practice of leadership in business.

Conventional Leadership
Development Approaches

Blue Ocean Leadership

Focus on the values, qualities and behavioral styles

Focus on acts and activities leaders need to undertake

Detached from market results people are expected to achieve

Leaders' actions closely connected to market realities

Focus mostly on the executive and senior levels

Distribute leadership across three management levels

Extra time required for leadership practices

High impact leadership acts and activities at low cost

How to put Blue Ocean Leadership into practice?

FOLLOW THE FOUR-STEP PROCESS TO CONVERT NONCUSTOMERS INTO CUSTOMERS OF YOUR LEADERSHIP

Blue Ocean Leadership involves a four step process that allows leaders to gain a clear understanding of just what changes it would take to bring out the best in their people, while conserving their most precious resource: TIME

01

See your leadership reality.

02

Develop alternative
Leadership Profiles.

03

Select to-be Leadership Profiles.

04

Institionalize new leadership pratices.

A Case in Point

A British Retail Group (BRG) applied Blue Ocean Leadership to redefine what effectiveness meant for frontline, midlevel and senior leaders.

Let's get academic

Releasing the ocean of untapped talent and energy of employees is something few companies can afford not to do. Visualising blue ocean leadership in comparison to conventional leadership practices will help you with implementation.

Blue Ocean
Leadership Q & A

Check out some of the most frequently asked questions on Blue Ocean Leadership
Read More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blue Ocean Leadership | Unlock Unrealized Talent & Energy in Organizations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blue Ocean Leadership was created by world-renowned professors Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne. The same way that blue ocean strategy can create uncontested market space, blue ocean leadership can unleash the ocean of untapped talent and employee potential in organizations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why are some leaders successful, while others fail?

The truth is that there is no "magic combination" of characteristics that makes a leader successful, and different characteristics matter in different circumstances.

This doesn't mean, however, that you can't learn to be an effective leader. You just need to understand the various approaches to leadership, so that you can use the right approach for your own situation.

One way of doing this is to learn about the core leadership theories that provide the backbone of our current understanding of leadership. We explore these in this article and in the video, below.

Click here to view a transcript of this video.

Tip:

Our article on Leadership Styles explores common leadership styles that have emerged from these core theories. These include the "transformational leadership" style, which is often the most effective approach to use in business situations.

The Four Core Theory Groups

Let's look at each of the four core groups of theory, and explore some of the tools and models that apply with each. (Keep in mind that there are many other theories out there.)

1. Trait Theories - What Type of Person Makes a Good Leader?

Trait theories argue that effective leaders share a number of common personality characteristics, or "traits."

Early trait theories said that leadership is an innate, instinctive quality that you do or don't have. Thankfully, we've moved on from this idea, and we're learning more about what we can do to develop leadership qualities within ourselves and others.

However, none of these traits, nor any specific combination of them, will guarantee success as a leader.

Traits are external behaviors that emerge from the things going on within our minds - and it's these internal beliefs and processes that are important for effective leadership.

We explore some of the traits and skills that you need to be a good leader in our articles What a Real Leader Knows, Level 5 Leadership, and What is Leadership?

2. Behavioral Theories - What Does a Good Leader Do?

Behavioral theories focus on how leaders behave. For instance, do leaders dictate what needs to be done and expect cooperation? Or do they involve their teams in decision-making to encourage acceptance and support?

1. Autocratic leaders make decisions without consulting their teams. This style of leadership is considered appropriate when decisions need to be made quickly, when there's no need for input, and when team agreement isn't necessary for a successful outcome.

2. Democratic leaders allow the team to provide input before making a decision, although the degree of input can vary from leader to leader. This style is important when team agreement matters, but it can be difficult to manage when there are lots of different perspectives and ideas.

3. Laissez-faire leaders don't interfere; they allow people within the team to make many of the decisions. This works well when the team is highly capable, is motivated, and doesn't need close supervision. However, this behavior can arise because the leader is lazy or distracted; and this is where this style of leadership can fail.

Clearly, how leaders behave affects their performance. Researchers have realized, though, that many of these leadership behaviors are appropriate at different times. The best leaders are those who can use many different behavioral styles, and choose the right style for each situation.

3. Contingency Theories - How Does the Situation Influence Good Leadership?

The realization that there is no one correct type of leader led to theories that the best leadership style depends on the situation. These theories try to predict which style is best in which circumstance.

