Leadership:
Literature Review
1.0 What is
Leadership?
According
to Burns (1978) leadership is considered as one of the most observed, but least
understood and comprehended phenomena in the world. For almost forever, several
scholars and researchers mainly focus on studying the subject or topic of
leadership and those vital factors and elements related to it. Thus, several
researches mainly focus on understanding better the different approaches,
methods and styles used and applied in leadership and their influences in an
organization and the entire society. For example, researches and studies in the
past years mainly focus on understanding what makes an effective leader (Eagly,
Johannesen-Schmidt, M C and Van Engen, 2003; Eagly 2007; Holt, Bjorklund and
Green, 2009). Leadership is considered as the ability to influence or affect
others and control the behaviors of the members of the group by using different
styles, approaches and methods, which include motivation and achieving
organizational goals (Rosette and Tost, 2010; Caldwell and Dixon, 2010).
The
term leadership has been described and defined by many authors and researchers
in many ways. Leadership “is a complex
social process, rooted in the values, skills, knowledge and ways of thinking of
both leaders and followers” (Gallos, 2008, 3).
Bernard Bass
defined leadership as “an interaction between two or more members of a group
that often involves a structuring of restructuring of the situation and the
perceptions and expectations of the members” (cited in Waite, 2008, 1).
President Harry Truman consider leader as those people who could “get people do what they don’t want to do and
like it.” It is the same with the definition given by Eileen Ford,
cofounder of Ford model agency, which she defined leadership as “the ability to convince people that they
want to do what you want them to do as if they had thought of it themselves.” On
the other hand, Warren Bennis, a leadership guru perceives leadership as “the energetic process of getting other
people fully and willingly committed to a course of action, to meet commonly
agreed of objectives” at the same time, leadership is about “understanding people” and relating with
those possible followers, and “having a
unique vision, making strategic choices and designing and enabling an
organization to get the job done” (cited in Parker and Begnaud 2004). This is the same with Gallos’ (2008,
3) definition: leadership “is about the
ongoing process of building and sustaining a relationship between those who
aspire to lead and those willing to follow.”
Grint
(2010) proposed a fourfold of typology of leadership definitions. Leadership
can be defined in 4 major alternatives including:
- Leadership
as position: it is where ‘leaders’ operate that makes
them leaders;
- Leadership
as person: it is who ‘leaders’ are that makes them
leaders;
- Leadership
as result: it is what ‘leaders’ achieve that makes
them leaders; and
- Leadership
as process: it is how ‘leaders’ get things done that
make them leaders (Grint, 2010, 4).
Most of the
definitions of leadership focus on autobiographical or biographical accounts,
which relate leadership to the person who
is considered as the leader. Others considered leadership as a process or the style a leader adopt and
implement or the different practices that are implemented by the leader. Some
considered leadership by focus on those people who has the authority to do so,
such as the definition of Truman and Ford. Last, some defined leadership as the
process of mobilizing a group or community to achieve a specific purpose – the result approach, such as the definition
of Bennis.
Thus, overall:
“leadership
is the focus of a group processes, as a personality attribute, as the art of
inducing compliance, as an exercise of influence, as a particular kind of act,
as a form of persuasion, as a power relation, as an instrument in the
attainment of goals, as an effect of interaction, as a differentiated role, and
as the initiation of structure” (Bass cited in
Waite, 2008, 1).
This
definition shows a complex set of conditions and situations which include
psyche of period, the economic situation as well as the overall structure of a
culture. Thus leadership covers all boundaries and can be considered as an
active and contributory part of the evolution of society, human development and
organizational progress and development (Waite, 2008, 1). The world is
experiencing different changes and development in both macro- and
micro-environment, which affect how people think, interact and relate with each
other, thus it influence how leadership is perceived and implemented. Likewise,
leadership is also one of the driving forces which shape the changes in
cultures and societies.
