Leadership Theories
LEADERSHIP HISTORY
1
Leadership History Tatiana M. Castaneda Vasquez Regent University
LEADERSHIP HISTORY Abstract
2
When power no longer guarantees the success, leadership becomes essential. In search of understand the secret behind outstanding leadership, history has created and revealed leadership theories, starting with Great Man approach, the identification of Trait and Characteristics, and later shifting to Behavior Theory, fomenting Contingency and Influence Models, concluding with Emerging Leadership. When environmental and societal changes occurred, the approaches were modified as scholar attempt of interpreting society and the impact that leaders have in history.
LEADERSHIP HISTORY
3
Historical Evolution of Leadership Thought since 1900’s To Present Leadership is defined as “an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes and outcomes that reflect their shared purposes.” (Daft, 2005, p.31). This influence has been periodically evaluated through indicators like quality and results (Maxwell, 2004, p.48) influencing the different approaches. Because an effective vision within leadership directly stimulates the achievement of a common goal (Northouse, 2007, p.3), Maxwell unmistakably states that “failure or success depend on leadership” (Maxwell, 2004, p.35). The requisite of an outstanding leader who can communicate a shared vision towards motivated followers is, therefore, maximized. The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the progressive theories of leadership, as well as motivating leaders to continue influencing positively a constantly evolving environment. Great Man Theories (GMT) GMT, the earliest approach (Daft, 2005, p.23), was popularized by Carlyle (1840’s) and influenced by assuming that the ability of leadership is inherit to a “Great Man” who would upsurge as a great need, equal to his capacities, would rise. This protagonist role was “reserved for male sex” (Daft, 2005,
1
Leadership History Tatiana M. Castaneda Vasquez Regent University
LEADERSHIP HISTORY Abstract
2
When power no longer guarantees the success, leadership becomes essential. In search of understand the secret behind outstanding leadership, history has created and revealed leadership theories, starting with Great Man approach, the identification of Trait and Characteristics, and later shifting to Behavior Theory, fomenting Contingency and Influence Models, concluding with Emerging Leadership. When environmental and societal changes occurred, the approaches were modified as scholar attempt of interpreting society and the impact that leaders have in history.
LEADERSHIP HISTORY
3
Historical Evolution of Leadership Thought since 1900’s To Present Leadership is defined as “an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes and outcomes that reflect their shared purposes.” (Daft, 2005, p.31). This influence has been periodically evaluated through indicators like quality and results (Maxwell, 2004, p.48) influencing the different approaches. Because an effective vision within leadership directly stimulates the achievement of a common goal (Northouse, 2007, p.3), Maxwell unmistakably states that “failure or success depend on leadership” (Maxwell, 2004, p.35). The requisite of an outstanding leader who can communicate a shared vision towards motivated followers is, therefore, maximized. The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the progressive theories of leadership, as well as motivating leaders to continue influencing positively a constantly evolving environment. Great Man Theories (GMT) GMT, the earliest approach (Daft, 2005, p.23), was popularized by Carlyle (1840’s) and influenced by assuming that the ability of leadership is inherit to a “Great Man” who would upsurge as a great need, equal to his capacities, would rise. This protagonist role was “reserved for male sex” (Daft, 2005,
References: Burns, James MacGregor. 1978. Leadership. New York, USA. Harper & Row. 7 Bass, Bernard M. 1999. “Current Developments in Transformational Leadership,” The xxxxxPsychologist – Manager Journal 3, no. 1. Bowers, D.G. and Seashore, S.E. 1966. “Predicting Organizational Effectiveness with a FourxxxxxFactor Theory of Leadership,” Administrative Science Quarterly 11. Carlyle, Thomas.1888. On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History. Fredrick A. Stokes xxxxx& Brother, New York. Carneiro, Robert L. 1981. Herbert Spencer as an Anthropologist. Journal of Libertarian Studies, xxxxxvol. 5, pp.171-2 Charan, Ram & Colvin, Geoffrey. 1999. “Why CEOs Fail,” Fortune. USA. Daft, Richard L. 2005. The Leadership Experience (3rd Edition). Canada. Thomson SouthxxxxxWestern. Ferch, Shann R. & Mitchell, Matthew M. 2001. Intentional Forgiveness in Relational xxxxxLeadership: A technique for Enhancing Effective Leadership,” The Journal of xxxxxLeadership Studies 7. No. 4. P. 70-83. Graham, Kyle. 2008. “Leadership By Example”, Regent University Christian Leader. Virginia xBeach, VA. Regent University. Greenleaf, Robert K. 1970. The Servant as a Leader. Indianapolis. The Robert Greenleaf Center. Hemphill, J.K. and Coons, A.E. 1957. “Development of the Leader Behavior Description xxxxxQuestionaire,” in Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement, Eds. R.M. Stogdill xxxxxand A.E. Coons. Colombus, OH: Ohi State University, Bureau of Business Research. Komives, Susan R. , Lucas, Nance, & McMahon, Timothy R. 1998. Exploring Leadership For xxxxxCollege Students Who Want To Make a Difference. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass xxxxxPublishers. Northouse, G. 2007. Leadership Theory and Practice. Thousand Oak, London, New Delhe, xxxxxSage Publications, Inc. Winston, Bruce E. 2002. Be a Leader for God’s Sake. Virginia Beach, Va. School of Leadership xxxxxStudies, Regent University.