FREE ESSAY ON LEADERSHIP THEORIES

LEADERSHIP THEORIES

LEADERSHIP THEORIES: THE THEORIES OF POWER
This essay will approach types of power such as; to utilize and influence others, to
either reward or punish, to confirm by role of an organization, and to identify with a
leader such as rock or film personality. This essay will cover six categories of power
and these interlink with each other and brings a better focus on theories of power.
The functions of leadership are many and varied, depending upon the basic problem with a
group must deal with, and the type of leadership style in action, which is dependent on
the leaders basis of power. Power, in the case of leadership, is divided into six
categories, however, each can be linked with another, as they are inter-related. Expert
and Informational power are concerned with skills, knowledge and information, of which
the holders of such abilities, are able to utilize, to influence others ie technicians
and computer personnel. Reward and Coercive power, differ from the previously mentioned,
as they involve the ability to either reward or punish persons being influenced, in order
to gain compliance. Legitimate power, is power which has been confirmed by the very role
structure of the group or organization itself, and is accepted by all as correct and
without dispute, such as in the case of the armed forces or the police force. Referent
power, on the other hand, involves those being influenced, identifying with the leader,
ie. rock or film personalities using their image to enter the political arena. 
Most leaders make use of a combination of these six types of power, depending on the
leadership style used. Authoritarian leaders, for example, use a mixture of legitimate,
coercive and reward powers, to dictate the policies, plans and activities of a group. In
comparison, a democratic or participative leader would use mainly referent power,
involving all members of the group in the decision-making process. 
LEADERSHIP THEORIES
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 (Adler, 1991, p. 4) 
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 (Wrightsman, 1977, p. 638) 
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 cognitive factors, including height, intelligence and communication skills. However,
few traits emerged to conclusively differentiate leaders from non-leaders. The traits an
individual has may, increase the probability that a person will become a leader, though
whether such leadership is guaranteed, is uncertain. Nevertheless, it can be seen to be
true that some people are more likely than others to assume leadership positions. 
The research on trait theories of leadership has shown that many other factors are
important in determining leader success, and that not everyone who possesses these
traits will be a leader (Adler, 1991, p. 267) 
As interest in the trait approach to leadership 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. 
Bibliography
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adair, J. (1984) The Skills of Leadership., Gower, Aldershot Kants, England 
Adler, R.B. & Rodman, G. (1991) Understanding Human Communication., Holt Rhinehart &
Winston., Fort Worth, Texas 
Cohen, W. A. (1990). The art of the leader. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Wrightsman, L.S. (1977) Social Psychology., 2nd Edn., Brooks/Cole., Monteray, California
Zaleznik, A. (1992) Managers & Leaders: Are they different?in / Harvard Business Review,
March/April 1992., p. 126-135.