The term ‘leadership’ has a repertoire of definitions coined by researchers. One of them is John Kotter who said that leadership is about coping with change. In modern context, organisation faces complexity and unpredictable flux in market forces. The leaders must be ready to cope with such evolution by establishing direction, communication and overcome hurdles. Buchanan and Huczynski also iterates that leadership whereby the leader exercise interpersonal influences over others. According to Drucker, leadership is the “ lifting of a man’s vision to higher spirits, the raising of a man’s performance to higher standard, the building of a man’s personality beyond its normal limitations.” We can sum it nicely that leadership is a process by which the leader inspires, stimulates, arouses and influence others towards achievement of goals. Leadership is also a dynamic process where one individual influences the other to contribute voluntarily to the achievement of group tasks in a given situation. We see that leaders are different from managers as the prominent distinguishing factor is that manager exercise authority but leaders have followers.
One of the many theories leadership we can examine through is the traits theory founded by P. Slogan Jr. This traits theory considers personality, social, physical or intellectual traits to differentiate leaders from non-leaders. The main focus is on the qualities and the characteristics the leader has. It also observes the personality of leaders such as internal locus of control, high mach and high self-esteem. The assumption is that the leaders were born and not made. The common personality traits will taken into consideration and compare it with the well-known leaders. The traits are classified into three categories. Firstly, drive, energy and appearances are examples under physical traits. Secondly, self-confidence and enthusiasm are under the personality traits. Lastly, the socials traits describe co-operation, tact and courtesy. Some of the examples related to this trait theory are Germany’s Hitler in the 1930s; Jack Welch and Steve Jobs in modern context.
One of the many theories leadership we can examine through is the traits theory founded by P. Slogan Jr. This traits theory considers personality, social, physical or intellectual traits to differentiate leaders from non-leaders. The main focus is on the qualities and the characteristics the leader has. It also observes the personality of leaders such as internal locus of control, high mach and high self-esteem. The assumption is that the leaders were born and not made. The common personality traits will taken into consideration and compare it with the well-known leaders. The traits are classified into three categories. Firstly, drive, energy and appearances are examples under physical traits. Secondly, self-confidence and enthusiasm are under the personality traits. Lastly, the socials traits describe co-operation, tact and courtesy. Some of the examples related to this trait theory are Germany’s Hitler in the 1930s; Jack Welch and Steve Jobs in modern context.
I feel that traits theory is subjective and refers to what a leader is, but not what a leader does. There are 4 limitations of trait theories and we must first consider before applying it. Firstly, there are no universal traits that can predict in all situations. Secondly, the traits predict behaviour better in the ‘weak’ than strong situation. The strong situation refers to strong behaviour norms, strong incentives for specific type of behaviour and clear expectations. Such strong norms create less opportunity for leaders to express their inherent dispositional tendencies. Thirdly, the evidence is unclear in separating cause from effect. Lastly, traits do a better job at predicting the appearance of leadership than in actually distinguishing between effective and ineffective leaders. The researchers have looked into other avenues to overcome the limitations of traits theory.
The behavioural theory was discovered to overcome the limitations of traits theory and the implications are different from traits approach. The behavioural theories propose that specific behaviours differentiate leaders from non-leaders. It distinctively says that leadership traits can be taught and what a leader does.
There are many contributors to the behaviour approach and one of them is Blake and Mouton. They have discovered the managerial grid, which is based on two fundamental ingredients of managerial behaviour concern for production and people. The best style is the 9,9 team management style. Rensis Likert who coined the four styles of leadership as he describes the systems of management. He classifies into 4 systems, which are the exploitative-authoritative, the benevolent-authoritative, the consultative and the participative group. On the basis of his research, Likert argues that managers’ adopting system 4, which is the participative group, are consistently effective in setting goals and achieving them. The advantages are economic rewards, mutual communications, joint decisions and higher productivity achieved. The catalyst that holds the group together is the ‘linking pin.’ But, researchers, White and lippitt in the handicraft experiment found out that the most successful style unlike authoritarian and laissez-faire is democratic. The democratic style emphasizes on the personal friendly group and steady work. There are a lot individual differences but a strong and cohesive group.
However, the behaviour style has also limitations as leaders might fail if they subscribe permanently to only one style. There is also a point to take note that if the leader did not changed the style depending on situation; it will make any leader ineffective. Therefore, a leader needs to be flexible and change his style reflective of the situation. The behaviour theories ignore the fact that leaders need to have certain traits or attributes to become effective leaders. Lastly, the behaviour theories fail to obtain consistent results.