2.0
The Leadership Theories
2.1 Great Man Theory
The
Great Man theory is from Aristotelian philosophy that some people are born to
be leader whereas others are born to follow (Marquis and Huston, 2008). Thus,
it also contains a thread of belief of Darwinism with the idea that leadership
ability can be passed from generation to generation in genetic manner. Therefore,
it shows that only those chosen few are able to lead, therefore, it is a
natural ally to elitism (Outcalt, Faris and Mcmahon 2001). Due to the
influenced of Galton’s (1869) study of hereditary background of great men,
different early theorists tried to explore leadership based on inheritance. The
study of Woods (1913) of 14 nations over periods of 5 to 10 centuries found out
that brothers of kings also tended to become men of power, authority and
influence (Bass and Bass, 2008, 49).
2.2. Trait Theory
The
Trait theory was very popular early in the 20th century believe that
leaders are those individuals who have “a
natural ability to lead” (Komives, Lucas and McMahon, 1998 cited in
Outcalt, Faris and McMahon, 2001, 10). The study of Bird (1940) compiled a list
of 79 significant traits from 20 psychologically oriented studies. The same
were implemented by Smith and Krueger (1933) for educators and by Jenkins
(1947) for military leaders (cited in Bass and Bass, 2008, 50). The most common
traits identified in researches are: energy,
drive, enthusiasm, ambition, aggressiveness, decisiveness, self-assurance,
self-confidence, friendliness, affection, honesty, fairness, loyalty,
dependability, technical mastery and teaching
skills (Marriner-Tomey, 2004, 169). Figure 1 shows some of the common
leadership traits.
Figure 1
Some of Common Leadership Traits
Adapted from:
(Marriner-Tomey, 2004, 169)
2.3 Behavioral Theories
Due
the 1950s and 1960s, Behavioral or Style theories have materialized from the
study of management (Outcalt, Faris and Mcmahon 2001). It had played a vital
role in the development of more realistic and more complicated approaches to
leadership. The theory does not focus on the attributes a leader might possess
(trait theory) but focus on what the
leaders actually do (their behaviors)
(Griffin and Moorhead
2.3.1
Role Theory
Role
theory is a theoretical approach which borrows a large degree of ideas from the
sociological role theory and applies these notions to leader-follower
relations. The role theory believes that leadership within a group is the
outcome of a process of differentiation by which group members attain aims
faster and therefore, meet their individual needs and demands (Winkler, 2009).
2.4 Situational
Leadership Theory
Situational
leadership theory assumes that suitable and proper leader behaviour changes
from one situation to another. Thus, it focuses on identifying the vital
situational factors and to focus on how they relate in order to determine the
suitable behavior as a leader (Ricky and Moorhead
2.4.1
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership
The
basic assumptions of this model is that leaders must adapt their style to
‘maturity’ level of the followers, which is dependent on how ready and willing
they are to perform the required tasks (Mackay, 2006). The leader must response
in one of four ways: directing, coaching, supporting and delegation (Shriberg
and Shriberg, 2009, 72).
Figure 2
Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership
2.4.2
Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Model
Victor
Vroom and Phillip Yetton developed a leader-participation model which connects
leadership behaviour and participation in decision-making process. The
normative model offers a sequential set of rules that must be followed in order
to know the type and quantity of participation in decision making process. It
is a decision tree which includes 7 contingencies, which can be answered by yes
or no, this later on improved by Vroom and Jago, which made it 8 and 5
alternative leadership styles.
2.4.3
House’s Path-Goal Theory of Leadership
Robert
House developed the path-goal theory which states that successful leaders
support its followers by establishing clear objectives and establishing a clear
path in order to achieve these goals (Shriberg and Shriberg, 2008, 72). Thus,
leaders must motivate followers and will only be successful if they can
convince their followers to accomplish the task before then which will help
them to achieve something that they value (Shriberg and Shriberg, 2008, 73).