For instance, when you need to make quick decisions, which style is best? When you need the full support of your team, is there a more effective way to lead? Should a leader be more people-oriented or task-oriented? These are all questions that contingency leadership theories try to address.

4. Power and Influence Theories - What Is the Source of the Leader's Power?

Power and influence theories of leadership take an entirely different approach - these are based on the different ways that leaders use power and influence to get things done, and they look at the leadership styles that emerge as a result.

Effective Leadership Styles

Transformational leaders show integrity, and they know how to develop a robust and inspiring vision of the future. They motivate people to achieve this vision, they manage its delivery, and they build ever stronger and more successful teams.

Key Points

Over time, several core theories about leadership have emerged. These theories fall into four main categories:

1. Trait theories.

2. Behavioral theories.

3. Contingency theories.

4. Power and influence theories.

"Transformational leadership," is the most effective style to use in most business situations. However, you can become a more effective leader by learning about these core leadership theories, and understanding the tools and models associated with each one.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Core Leadership Theories: Learning the Foundations of Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why are some leaders successful, while others fail? The truth is that there is no "magic combination" of characteristics that makes a leader successful, and different characteristics matter in different circumstances. This doesn't mean, however, that you can't learn to be an effective leader.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Technological Leadership | IGI Global

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is Technological Leadership? Definition of Technological Leadership: This is the act of commitment to the provision of technology facilities and enabling environment that can support their application in classroom instruction to promote learning among students. It entails the enhancement of the instructional roles of lecturers through the provision of technological facilities and coordinating their utilization for the achievement of instructional goals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Distributed leadership is a conceptual and analytical approach to understanding how the work of leadership takes place among the people and in context of a complex organization. Though developed and primarily used in education research, it has since been applied to other domains, including business and even tourism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is transformational leadership?

Transformational leadership is a leadership style in which leaders encourage, inspire and motivate employees to innovate and create change that will help grow and shape the future success of the company. This is accomplished by setting an example at the executive level through a strong sense of corporate culture, employee ownership and independence in the workplace.

Transformational leaders inspire and motivate their workforce without micromanaging - they trust trained employees to take authority over decisions in their assigned jobs. It's a management style that's designed to give employees more room to be creative, look to the future and find new solutions to old problems. Employees on the leadership track will also be prepared to become transformational leaders themselves through mentorship and training.

Transformational leadership model

The concept of transformational leadership started with James V. Downton in 1973 and was expanded by James Burns in 1978. In 1985, researcher Bernard M. Bass further expanded the concept to include ways for measuring the success of transformational leadership. This model encourages leaders to demonstrate authentic, strong leadership with the idea that employees will be inspired to follow suit.

While Bass' model dates to the '70s, it's still an effective leadership style practiced today - this style of authentic leadership never changes, just the environments it's used in. It's applicable across every industry, but it's especially vital to the fast-paced tech industry where innovation and agility can make or break a company.

For a deeper look at the transformational leadership model, see " How to apply transformational leadership at your company."

Transformational leadership characteristics

According to Bass, these are the hallmarks of a transformational leader that sets them apart from other leadership styles. A transformational leader is someone who:

Encourages the motivation and positive development of followers

Exemplifies moral standards within the organization and encourages the same of others

Fosters an ethical work environment with clear values, priorities and standards.

Builds company culture by encouraging employees to move from an attitude of self-interest to a mindset where they are working for the common good

Holds an emphasis on authenticity, cooperation and open communication

Provides coaching and mentoring but allowing employees to make decisions and take ownership of tasks

For a look at how to draw out your transformational leadership qualities in your resume, see " IT resume makeover: Highlighting transformational leadership."

Transformational leadership in IT

Although the concept of transformational leadership can apply to every industry - including healthcare, education and government agencies - it's increasingly important in IT as companies embrace digital transformation. Adapting to rapidly changing technology requires innovation and strong leadership to stay ahead of the curve and to remain competitive.

As leaders in IT, CIOs are responsible for setting the example as transformative leaders - especially considering they're largely responsible for digital transformation in the business. Gartner reports that 40 percent of CIOs are leaders of digital transformation in their organization, while 34 percent say they're responsible for innovation. Inspiring and motivating employees is an important puzzle piece when planning out digital transformation, as success depends on everyone buying into and embracing growth and change.

While there is certainly a growing need to keep an eye on the future - whether it's security, new technology or shifting platforms - not every part of IT will benefit from transformational leadership. Some processes, procedures and development projects require more structure, consistency and reliability; this is called transactional leadership.