The situation or contingency theory overcomes the severe limitation of the style or behavioural theory by ensuring that leader becomes flexible. There are many writers who have put forth their theories of leadership. One of the well-known theories is Fiedler’s contingency model. The model dictates that leadership style depends on three situations, which are leader-members relations, task structure and position power. The leader should base on these three situations to change his style. If the situation requires the leader to be task-oriented, the leader should be psychologically distant. Nevertheless, if the situation requires the leader to be relationship-oriented, the leader needs to be psychologically close. This theory of leadership has been particularly influential and offers systematic way of analyzing situations and prescribing the most effective leadership response to that particular situation so as to achieve optimum performances and effectiveness. There are other writers such as Hershey and Blanchard who have commented that leadership style depends on follower’s readiness on the job and the maturity of subordinate on job. The style in which the leader may use are therefore be telling, selling, participative and delegating. Before determining the appropriate leadership style, the leader should first determine the maturity level of their followers in relation to the specific tasks given. As the follower’s maturity increases, the leaders should reduce their task behaviour and increase relationship behaviour until the followers reach a moderate level of maturity. As the follower’s reached an above average maturity, the leader should decrease the task behaviour and relationship behaviour. But, the well-accepted theory of leadership is Robert House's Path Goal theory. The leader could adopt 4 styles, which are classified into directive, supportive, participative and achievement-oriented styles depending on the situation. The effective leaders clarify the path to assist their followers achieve their goals and make their journey along the path easier. The leader makes their subordinates need satisfaction contingent on effective performance. The leader must also provide the necessary coaching, guidance, support and rewards for effective performances.
Although, we realize that the do overcomes the limitations of behavioural theories. But, it has also limitations. Even though, leaders have the skills and attributes but they may not be effective leaders given in certain situations. Moreover, the constant change of styles may in any way insult their subordinates or making followers feel redundant. Some subordinates prefer the leaders to adhere to one style.
Although, we realize that the do overcomes the limitations of behavioural theories. But, it has also limitations. Even though, leaders have the skills and attributes but they may not be effective leaders given in certain situations. Moreover, the constant change of styles may in any way insult their subordinates or making followers feel redundant. Some subordinates prefer the leaders to adhere to one style.
In modern business context, there are emerging theories of leadership to overcome the limitations of situational or contingency theories. One of them is the attribution theory. It claims that leaders must possess traits. For example, Ronald Reagan or Lee Iaccoca who has exceptional traits that made them successful leaders. While, there are other writers who claim that leaders must have charisma to influence followers. For example, Gandhi and minister mentor Lee Kuan Yew. We also bring in transformational leaders like Jack Welch of GE have great impact on the performance of subordinates and organisations. These are recent trends, which tend to slant towards the recent theories to predict what makes an effective leader.
We would also like to see the different types of leadership applied in the public and private sectors. Firstly, the public sector has mechanistic structure, which is more towards bureaucratic management. It has a standardisation of procedures with routine work and thee the environment is stable. The individual behaviour may be external locus of control, introvert and cautious. The style of leadership applied in the public sector may be of tasked-oriented coined by Fiedler, we can also apply Robert House’s path goal theory, where we use the supportive style due to routine work. Furthermore, we can use Charles Handy’s best-fit approach where we utilise tight leadership style in the public sector.
As for the private sector, the business environment is unstable. It is normally an organic structure with the usage of high technology. The individual behaviour may be of high mach and internal locus of control. The style of leadership applied in the private sector may be of relationship-oriented coined by Fiedler, we can also apply team based approach by Blake and Mouton or we can draw on Rensis Likert’s system 4 which is the participative style with “linking pin.” We can use delegating style, which is put forth by Hersey and Blanchard.
Nowadays, there is not distinction between public sector or private sector organisations. All organisations must be treated as business organisations, which is coined by Needle. I think the emphasis should weight more on democratic and humane approach will be relevant. For example, the theory Y assumptions made by Douglas McGregor.
In conclusion, we have examined the various theories of leadership that have been concurred by researchers. The theories plays a central part in understanding group behaviors and provides a direction towards goal achievement. Furthermore, it facilitates a more accurate predicative capability in improving performances of individuals and the organisation.
