Theories of Leadership

Leadership has been described as "a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task".  For example, some understand a leader simply as somebody whom people follow, or as somebody who guides or directs others, while others define leadership as "organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal".

Studies of leadership have produced theories involving traits, situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values, charisma, and intelligence, among others.

Early Western History and the Trait Theory

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for centuries. Philosophical writings from Plato's Republic 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 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".

The trait theory was explored at length in a number of works in the 19th century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton, whose works have prompted decades of research.  In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. In Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869), he examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when moving from first degree to second degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the leader.

Rise of Alternative Theories

In the late 1940s and early 1950s, however, a series of qualitative reviews of these studies (e.g., Bird, 1940; Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959) 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 persons 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, as 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.

Reemergence of Trait Theory

New methods and measurements were developed after these influential reviews that would ultimately reestablish the 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.  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.
• Significant relationships exist between leadership emergence and such individual traits as:

 

·         intelligence

·         adjustment

·         extraversion

·         conscientiousness

·         openness to experience

·         general self-efficacy

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Afterword by the Blog Author

The blog author has a separate theory of leadership.  A genuine leader is endowed with certain traits that are rare and unmistakable.  Among these traits there must be a lifelong autodidactic curiosity as well as a suspicious dislike of flattery.

Below the leader is the sherpa, a more common role that involves extensive subject matter expertise combined with an integrity and loyalty that are at least partially instilled by the society in which the sherpa is immersed.  Deputy sherpas (“sous-sherpas”) are aides and assistants in training to the sherpa.

Below the sherpa is the steward, who accepts responsibility for maintaining a facility or capability or corps.  Stewardship is a well-documented capability emphasizing ethics and accountability.  It has a particularly long history among Christians.