My Taxonomy: Contrast And Comparing Four Leadership Theories
My Taxonomy of Leadership Theories
Abstract
My Taxonomy on Leaderships contrasts and compares four leadership theories. The leadership principles discussed in the Taxonomy include the trait-based, servant leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership theories. Trait-based theories are the earliest attempts to study leaders and leadership effectiveness by concentrating on distinctive skills and traits of the individual. Servant Leadership is a servant to others, one by putting the needs of their customers, employees and communities first. Transactional Leadership is based on the setting of clear objectives and goals for either punishments or rewards in order to encourage compliance with those goals. Lastly, …show more content…
a transformational leadership theory is a leader that motivates their followers through inspiration and influence.
I. Trait Theory
The trait theory approach is one of the original theories used to explain leadership that were focused on trying to identify the characteristics that distinguished leaders from non-leaders. The trait theory embraces those individual physical, social, and personal qualities that are inborn in leaders (Maslanka, 2004). Early research shows that highly thought of leaders were believed to have these particular characteristics, although the study failed to deliver evidence that projected leadership success. There has been a lot of research done to identify these traits, but no pure evidence has been established with respect to what regularly attributes to high leadership. Maslanka (2004) states the one flaw with this line of thinking is overlooking the situational and environmental factors that play a part in a leader’s effectiveness.
The root of this leadership theory is the evidence that all effective leaders share a particular set of traits. Hence, employers could predict that if an individual had leadership potential based on the qualities that they demonstrated. The assumption was if the potential employee had traits like decisiveness, extroversion, aggression, and risk-taking they could be connected with leadership potential.
The acceptance of trait theory has come and gone over the years and up until the early 1950s, trait theory approach was valid. In 1948, a researcher called Stogdill pointed out that people who were in leadership positions in one set of circumstances were not necessarily leaders in other sets of circumstance: This observation shattered the trait theory, and situational and behavioral theories started to emerge (Badshah, 2012).
II. Servant Leadership
Robert Greenleaf laid claim to the term servant leadership in his influential work “The Servant as Leader,” was published in 1970. Robert Greenleaf introduced this theory to servant leadership in the 1970s. Dierendonck (2012) contends that excellent leaders perform as a servant first. This vital piece of servant leadership, is being a servant first to others, it offers a unique approach to view leadership.
Here is possibly the most famous and well-known quote related to the servant leadership field, written by Robert Greenleaf “going beyond one’s self-interest” is the number one core trait of servant leadership even though it is mentioned numerous times in other leadership theories.
The cornerstone of a servant-leader is to help followers grow; in contrast, to other leadership styles where the ultimate goal is the betterment of the business. A servant leader is only worried about serving its members as is also indicated by Dierendonck (2012). This one person-oriented approach makes way for safe, reliable, everlasting relationships inside the organization. In addition, as Dierendonck (2012) states, servants that are selected to be leaders are greatly endorsed by their fellow workers because they have dedicated themselves and are dependable. As servant-leader, they have the duty of an overseer who holds the organization in trust. That means that servant-leaders go beyond their self-interest, and they are interested in something more significant than the power, namely, the need to serve (Dierendonck 2012).
Ethical Leadership is a vital element of servant leadership it is a moral compass that guides the leader, workers, and the organization. To Greenleaf the servant leader was the critical ethical and authentic leader.
III. Transactional Leadership Northouse (2014) Transactional leadership is much different from transformational leadership. Northouse (2014) explains that transactional leaders undertaking is to obtain an agreement with followers to attain goals for reward. That kind of pressure creates a self-interested group that does not achieve a higher level for a higher purpose. Regardless of the situation or group, a leader must be able to decide what type of leadership style to proceed
Whittington, Coker, Goodwin, Ickes, Murray (2009) states Transactional leadership happens when a leader exchanges something of value with a subordinate.
This solidified when the leader was classifying performance measures as well as expounding on the conditions for which rewards will be available for meeting these requirements. The objective is to agree on a beneficial exchange that both groups agree on, not necessarily to progress into a long-term relationship. Transactional leadership is compared to transforming leadership, which occurs when persons work with each other in a way that the leader and subordinate raise one another to higher levels of inspiration and …show more content…
standards.
