leadership
1**Leadership itself, has been accompanied throughout time, by numerous theories, all claiming to answer the question, Are leaders born or made? Those who accept the verdict, that leaders are born and not made, maintain, "... that there are certain inborn qualities such as initiative, courage, intelligence and humour, which altogether pre-destine a man to be a leader ... the essential pattern is given at birth"Two leadership theories which concentrate on this point, are the Great man/great woman and theTrait theories. The great man/great woman theory, accordingly to Wrightsman, involves its followers believing that major events, both nationally and internationally, are influenced by those persons in power. "A sudden act by a great man could, according to this theory, change the fate of the nation"The trait theory expands further on this conjecture, by concentrating on the personal characteristics of the leader. The theory, which until the mid-1940s formed the basis of most leadership research, cited traits believed to be characteristic of leaders, the list of which grew in length over the years, to include all manner of physical, personality and co
Nevertheless, it can be seen to be true that some people are more likely than others to assume leadership positions. *****From a review of leadership theories, it is obvious, that there are no best leadership styles. 6)*Robert House's path-goal theory proposed a leader 's effectiveness was based on a leader's ability to raise satisfaction and motivation in group members, by use of an incentive scheme to reward or punish those responsible for success or failure in reaching group objectives. To put it simply, the leader was a person who was in the right place at the right time. Fiedler's research concluded, that a task-orientedapproach was more effective when conditions were either highly favourable (good leader/group relations, strong leadership position and a clear task structure) or, highly unfavourable (poor leader/group relations, weak leadership position and an ambiguous task) A group-oriented approach, was deemed as preferable, when conditions were comparatively stable, so more attention is paid to the preservation of group relationships, to starve off conflict and inefficiency which could eventuate from any disharmony in the group setting. Still, Fiedler's theory was not the only interactionist theory circulating during the time period concerned, although, each differed slightly in their prime objectives. "At one extreme, is the leader who values successful interpersonal relations to the exclusion of task accomplishment. However, few traits emerged to conclusively differentiate leaders from non-leaders. Those with a high score, were deemed group-oriented, while those with a low score, were task-oriented. 3)*Due to the disillusionment with the fore-mentioned trait theory, the situational approach arose, which suggested that the traits required of a leader differed, according to varying situations. The leader needs to be aware of his own behaviour and influence on others, individual differences of group members, group characteristics, task structure, environmental and situational variables, and adjust his leadership style accordingly. In order to accomplish these goals, a leader would be required to adopt differing styles of leadership behavior as the situation dictated. The interactionist theory, proposed that both the characteristics of the individual, and the situation in which the group found itself, accounted for whom would become the leader.
Common topics in this essay:
Managerial Grid,
LEADERSHIP THEORIES,
Vroom Yetton's,
leadership theories,
leadership styles,
task structure,
interactionist theory,
situational approach,
leaders born,
man/great woman,
leader/group relations,
group-oriented approach,
theory proposed,
|
Acceptance Essays
