What are the two main approaches to leadership?

The three approaches to leadership are (1) Trait Approach, (2) Behavioural Approach, and (3) The contingency Approach.

(i)     THE TRAIT APPROACH

This theory seeks to separate certain characteristics that separate effective from ineffective managers. The proponents of this theory identified the following as some of the unique characteristics.

1. Physical These include physical appearance, weight, height, age etc.
2. Alertness, verbal facility, originality, judgement, aptitude, personal charisma, character
3. Scholarship, knowledge, athletic accomplishments
4. Activity, sociability, cooperation, adaptability, humour.
5. Socioeconomic position, popularity.
6. Leaders exhibit a high effort level. They have a relatively high desire for achievement; they are ambitious; they have a lot of energy; they are tirelessly persistent in their activities; and they show initiatives.
7. Desire to lead. Leaders have a strong desire to influence and lead others. They demonstrate the willingness to take responsibility
8. Honesty and integrity. Leaders should build trusting relationships between themselves and followers by being truthful or non-deceitful and showing high consistency between word and deed.
9. Self-confidence. Followers look to leaders for an absence of self doubt. Leaders therefore, need to show self- confidence in order to convince followers of the rightness of their goals and decisions.
10. Leaders need to be intelligent enough to gather, synthesise, and interpret large amounts of information, and they need to be able to create visions, solve problems, and make correct decisions.
11. Job-relevant knowledge. Effective leaders have a high degree of knowledge about the company, industry, and technical matters. In-depth knowledge allows leaders to make well-informed decisions and understand the implications of those decisions
12. Leaders are energetic, lively people. They are sociable, assertive, and rarely silent or withdrawn.

Thus, these theorists sought to judge the effectiveness of leadership be personal characteristics of the leader.

This theory has failed to prove itself practically, in real life situations as there are no distinct traits that aptly describe the effectiveness of a leader.

(ii)   THE BEHAVIOURAL APPROACH.

Following the failure of the trait approach to explain how characteristics of a leader could influence the effectiveness of leadership new approaches were developed.

This approach shifted emphasis to the behavioural characteristics of the effective leader i.e. what effective leaders did. This included analysis of how the leader motivated and guided subordinates.

The major advantage of behaviours over traits was that they could be learnt i.e. with adequate training, the leader’s behaviour could be altered. The researchers analysed two aspects of leadership behaviours.

1. Leadership Function: - It is the term used to analyse the behaviour of a manager in terms of whether it is “task- related” (problem-solving) or “group maintenance” (social function. An effective leader is the one who is able to blend these two
2. Leadership Style: - These are the various behaviour patterns favoured by leaders during the process of directing and influencing subordinates. Manager with task-oriented style closely supervise subordinates to make sure that the tasks assigned to them are carried out.

(iii) THE CONTINGENCY APPROACH

There are various situational factors (variables) which causes one leadership style to be more effective than another. Put differently, leaders are the product of given situations i.e. leadership is strongly is strongly influenced by the situation from which the leader emerges and in which he operates.

The following factors were identified

1. Leadership personality and experience. These include past experience, expectations and standard of education. For example, a manager who has been successful in exercising little supervision is bound to adopt a more employee-oriented approach than his other counterparts – who may have proved that close control is more effective and hence opt for a more task-oriented approach
2. Expectations and Behaviour of superiors. This emanates from the fact that superiors are usually the ones to review the leaders’ Use of reward power by superiors implies that they can influence the leadership behaviour of subordinates referent power on the part of the superiors may also have a bearing on subordinate’s leadership style.
3. Expectations, characteristics and behaviour of subordinates. These entail the subordinates’ skills, training, attitudes, confidence, degree of self-motivation, desire for responsible tasks, preferable leadership styles i.e. close supervision, autonomy etc. The appropriateness of a particular leadership style depends on the above factors.
4. Task Requirements. The manager’s leadership style also hinges on the job responsibilities of the subordinates. The task requiring precise instructions, for example, would tend to warrant a task-oriented approach than tasks with lesser operating procedures - this is also called the task structure and a task requiring precise instructions is also called a highly structured tas.
5. Organisational Culture and Policies. Culture refers to the general pattern of behaviour, shared beliefs, and values that organisational members have in common. It establishes implied rules for the way people should It therefore follows that the organisational culture and policies do influence the leadership style a leader would adopt.
6. Expectations and behaviour of peers. Peers are colleagues at the same echelons (ranks) with the leader and they interact in meetings and exchange ideas (including those on leadership styles). Peer pressure may influence a particular leader to follow the leadership styles advocated by peers.

Learning Outcomes

• Identify leadership styles

We’ve already talked about how personality traits, behaviors and situations (and response to those situations) affect leadership. But what about style? Every leader has their own personal approach. In fact, one might assume that there are as many leadership styles as there are leaders.

Traditional Leadership Styles

Leadership style is a leader’s approach to providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. In 1939, psychologist Kurt Lewin and a team of researchers determined that there were three basic leadership styles: Authoritarian (Autocratic), Participative (Democratic) and Delegative (Laissez-Faire). They put these three leadership styles into action with a group of school children charged with the completion of a craft project to determine responses to the leadership styles.

