The Trait Approach to Leadership
There are few things added important to animal action than leadership. Best people, behindhand of their occupation, education, political or religious beliefs, or cultural orientation, admit that administration is a absolute and awfully consequential phenomenon. Political candidates affirm it, pundits altercate it, companies amount it, and aggressive organizations depend on it. The French agent Talleyrand already said, “I am added abashed of an army of 100 sheep led by a bobcat than an army of 100 lions led by a sheep.”
Aristotle appropriate that “men are apparent out from the moment of bearing to aphorism or be ruled,” an abstraction that acquired into the Great Being Theory. Great leaders of the accomplished do assume altered from accustomed animal beings. Back we accede the lives of Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr., it is accessible to anticipate of their access as a action of altered claimed attributes.
This affection access was one of the aboriginal perspectives activated to the abstraction of administration and for abounding years bedeviled administration research. The account of ancestry associated with able administration is all-encompassing and includes personality characteristics such as actuality outgoing, assertive, and conscientious.
Other ancestry that accept been articular are confidence, integrity, discipline, courage, self-sufficiency, humor, and mystery. Charles de Gaulle declared this aftermost affection best back he acclaimed that “A accurate baton consistently keeps an aspect of abruptness up his sleeve, which others cannot butt but which keeps his accessible aflame and breathless.”
What do leaders do the behavioral approach
Three above schools of thought—the Ohio State Studies, Access X/Y (McGregor, 1960), and the Managerial Filigree (Blake & Mouton, 1984)—have all appropriate that differences in baton capability are anon accompanying to the amount to which the baton is assignment aggressive against being oriented. Task-oriented leaders focus on the group’s assignment and its goals.
They ascertain and anatomy the roles of their subordinates in adjustment to best access authoritative goals. Task-oriented leaders set standards and objectives, ascertain responsibilities, appraise employees, and adviser acquiescence with their directives. In the Ohio State studies this was referred to as initiating structure, admitting McGregor (1960) refers to it as Access X, and the Managerial Filigree calls it task-centered.
Harry S. Truman, 33rd admiral of the United States, already wrote, “A baton is a man who can actuate bodies to do what they don’t appetite to do, or do what they’re too apathetic to do, and like it.” Task-oriented leaders generally see their followers as undisciplined, lazy, extrinsically motivated, and irresponsible. For these leaders, administration consists of giving direction, ambience goals, and authoritative unilateral decisions. Back beneath pressure, task-oriented leaders become anxious, defensive, and domineering.
Situational Approaches to Leadership
The Great Being access of leadership, represented by such theorists as Sigmund Freud, Thomas Carlyle, and Max Weber, suggests that from time to time, awful capable, talented, absorbing abstracts emerge, allure a host of followers, and change history. In adverse to this, Hegel, Marx, and Durkheim advance that there is a course active in animal affairs, authentic by history or the economy, and that leaders are those who ride the tide.
The abstraction of the course leads us to the role of situational factors in leadership. For example, Perrow (1970) suggests that administration capability is abased aloft structural aspects of the organization. Longitudinal studies of authoritative capability accommodate abutment for this idea. For example, Pfeffer (1997) adumbrated that “If one cannot beam differences back leaders change, again what does it amount who occupies the positions or how they behave?” (p. 108). Vroom and Jago (2007) accept articular three audible roles that situational factors comedy in administration effectiveness.
SOURCE: Adapted from Warren G. Bennis. (1989). Managing the dream: Administration in the 21st century, Journal of Authoritative Change Management, 2(1), 7.
One of the aboriginal psychologists to advance a accident access to administration capability was Fred Fiedler (1964, 1967), who believed that a leader’s appearance is a aftereffect of constant adventures that are not accessible to change. With this in mind, he appropriate that leaders charge to accept what their appearance is and to dispense the bearings so that the two match. Like antecedent researchers, Fiedler’s abstraction of administration appearance included assignment acclimatization and being orientation, although his access for free a leader’s acclimatization was unique. Fiedler developed the least-preferred aide (LPC) scale.
On this scale, individuals amount the being with whom they would atomic appetite to assignment on a array of characteristics. Individuals who amount their LPC as analogously abrogating are advised assignment oriented, admitting those who differentiate amid the characteristics are being oriented. The additional allotment of his accident access is the favorableness of the situation. Situational favorability is bent by three factors: the admeasurement to which the assignment adverse the accumulation is structured, the accepted ability of the leader, and the relations amid the baton and his subordinates.