Whittington, Coker, Goodwin, Ickes, Murray (2009) state when used correctly, transactional performances can achieve the leader’s goals and satisfy the interests of the subordinates. Positive dealings are those that explain opportunities and identify the connections between the performance and rewards. When done correctly, these exchanges create a sense of credibility by which followers will gauge the reliability and honesty of their leader. As a result, the subordinates will make a decision if they will enter into any other deals with the leadership.
IV. Transformational Leadership
A transformational leader goes well beyond leading day-to-day events and constructing plans for taking their teams to the next level of performance and growth (Northouse, 2013). A transformational leader focuses on team building, motivating and building solid relationships with teammates at different levels of the organization to achieve change for the better. Transformational leaders set goals, incentives and influence their subordinates to achieve a higher performance level while they deliver opportunities for each teammate to grow personally and professionally (Northouse, 2013).
Warrick (2011) states the term transformational leader was initially developed by James MacGregor Burns.
Burns has made a significant distinction between transactional leaders and transformational leaders.
Transformational leadership is defined as the method by which leaders bring about significant positive change in people, teams, and establishments by using influence, charisma, Competence and the ability to motivate followers to surpass their own interests for a shared purpose (Warrick, 2011). Transformational leadership puts particular emphasis on leadership skills and takes the leadership to new heights by renovating organizations from the inside out and putting them on a
course.
The Full Range of Leadership (FRL) is a transformational leadership theory that was developed by Bernard Bass. The FRL model has four elements in it: idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation (Kirkbride, P. 2006). Idealized influence includes the follower 's respect for the leader. The manager displays behaviors that are consistent and grounded in moral values. The follower, who has a high respect for the leader due to their model actions, wishes to match the leader. Intellectual stimulation involves inspiring members to be original and pioneering in their methods to the team’s goals and problems. The leader inspires the member to tackle old issues in new ways. This lets the member be involved in their problem-solving and decision-making. Individualized consideration requires the leader to understand that followers have distinctive and singular needs. This aspect of the Full Range model stresses diversity. No longer can leaders treat every subordinate the same way. Inspirational motivation is the tool by which transformational leaders connect with their followers with profound meanings in the professional atmosphere. This portion involves inspirational and motivating members to commit to teams goals and to perform above the established standards (Kirkbride, P. 2006).
Through the ages, there have been significant modifications to leadership styles based on certain situations. When organizations will not adjust their leadership styles, they delay their development and sometimes set themselves up for failure. The revisions to the art of leadership need constant research. The recipe for what makes a great leader does not exist. For this reason, the research continues for what makes a great leader and a magic formula for succes.
References:
Dierendonck, D. (2010). Servant Leadership: A Review and Synthesis. Journal of Management, 1228-1261. Retrieved January 25, 2015. Research Network. DOI: 10.1177/0149206310380462
Ismail, A., Mohamad, M. H., Mohamed, H. A., Rafiuddin, N. M., & Zhen, K. P. (2010). Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles as a Predictor of Individual Outcomes. Theoretical & Applied Economics, 17(6), 89-104.
Kirkbride, P. (2006). Developing transformational leaders: The full range leadership model in action. Industrial and Commercial Training, 38(1), 23-32. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214105353?accountid=14872
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patrulescu, C. (2012). Comparison and contrast of trait-based, situational and transformational leadership theories. Rochester: Social Science Research Network. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2132126
Maslanka, A. M. (2004). Evolution of leadership theories (Order No. 1424602). Available from ABI/INFORM Complete. (305047607). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305047607?accountid=14872
Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(3), 145. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/226924747?accountid=14872
Youngjohn, R. M. (1999). Is leadership trait theory fact or fiction? A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between individual differences and leader effectiveness (Order No. 9943589). Available from ABI/INFORM Complete. (304573686). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304573686?accountid=14872
Warrick, D. D. (2011). The urgent need for skilled transformational leaders: Integrating transformational leadership and organization development. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 8(5), 11-26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/909486088?accountid=14872
Whittington, J. L., Coker, R. H., Goodwin, V. L., Ickes, W., & Murray, B. (2009). Transactional Leadership Revisited: Self–Other Agreement and Its Consequences. Journal Of Applied Social Psychology, 39(8), 1860-1886. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00507.x
Abstract
My Taxonomy on Leaderships contrasts and compares four leadership theories. The leadership principles discussed in the Taxonomy include the trait-based, servant leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership theories. Trait-based theories are the earliest attempts to study leaders and leadership effectiveness by concentrating on distinctive skills and traits of the individual. Servant Leadership is a servant to others, one by putting the needs of their customers, employees and communities first. Transactional Leadership is based on the setting of clear objectives and goals for either punishments or rewards in order to encourage compliance with those goals. Lastly, …show more content…
a transformational leadership theory is a leader that motivates their followers through inspiration and influence.