Authoritarian (Autocratic) Leadership

Researchers found there was less creativity under an authoritarian leadership style, but the children were still productive.

While authoritarian leadership sounds stifling, it has its place: it’s best applied to situations where there is little time for group decision making, or when the leader has expertise that the rest of the group does not. When authoritarian leadership strays into areas where it’s not needed, it can create dysfunctional environments where followers are the “good guys” and domineering leaders the “bad guys.”

Participative (Democratic) Leadership

Group members feel engaged in the decision making process when they have a participative leader. Those leaders practicing the participative leadership style offer guidance to the group, as for their input in decision making but retain final say. Participative leaders make their group feel like they’re part of a team, which creates commitment within the group.

Lewin’s researchers found that the participative style of leadership yielded the most desirable results with the school children and their craft project. They weren’t quite as productive as the children in the authoritarian group, but their work was a higher quality.

There are drawbacks to the participative style. If roles within the group are unclear, participative leadership can lead to communication failures. If the group is not skilled in the area in which they’re making decisions, poor decisions could be the result.

Delegative (Laissez-Faire) Leadership

Leaders practicing the delegative leadership style are very hands-off. They offer little or no guidance to their group and leave decision making up to the group. A delegative leader will provide the necessary tools and resources to complete a project and will take responsibility for the group’s decisions and actions, but power is basically handed over to the group.

Lewin and his team found that the group of children trying to complete the craft project under the delegative leader were the least productive. They also made more demands of their leader, were unable to work independently and showed little cooperation.

The delegative style is particularly appropriate for a group of highly skilled workers, and creative teams often value this kind of freedom. On the other hand, this style does not work well for a group that lacks the needed skills, motivation or adherence to deadlines, and that can lead to poor performance.

As you might have guessed, further research has yielded more leadership styles than the original three that Lewin and his team identified in 1939. Still, Lewin’s studies were influential in establishing a starting point for this kind of research. Let’s take a look at some additional leadership styles proposed by researchers since Lewin developed his original framework.

Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership is a set of activities that involve an exchange between followers and leader and deal with daily tasks (Bass, 1990). Transactional leadership deals with those day-to-day tasks that get the job done. The majority of models we talked about in the last section—Fiedler’s Contingency Theory, Path-Goal among them—are based on the concept of this exchange between leaders and followers. The leader provides followers with direction, resources and rewards in exchange for productivity and task accomplishment.

Charismatic Leadership

• High degree of confidence and lack of internal conflict
• High energy and enthusiasm
• Good communication skills
• Good image and role model

The relationship between charismatic leader and followers is an emotional one (this can sometimes go awry—just think about the relationship between the leaders and followers in a cult). In order for a charismatic leader to be effective, the situation has to be right. There are four situations required for a charismatic leader to have success:

• Organization is in a time of crisis or stress.
• Organization is in need of change.
• There is opportunity for the organization to have new goals or direction.
• Availability of dramatic symbols (like the CEO taking a pay cut or donating his salary to charity)

Culturally speaking, those cultures with a tradition of prophetic salvation (e.g., Christianity, Islam) are more welcoming of the charismatic leader, while cultures without prophetic tradition are less likely to embrace them.

In spite of a limited amount of scientific study where charismatic leaders are concerned, researchers agree there are applications and lessons to be learned out of this type of leadership. Leaders should have belief in their own actions. They should seek to develop bonds with their followers. And they must be able to communicate their messages clearly.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership takes a chapter out of the book of charismatic leadership. (Bass, 1990) Followers admire and are inspired to act. But the transformational leadership concept takes that one step further and expects intellectual stimulation from a leader, as well as individual consideration, in which a leader singles out followers and provides them with additional motivation.

Transformational leaders motivate and teach with a shared vision of the future. They communicate well. They inspire their group because they expect the best from everyone and hold themselves accountable as well. Transformational leaders usually exhibit the following traits:

• Integrity
• Self-awareness
• Authenticity
• Empathy

Measuring a leader’s ability to inspire and enable is a challenge, so researchers rely on anecdotes to supply data. This makes scientific study difficult. And even though this theory emphasize leadership behavior, it’s difficult to determine how a leader can learn to be charismatic and transformational.

Servant Leadership

If you’ve read up on the Southwest Airlines organization, then you already understand the concept of servant leadership – they profess to practice it daily. A “servant leader” is someone, regardless of their level on the corporate hierarchy, who leads by meeting the needs of the team. (Greenleaf, 1970)

Values are important in the world of servant leadership, and those that lead within this network do so with generosity of spirit. Servant leaders can achieve power because of their ideals and ethics.

There are many more leadership styles out there to be studied. Daniel Goleman, et. al., has written extensively about the concept of emotional intelligence in business, and he and his team review six emotional leadership styles in their book Primal Leadership. Flamholtz and Randle proposed a leadership style matrix in 2007 which measures the quality of people on a team versus the quality of the task to determine which leadership style is most appropriate.

By understanding various frameworks of leadership and how they work, those who are stepping up to lead can develop their own approaches to leadership and be more effective.

Contribute!

Did you have an idea for improving this content? We’d love your input.

Improve this pageLearn More