According
to Vroom and Yetton and Vroom and Jago (1988), the following questions are
helpful in sequence:
- Quality
Requirement: How important is the technical quality of the decision?
- Commitment
Requirement: How important is subordinate commitment to the decision?
- Leader’s
Information: Do you (the leader) have sufficient information to make a
high quality decision on your own?
- Problem
Structure: Is the problem well structured?
- Commitment
Probability: If you were to make the decision by yourself, is it
reasonably certain that your subordinates would be committed to the
decision?
- Goal
Congruence: Do subordinates share the organizational goals to be attained
in solving the problem?
- Subordinate
Conflict: Is conflict among subordinates over preferred solutions likely?
- Subordinate
Information: Do subordinates have sufficient information to make a high
quality decision? Source:
(http://faculty.css.edu/dswenson/web/LEAD/vroom-yetton.html)
2.5 Contingency Theories
The
term contingency means “it depends.” Thus the theory focus on the notion that
one thing depends on other things, therefore, in order for a leader to be
effective and efficient, there must be a suitable fit between the behaviour and
style of the leader , the follower and the situation (Lussier and Achua, 2009,
152).
2.5.1
Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory
Fiedler’s theory
assumes that leaders are either task-oriented or relationship-oriented but not
both. Task-oriented leader are those who are directive, structure situations,
set deadlines and make assignments. On the other hand, relationship-leaders
focus on people, considerate and are not strongly directive (Leitner, 2007).
2.5.2 Fiedler and
Garcia’s (1987) Cognitive Resource Theory
Cognitive
theory predicts that under high stress, leader experience is linked with
performance, while under low stress, leader intelligence is better predictor.
Therefore, stress can act as a cognitive load interfering with controlled
processing (Chemers, 1997, 111 - 112).
2.6
Transactional Leadership
Transactional
leadership applies on being task-oriented and the ability to direct the group
in a specific manner in order to do finite goals and objective. In order to do
this, different approaches are used and applied, including: rewarding,
punishing, appealing to the sense of altruism of the group members or appealing
to the rational judgment of the followers (Martin, 2006, 47).
2.6.1
LMX
theory was first called vertical-dyad linkage. It is based on two core
theories: Blau’s (1964) social exchange theory and Katz and Kahn’s (1978) role
theory (Leponiemi, n.d., 8). The LMX theory argues that due to time pressures,
leaders establish a special relationship with a small group of their followers.
These individuals make up the in-group because they are trusted and get a
disproportionate degree of attention from the leaders, therefore, they apt to
receive special privileges and treatments. Other followers belong to the
out-group; they get less attention of the leaders, get few of the preferred
rewards and control, therefore, the leader-follower relationship is based only
on formal authority relationship (Robbins, 2009, 301).
Figure 3
LMX Theory
Source: (Robbins, 2009,
301)
2.7 Transformational
Leadership
Transformational
leadership is considered as the leadership with is closer to the prototype of
leadership that most people think when describing their ideal leader.
Transformational leaders have a strong sense of mission and the capability to
attract loyal and committed followers (Martin, 2006, 47).
2.7.1
Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory
According
to Bass, transformational leaders produce leadership behavior which helps him
or her to fulfil and attain four main functions, which are also known as the
Four Is, which include:
- Idealized leadership
offers a vision and a sense of mission, inspire and encourage pride and
enables to gain trust and respect;
- Inspirational motivational
connects high expectations and shows vital purposes in simple manners;
- Intellectual stimulation
encourages intelligence and careful problem solving;
- Individualized consideration
enables to have personal attention, treats people in individual and unique
manner and focus on coaching and advising (Martin, 2006, 47).