I. Trait Theory
The trait theory approach is one of the original theories used to explain leadership that were focused on trying to identify the characteristics that distinguished leaders from non-leaders. The trait theory embraces those individual physical, social, and personal qualities that are inborn in leaders (Maslanka, 2004). Early research shows that highly thought of leaders were believed to have these particular characteristics, although the study failed to deliver evidence that projected leadership success. There has been a lot of research done to identify these traits, but no pure evidence has been established with respect to what regularly attributes to high leadership. Maslanka (2004) states the one flaw with this line of thinking is overlooking the situational and environmental factors that play a part in a leader’s effectiveness.
The root of this leadership theory is the evidence that all effective leaders share a particular set of traits. Hence, employers could predict that if an individual had leadership potential based on the qualities that they demonstrated. The assumption was if the potential employee had traits like decisiveness, extroversion, aggression, and risk-taking they could be connected with leadership potential.
The acceptance of trait theory has come and gone over the years and up until the early 1950s, trait theory approach was valid. In 1948, a researcher called Stogdill pointed out that people who were in leadership positions in one set of circumstances were not necessarily leaders in other sets of circumstance: This observation shattered the trait theory, and situational and behavioral theories started to emerge (Badshah, 2012).
II. Servant Leadership
Robert Greenleaf laid claim to the term servant leadership in his influential work “The Servant as Leader,” was published in 1970. Robert Greenleaf introduced this theory to servant leadership in the 1970s. Dierendonck (2012) contends that excellent leaders perform as a servant first. This vital piece of servant leadership, is being a servant first to others, it offers a unique approach to view leadership.
Here is possibly the most famous and well-known quote related to the servant leadership field, written by Robert Greenleaf “going beyond one’s self-interest” is the number one core trait of servant leadership even though it is mentioned numerous times in other leadership theories.
The cornerstone of a servant-leader is to help followers grow; in contrast, to other leadership styles where the ultimate goal is the betterment of the business. A servant leader is only worried about serving its members as is also indicated by Dierendonck (2012). This one person-oriented approach makes way for safe, reliable, everlasting relationships inside the organization. In addition, as Dierendonck (2012) states, servants that are selected to be leaders are greatly endorsed by their fellow workers because they have dedicated themselves and are dependable. As servant-leader, they have the duty of an overseer who holds the organization in trust. That means that servant-leaders go beyond their self-interest, and they are interested in something more significant than the power, namely, the need to serve (Dierendonck 2012).
Ethical Leadership is a vital element of servant leadership it is a moral compass that guides the leader, workers, and the organization. To Greenleaf the servant leader was the critical ethical and authentic leader.
III. Transactional Leadership Northouse (2014) Transactional leadership is much different from transformational leadership. Northouse (2014) explains that transactional leaders undertaking is to obtain an agreement with followers to attain goals for reward. That kind of pressure creates a self-interested group that does not achieve a higher level for a higher purpose. Regardless of the situation or group, a leader must be able to decide what type of leadership style to proceed
Whittington, Coker, Goodwin, Ickes, Murray (2009) states Transactional leadership happens when a leader exchanges something of value with a subordinate.
This solidified when the leader was classifying performance measures as well as expounding on the conditions for which rewards will be available for meeting these requirements. The objective is to agree on a beneficial exchange that both groups agree on, not necessarily to progress into a long-term relationship. Transactional leadership is compared to transforming leadership, which occurs when persons work with each other in a way that the leader and subordinate raise one another to higher levels of inspiration and …show more content…
standards.
