Leadership Theories Essay, Research Paper

This essay will near types of power such as ; to use and influence others, to either wages or punish, to corroborate by function of an organisation, and to place with a leader such as stone or movie personality. This essay will cover six classs of power and these interlink with each other and brings a better focal point on theories of power. The maps of leading are many and varied, depending upon the basic job with a group must cover with, and the type of leading manner in action, which is dependent on the leaders footing of power. Power, in the instance of leading, is divided into six classs, nevertheless, each can be linked with another, as they are inter-related. Expert and Informational power are concerned with accomplishments, cognition and information, of which the holders of such abilities, are able to use, to act upon others ie technicians and computing machine forces. Reward and Coercive power, differ from the antecedently mentioned, as they involve the ability to either wages or punish individuals being influenced, in order to derive conformity. Legitimate power, is power which has been confirmed by the really function construction of the group or organisation itself, and is accepted by all as correct and without difference, such as in the instance of the armed forces or the constabulary force. Referent power, on the other manus, involves those being influenced, placing with the leader, Internet Explorer. stone or movie personalities utilizing their image to come in the political sphere. Most leaders make usage of a combination of these six types of power, depending on the leading manner used. Authoritarian leaders, for illustration, utilize a mixture of legitimate, coercive and reward powers, to order the policies, programs and activities of a group. In comparing, a democratic or participative leader would utilize chiefly referent power, affecting all members of the group in the decision-making procedure. LEADERSHIP THEORIES Leadership itself, has been accompanied throughout clip, by legion theories, all claiming to reply the inquiry, Are leaders born or made? Those who accept the finding of fact, that leaders are born and non made, keep, & # 8220 ; & # 8230 ; that there are certain congenital qualities such as enterprise, bravery, intelligence and temper, which wholly pre-destine a adult male to be a leader & # 8230 ; the indispensable form is given at birth & # 8221 ; ( Adler, 1991, p. 4 ) Two leading theories which concentrate on this point, are the Great man/great adult female and theTrait theories. The great man/great adult female theory, consequently to Wrightsman, involves its followings believing that major events, both nationally and internationally, are influenced by those individuals in power. & # 8220 ; A sudden act by a great adult male could, harmonizing to this theory, change the destiny of the state & # 8221 ; ( Wrightsman, 1977, p. 638 ) The trait theory expands farther on this speculation, by concentrating on the personal features of the leader. The theory, which until the mid-1940s formed the footing of most leading research, cited traits believed to be characteristic of leaders, the list of which grew in length over the old ages, to include all mode of physical, personality and cognitive factors, including tallness, intelligence and communicating accomplishments. However, few traits emerged to once and for all distinguish leaders from non-leaders. The traits an person has may, increase the chance that a individual will go a leader, though whether such leading is guaranteed, is unsure. However, it can be seen to be true that some people are more likely than others to presume leading places. & # 8220 ; The research on trait theories of leading has shown that many other factors are of import in finding leader success, and that non everyone who possesses these traits will be a leader & # 8221 ; ( Adler, 1991, p. 267 ) As involvement in the trait attack to le

adership declined, researchers focused their attention on the leader’s actions rather than their attributes, which led to the emergence of the behaviourist theories. The most widely publicized exponent of this approach was Robert Blake and Jane Mouton’s Managerial Grid, which attempted to explain that there was one best style of leadership, by various combinations of two factors regarding a concern for production and people. Due to the disillusionment with the fore-mentioned trait theory, the situational approach suggested that the traits required of a leader differed, according to varying situations. The situational approach, which predominated in the 1950s, held that whether a given person became a leader of a group, had nothing to do with his/her personality, but had everything to do with such factors as the flow of events and circumstances surrounding a group. To put it simply, the leader was a person who was in the right place at the right time. “Rather than a great man causing a great event to happen, the situational approach claims that great events are the product of historical forces that are gong to happen whether specific leaders are present or not ” (Adair, 1984, p. 8) Unfortunately, this theory still didn’t answer, why one member of a group emerged as the leader, rather than another, or why one particular leader proved to be a better leader in some situations than another. The emergence of a related theory, the interactionist approach, attempted to explain the existing anomalies. 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. Resulting from this theory, was the view that leaders are both born and made, due to the leader requiring certain abilities and skill, but as the situation and the needs of the group changed, so to the person acceptable as leader changed. Developing such abilities and skills requires no position of authority but does require commitment to self, commitment to the organization and its employees, action, and thoughtful, on-going self-assessment. Such a program of personal development, ideally begun as a part of the formal education process, can assist significantly in learning how to influence others, up, down, and across the organization. Thus, one can learn how to become what Cohen (1990) has called an “uncrowned leader,” a person who exerts influence over others but lacks positional authority. SUMMARY The functions of a Leader are many and varied. Its hard to say the one theory is better than the other because as my research shows, it takes more than one approach to accomplish a task with overall proficiency. Each situation, each environment, and each group of people requires a different approach. If a leader is trainable to understand that different approaches are needed for different situations, then an leader can succeed. However if a born leader hasn’t had the exposure to an array of situations, then he/she will not be effective. It stands to reason regarding a leader is born is that a leader may be born but if that person isn’t exposed to an array to various situations and factors, the that born leader will become a failure. However I agree a leader may be born and a follower is a follower but a follower can influence other followers especially if that person has charisma such as wiser experience, cultured education, and mature personality. So a leader may be born but a follower by my own experience I’ve seen followers who are leaders and assist leaders to perform their best. Therefore sometimes a leader and follower can complement each other thus strengthening the environment. Therefore my own observations show that there are ranks of leaders and ranks of followers. Each side of the line can have leadership.