2.7.1
Burn’s Transformational Leadership Theory
Burns
(1978, 20) describes transforming leadership as “a process where leaders and followers raise one another to higher
levels of morality and motivation.” Thus, it can result in a relationship
and connection of mutual stimulation and elevation which alters and adapts
followers into leaders, and may convert leaders into moral agents. Consequently,
leaders appeal to the higher ideals and moral values of the followers,
including their freedom, justice, fairness and equality, peace, humanitarianism
as well as those negative emotions and feelings like fear, voracity, envy or
hatred. Therefore, According to Burns (1978, 19) transforming leadership
assumes that leadership is undividable from the needs and objectives of the
followers, therefore, the importance of leader-follower relationship is the
relationship and connection of persons with the different degrees of
motivations of power possibilities, including skills in pursuing common or
joint purposes (cited in Komives, Lucas and McMahon, 2009).
2.7.2
Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Participation
The
leadership practice theory of Kouzes and Posner (1987) starts with empirical
approach than chronological approach. The authors surveyed 1,330 people regarding
personal best experiences. The results enabled the researchers to design a
leadership instrument called the Leadership Practices Inventory. Like other
transformational theorists, the study of Kouzes and Posner (1987) use a
universal approach, which enable them not to discriminate based on the degree
of leadership or the situation types, and the only restraining factor is the
quality of implementation of the actions or practices. According to Kouzes and
Posner, successful leaders must “challenge
the process” by focusing on quest and courage. Furthermore, it is also
vital for leaders to inspire a shared
vision”, “enable others to act”, “model the way” and “encourage the heart” (Van Wart, 2007, 6).
References
Bass, B. and Bass, R. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: theory, research and managerial
applications. Simon and Schuster.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York ,
NY
Chemers, M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. Routledge.
Eagly, A H 2007, “Female leadership advantage and
disadvantage: resolving the contradictions”. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 31, 1 – 12.
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. and Van Engen,
M. L. (2003), “Transformational, transactional and laissaez-faire leadership
styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men”, American Psychological Association. 128, 569 – 591.
Gallos, J. (2008). Business
leadership: A Jossey-Bass reader. John Wiley and Sons.
Grint, K. (2010). Leadership:
a very short introduction. Oxford
University
Holts, S., Bjorklund, R and Green, V. (2009).
“Leadership and culture: examining the relationship cultural background and
leadership perceptions”, Journal of
Global Business Issues, 3, 149 – 164.
Leitner, A. (2007). Concept of leadership and management. GRIN Verlag.
Leponiemi, J. Ethnic
minority member perspective on leader-member exchange. University of Vaasa
Lussier, R. and Achua, C. (2009). Leadership: theory, application & skill development. Cengage
Learning.
Mackay, A. (2006). Motivation,
ability and confidence building in people. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Marriner-Tomey, A. (2004). Guide to nursing management and leadership. Elsevier Health
Sciences.
Marquis, B. and Huston, C. (2008). Leadership roles and management functions in
nursing: theory and application. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Martin, B. (2006). Outdoor
leadership: theory and practice. Human Kinetics.
Outcalt, C., Faris, S. and McMahon, K. (2001). Developing non-hierarchical leadership on
campus: case studies and best practices in higher education. Greenwood
Publishing Group.
Parker, J. P. and Begnaud, L.G. (2004). Developing creative leadership. Libraries
Unlimited.
Robbins, S. (2009). Organisational Behaviour: global and Southern African perspectives. South Africa : Pearson , South Africa
Rosette, A. and Tost, L. (2010). “Agentic women and
communal leadership: how role prescriptions confer advantage to top women
leaders”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 95,
221 – 235.
Shriberg, A. and Shriberg, D. (2009). Practicing leadership principles and
applications. John Wiley and Sons.
Van Wart, M. (2007). Leadership in public organizations: an introduction. M. E. Sharpe.
Vroom, V. H. and Jago, A. G. (1988). The new leadership: Managing participation
in organizations. Prentice Hall: Englewood
Waite, M. (2008). Fire
service leadership: theories and practices. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Winkler, I. (2009).
“Role theory of leadership”. Contributions
to Management Science. 75 – 83.
No comments:
Post a Comment