Leaderships Theories When an individual manages to influence the minds of several people to behave in a certain way towards the fulfillment of a specific or a general goal, then that individual is said to have exhibited leadership qualities, and is considered as a leader.
Theories of Leadership - Many writers have put toward their own views and formulated their own theories regarding leaders and leadership. Some of the theories are briefly touched below to give an idea of the literature on the subject of leadership.
Great Man Theory - This Theory assumed that leaders are born and not made. Leaders usually were members from the aristocracy since they only got a chance to lead; hence, it was considered that good breeding contributed in making great leaders. The concept of a Great Woman was not explored and androcentric bias was never realized. In addition, the theory also states that when there is a great need, then a great leader arises, like Buddha, Jesus, Churchill and Eisenhower.
The Trait Theory - This theory assumes that human beings are born with inherited traits and the right combination of traits makes them a leader. Hence, leadership was a matter of traits whether inherited or acquired otherwise. Stogdill(1974) identified certain traits like adaptability, socially aware, achievement oriented, decisive, dominant, energetic,cooperative, assertive, self-confident, persistent, responsible, and capacity to tolerate stress. McCall and Lombardo (1983) identified four basic traits, namely, emotional composure and stability, intellectual breadth, highly developed interpersonal skills, and the capacity to admit errors.
Participative Leadership Theory - This theory assumes that the conclusion of many minds makes a better decision than the judgment of a single mind. Hence, the leader invites participation from the persons responsible for carrying out the work, since it makes them less competitive and more collaborative, thereby increasing their level of commitment. Participants may be subordinates, peers, superiors, or stakeholders. The extent of participation may vary. The leaders may outline the objectives or goals and allow a joint decision to be taken with respect to objectives and its method of achievement or the team may propose but the final decision is always of the leader. Many varieties exist, like consultation, democratic leadership, Management by Objectives (MBO), power-sharing, empowerment and joint decision-making. The negative side of this theory is that when a leader asks for opinions and does not find them suitable, then it leads to cynicism, feelings of betrayal, reduced motivation and decreased level of commitment.
Lewin's Theory - Kurt Lewin along with others conducted experiments in 1939 and came up with three styles of participative leaderships, namely autocratic, democratic, and Laissez-faire. In the autocratic style, the leader took the decision without consulting others. In the democratic style, the leader took the decisions after consulting others or let the majority decide on what is to be done. In the Laissez-faire style, the leader lets others decide on the decisions to be taken. Lewin et al. discovered that the autocratic style led to revolution, the Leissez-faire style lacked enthusiasm and coordination, while the democratic style proved to be the most effective. Since these experiments were done on children, they still require further study and research.
Likert's Theory - Rensis Likert (1967) theorized four styles, namely, exploitive authoritative, benevolent authoritative, consultative, and participative. In the exploitive authoritative style, the leader uses methods as threats, coercion, and other fear based methods to enforce conformance. It is always a top down approach and views, feelings, of others is given no value. In the benevolent authoritative style, the leader becomes a benevolent dictator and uses rewards to motivate performance. The leader listens to rose-tinted views from the subordinates as they tell only what the leader likes to hear in the hope of gaining rewards. Trivial delegation of decision is done, however important decisions are always made centrally. In the participative style, the leader invites participation across all levels, including the shop floor worker, and attempts to make the employees psychologically closer are made. Dissensions, arguments, feelings of betrayal all take place in this style. The leader becomes a father figure and a cult head, whose saying ultimately becomes the final decision.