Another access that addresses the affiliation amid administration appearance and the bearings is path-goal access (House, 1971). In this theory, aisle refers to the leader’s behaviors that are best acceptable to advice the accumulation attain a adapted aftereffect or goal. Thus, leaders charge display altered behaviors to ability altered goals, depending on the situation. Four altered styles of behavior are described:
Directive leadership. The baton sets standards of achievement and provides guidelines and expectations to subordinates on how to accomplish those standards.
Supportive leadership. The baton expresses affair for the subordinates’ abundance and is admiring of them as individuals, not aloof as workers.
Participative leadership. The baton solicits account and suggestions from subordinates and invites them to participate in decisions that anon affect them.
Achievement-oriented leadership. The baton sets arduous goals and encourages subordinates to attain those goals.
Charismatic and Transformational Leadership
Leaders accommodate vision, a faculty of mission, and their assurance in their followers. Leaders booty stands on difficult issues and appetite their followers to chase suit. They accent the accent of purpose, commitment, and ethical accommodation making. The additional basic is adorning motivation.
Leaders acquaint aerial expectations, accurate important purposes in easy-to-understand ways, allocution optimistically and agilely about the tasks adverse the organization, and accommodate advance and acceptation for what has to be done. They generally use symbols to focus the efforts of their followers.
The third basic is bookish stimulation. Leaders advance thoughtful, rational, and accurate accommodation making. They activate others to abandon anachronistic assumptions and behavior and to analyze new perspectives and means of accomplishing things. The fourth basic is abundant consideration.
Leaders accord their followers claimed absorption and amusement anniversary being individually. They accept anxiously and accede the alone needs, abilities, and goals of their followers in their decisions. In adjustment to enhance the development of their followers they advise, teach, and coach, as needed. Yukl (2002) offers the afterward guidelines for transformational leadership:
Develop a bright and ambrosial vision.
Create a action for attaining the vision.
Articulate and advance the vision.
Act assured and optimistic.
Express aplomb in followers.
Use aboriginal success in accessible tasks to body confidence.
Celebrate your followers’ successes.
Use dramatic, allegorical accomplishments to accent key values.
Model the behaviors you appetite followers to adopt.
Create or adapt cultural forms as symbols, slogans, or ceremonies.
Not anybody is built-in with “the appropriate stuff” or finds himself or herself in aloof the appropriate bearings to authenticate his or her accommodation as a leader. However, anyone can advance his or her administration skills. The action of training bodies to action finer in a administration role is accepted as administration development and it is a multimillion-dollar business. Administration development programs tend to be of two types: centralized programs aural an organization, advised to strengthen the organization, and alien programs that booty the anatomy of seminars, workshops, conferences, and retreats.
Typical of alien administration development programs are the seminars offered by the American Administration Association. Their training seminars are captivated annually in cities beyond the country and abode both accepted administration abilities as able-bodied as cardinal leadership. Amid the seminars offered in the breadth of accepted administration are analytical thinking, storytelling, and aggregation development in a array of areas such as advisory technology or government. Seminars on cardinal administration abode such capacity as advice strategies, situational leadership, innovation, affecting intelligence, and coaching.
A additional access to administration development is a address accepted as filigree training. The aboriginal footfall in filigree training is a filigree academy during which associates of an organization’s administration aggregation advice others in their alignment analyze their administration appearance as one of four administration styles: bankrupt management, assignment management, country-club management, and aggregation management.
The additional footfall is training, which varies depending on the leader’s administration style. The ambition of the training is greater productivity, bigger accommodation making, added morale, and focused ability change in the leader’s altered authoritative environment. Filigree training is directed against six key areas: administration development, aggregation building, battle resolution, chump service, mergers, and affairs solutions.
Internal administration development programs tend to focus on three above areas: the development of amusing alternation networks both amid bodies aural a accustomed alignment and amid organizations that assignment with one another, the development of dupe relationships amid leaders and followers, and the development of accepted belief and a aggregate eyes amid leaders and followers. There are several techniques that advance these goals.
One such address is 360-degree feedback. This is a action whereby leaders may apprentice what peers, subordinates, and superiors anticipate of their performance. This affectionate of acknowledgment can be advantageous in anecdotic areas in charge of improvement. The backbone of the address is that it provides differing perspectives beyond a array of situations that advice the baton to accept the perceptions of his or her actions. This convenance has become actual accepted and is currently acclimated by around all Fortune 500 companies.
Like all forms of assessment, 360-degree acknowledgment is alone advantageous if the baton is accommodating and able to change his or her behavior as a aftereffect of the feedback. To ensure that leaders don’t arbitrarily abolish acknowledgment that doesn’t clothing them, abounding companies accept abiding for contiguous affairs amid the leaders and those who accept provided the feedback.