Whittington, Coker, Goodwin, Ickes, Murray (2009) state when used correctly, transactional performances can achieve the leader’s goals and satisfy the interests of the subordinates. Positive dealings are those that explain opportunities and identify the connections between the performance and rewards. When done correctly, these exchanges create a sense of credibility by which followers will gauge the reliability and honesty of their leader. As a result, the subordinates will make a decision if they will enter into any other deals with the leadership.
IV. Transformational Leadership
A transformational leader goes well beyond leading day-to-day events and constructing plans for taking their teams to the next level of performance and growth (Northouse, 2013). A transformational leader focuses on team building, motivating and building solid relationships with teammates at different levels of the organization to achieve change for the better. Transformational leaders set goals, incentives and influence their subordinates to achieve a higher performance level while they deliver opportunities for each teammate to grow personally and professionally (Northouse, 2013).
Warrick (2011) states the term transformational leader was initially developed by James MacGregor Burns.
Burns has made a significant distinction between transactional leaders and transformational leaders.
Transformational leadership is defined as the method by which leaders bring about significant positive change in people, teams, and establishments by using influence, charisma, Competence and the ability to motivate followers to surpass their own interests for a shared purpose (Warrick, 2011). Transformational leadership puts particular emphasis on leadership skills and takes the leadership to new heights by renovating organizations from the inside out and putting them on a
course.
The Full Range of Leadership (FRL) is a transformational leadership theory that was developed by Bernard Bass. The FRL model has four elements in it: idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation (Kirkbride, P. 2006). Idealized influence includes the follower 's respect for the leader. The manager displays behaviors that are consistent and grounded in moral values. The follower, who has a high respect for the leader due to their model actions, wishes to match the leader. Intellectual stimulation involves inspiring members to be original and pioneering in their methods to the team’s goals and problems. The leader inspires the member to tackle old issues in new ways. This lets the member be involved in their problem-solving and decision-making. Individualized consideration requires the leader to understand that followers have distinctive and singular needs. This aspect of the Full Range model stresses diversity. No longer can leaders treat every subordinate the same way. Inspirational motivation is the tool by which transformational leaders connect with their followers with profound meanings in the professional atmosphere. This portion involves inspirational and motivating members to commit to teams goals and to perform above the established standards (Kirkbride, P. 2006).
Through the ages, there have been significant modifications to leadership styles based on certain situations. When organizations will not adjust their leadership styles, they delay their development and sometimes set themselves up for failure. The revisions to the art of leadership need constant research. The recipe for what makes a great leader does not exist. For this reason, the research continues for what makes a great leader and a magic formula for succes.
References:
Dierendonck, D. (2010). Servant Leadership: A Review and Synthesis. Journal of Management, 1228-1261. Retrieved January 25, 2015. Research Network. DOI: 10.1177/0149206310380462
Ismail, A., Mohamad, M. H., Mohamed, H. A., Rafiuddin, N. M., & Zhen, K. P. (2010). Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles as a Predictor of Individual Outcomes. Theoretical & Applied Economics, 17(6), 89-104.
Kirkbride, P. (2006). Developing transformational leaders: The full range leadership model in action. Industrial and Commercial Training, 38(1), 23-32. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214105353?accountid=14872
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patrulescu, C. (2012). Comparison and contrast of trait-based, situational and transformational leadership theories. Rochester: Social Science Research Network. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2132126
Maslanka, A. M. (2004). Evolution of leadership theories (Order No. 1424602). Available from ABI/INFORM Complete. (305047607). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305047607?accountid=14872
Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(3), 145. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/226924747?accountid=14872
Youngjohn, R. M. (1999). Is leadership trait theory fact or fiction? A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between individual differences and leader effectiveness (Order No. 9943589). Available from ABI/INFORM Complete. (304573686). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304573686?accountid=14872
Warrick, D. D. (2011). The urgent need for skilled transformational leaders: Integrating transformational leadership and organization development. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 8(5), 11-26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/909486088?accountid=14872
Whittington, J. L., Coker, R. H., Goodwin, V. L., Ickes, W., & Murray, B. (2009). Transactional Leadership Revisited: Self–Other Agreement and Its Consequences. Journal Of Applied Social Psychology, 39(8), 1860-1886. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00507.x