To read how CIOs are making good on transformational leadership, see " Transformational CIOs juggle innovation and operations."

Transactional vs. transformational leadership

Transactional leadership is the exact opposite of transformational leadership - it relies on motivating employees through rewards and punishments. It requires supervision, oversight, organization and performance-monitoring. This leadership model doesn't try to innovate. Instead, it's rooted in keeping things consistent and predictable over time. Errors and faults are closely investigated, and the overall goal is to create efficient, routine procedures.

This style is best suited to departments or organizations that require routine and structure - areas where businesses want to reduce chaos or inefficiency. But it doesn't allow for innovation or future planning the same way transformational leadership will.

Transformational leadership, on the other hand, supports agile environments, especially where failure carries less risk. You want the development and maintenance of a current product to remain consistent and error free, but you don't want that to hinder the progress and growth of future updates and improvements.

Transactional leadership takes care of creating a consistent development process, while transformational leadership leaves people free to come up with new ideas and look at the future of products, services and ideas.

Training and certification

Although transformational leadership skills are considered soft skills, there are still plenty of resources, certificates and training programs aimed at developing transformational leaders. Here's a short list of online resources to earn training and certifications in transformational leadership. However, it's likely you can find an in-person training course at a local college or university in your home state.

Examples of transformational leaders

Harvard Business Review analyzed companies on the S&P and Fortune Global 500 list to uncover the best examples of transformational leadership. These businesses were judged on "new products, services and business models; repositioning its core business; and financial performance."

Jeff Bezos, Amazon: Harvard Business Review attribute's Bezos' "insider, outsider" status as part of what makes him a great transformational leader. As someone who jumped from the finance world, he brought a fresh perspective to e-commerce through years of experience in a different industry.

Reed Hastings, Netflix: Hastings tied for first alongside Bezos, and for similar reasons. Hailing from the software industry, he wasn't rooted in pre-established process and procedure in the television industry.

Jeff Boyd and Glenn Fogel, Priceline: Boyd and Fogel reinvented travel reservations by charging lower commission fees on reservations, but focused on smaller niche markets (inns, B&Bs and apartments), eventually spawning Booking.com.

Steve Jobs and Tim Cook, Apple: HBR points to Apple as an example of "dual transformation": Jobs innovated on original Microsoft products while also building a software ecosystem. Cook has extended on Jobs' vision, maintaining a focus on innovation, software and brand loyalty.

Mark Bertolini, Aetna: Bertolini is known for his realistic management approach in the healthcare industry. He says his goal is to build strategies around a realistic vision of the future.

Kent Thiry, DaVita: Thiry managed to take a bankrupt company and turn it into a thriving business through firm core values that included "service excellence, teamwork, accountability and fun," according to Harvard Business Review.

Satya Nadella, Microsoft: Nadella started at Microsoft in 1992 and worked his way up the corporate ladder, eventually running the business' cloud computing efforts, which landed him the executive position.

Emmanuel Faber, Danone: Faber started out as an architect for Danone and earned the CEO job after he helped develop the company's vision to turn the company into a sustainable health and nutrition company.

Heinrich Hiesinger, ThyssenKrupp: Hiesinger become CEO of ThyssenKrupp in 2011 and helped alleviate pressure from Asian competitors in the steel market by embracing newer forms of manufacturing, including 3D printing - "new growth areas" that now make up 47 percent of the business' sales.

Copyright © 2018 IDG Communications, Inc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is transformational leadership? A model for sparking innovation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transformational leadership is a leadership style in which leaders encourage, inspire and motivate employees to innovate and create change that will help grow and shape the future success of the company. This is accomplished by setting an example at the executive level through a strong sense of corporate culture, employee ownership and independence in the workplace.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-situational-theory-of-leadership-2795321

# data[].attributes.body
Menjadi pemimpin yang lebih berkesan di sekolah berdasarkan ilmu-ilmu menjadi seorang pemimpin

# data[].attributes.body
Pemimpin yang berkarisma memerlukan ilmu dan latihan.

# data[].attributes.body
Banyak kepelbagaian jenis-jenis kepimpinan yang boleh diaplikasikan di sekolah.

# data[].attributes.body
Menambah Ilmu pengurusan kepimpinan seperi jenis-jenis kepimpinan,gaya kepimpinan dan aplikasi dalam pentadbiran pendidikan

# data[].attributes.body
Senang faham, macam permainan bola sepak, setiap org diagihkan mengikut fungsi masing².