Allen, T. D. Eby, L. T. Poteet, M. Lima, L. and Lentz, E. Outcomes associated with mentoring proteges: A metaanalysis. Journal of Activated Attitude vol. 89 (2004). pp. 127–136
Avolio, B. J. Promoting added commutual strategies for administration access building. American Psychologist vol. 62 (2007). pp. 25–33
Avolio, B. J. Sosik, J. J. Jung, D. I. & Bierson, Y. (2003). Administration models, methods, and applications. In W. C. Borman, ed. D. R. Ilgen, ed. & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial and authoritative attitude (pp. 277–307). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A analysis of access and research. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. Does the transactional-transformational administration archetype transcend authoritative and civic boundariesAmerican Psychologist vol. 52 (1997). pp. 130–139
Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving authoritative capability through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bennis, W. (1989). On acceptable a leader. New York: Perseus.
Bennis, W. The challenges of administration in the avant-garde world: Introduction to the appropriate issue. American Psychologist vol. 62 (2007). pp. 2–5
Blake, R. R. & Mouton, J. S. (1984). Solving cher authoritative conflicts: Achieving intergroup trust, cooperation, and teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dansereau, F. Graen, G. G. and Haga, W. A vertical brace bond access to administration in academic organizatons. Authoritative Behavior and Animal Achievement vol. 13 (1975). pp. 46–78
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in amusing behavior: A amusing role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. and Johnson, B. Gender and the actualization of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin vol. 108 (1990). pp. 233–256
Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A accident archetypal of administration effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in beginning amusing attitude (Vol. 1). New York: Academic Press.
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A access of administration effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gibb, C. A. (1969). Leadership. In G. Lindzey, ed. & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of amusing attitude (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 205–282). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Graen, G. B. and Uhl-Bien, M. Relationship-based access to leadership: Development of leader-member barter (LMX) access of administration over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Administration Quarterly vol. 6 no. (2) (1995). pp. 219–247
Hackman, J. R. and Wageman, R. Asking the appropriate questions about leadership. American Psychologist vol. 62 (2007). pp. 43–47
House, R. J. A path-goal access of baton effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly vol. 16 (1971). pp. 321–328
House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 access of absorbing leadership. In J. G. Hunt, ed. & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The acid edge. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
House, R. J. ed. Hanges, P. J. ed. Javidan, M. ed. Dorman, P. W. ed. & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE abstraction of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
House, R. J. and Mitchell, R. R. Path-goal access of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business vol. 3 (1974). pp. 81–97
Howell, J. M. and Avolio, B. J. The belief of absorbing leadership: Submission or liberationAcademy of Administration Executive vol. 6 no. (2) (1992). pp. 43–54
Indvik, J. Path-goal access of leadership: A meta-analysis . Proceedings of the Academy of Administration Meeting , (1986). pp. 189–192.
Judge, T. A. Bono, J. E. Ilies, R. and Gerhardt, M. W. Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Activated Attitude vol. 87 (2002). pp. 765–780
Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lord, R. G. & Maher, K. (1989). Perceptions in administration and their implications in organizations. In J. Carroll (Ed.), Activated amusing attitude and authoritative settings (Vol. 4, pp. 129–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lord, R. G. & Maher, K. J. (1991). Administration and advice processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
McClelland, D. C. and Boyatzis, R. E. Administration motive arrangement and abiding success in management. Journal of Activated Attitude vol. 67 (1982). pp. 737–743
McGregor, D. (1960). The animal ancillary of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Miller, R. L. Butler, J. and Cosentino, C. J. Followership effectiveness: An addendum of Fiedler’s accident model. The Administration and Authoritative Development Journal vol. 24 (2004). pp. 362–368
Murphy, S. E. and Ensher, E. A. The furnishings of baton and accessory characteristics in the development of leader-member barter quality. Journal of Activated Amusing Attitude vol. 29 (1999). pp. 1371–1394
Perrow, C. (1970). Alignment analysis: A sociological view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Pfeffer, J. The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Administration Analysis vol. 2 (1977). pp. 104–112
Strube, M. J. and Garcia, J. E. A meta-analytic analysis of Fiedler’s accident archetypal of administration effectiveness. Psychological Bulletin vol. 90 (1981). pp. 307–321
Vroom, V. H. and Jago, A. G. The role of the bearings in leadership. American Psychologist vol. 62 (2007). pp. 17–24
Yukl, G. A. (1981). Administration in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. A. (1998). Administration in organizations (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zaccaro, S. J. Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist vol. 62 (2007). pp. 6–16
Order a unique copy of this paper