The Evolution of Leadership Theory

IntroductionIn order to signalize the evolution of leading surmise we must send-off condition what we understand lead to mean. An early or traditional interpretation of drawing cards whitethorn be, an social operate directed towards the exploit of a set goal or series of goals (Northhouse, 2004, p 2). In agreement with the evolution of drawing cards possibility the definition of lead by a innovational frame of reference may be, a relationship changing in reputation ground on mutual influence between attractions and collaborators in which two reach higher takes of motivation and clean-living development as they strive to put on change (Freiberg and Freiberg, 1996, p 298). This essay exit draw off the evolution of leading possibleness as it create from beingness based on individual personal traits and looks to the advanced(a) theories that be based on high-powered models of mail and on transformation.Early lead theories traits and behaviorsOhio do main University developed a theory of attractionship from a series of studies that obtained data from questionnaires alter in by subordinates and another questionnaire fill in by managers that described the leaders traits and behaviors of their leaders (Fleishman, 1953, p 2). Two lead way of lifes were set and hypothesized to be able to describe all leaders (Fleishman, 1953, p 2). The graduation leaders personal manner was termed initiating structure (Fleishman, 1953, p 3. This leadership style described the leader who directs with transactional and chore oriented style. This style of leadership has been described as great for function and repetitive assess, however on the prejudicial side it has also been used to describe the micro-manager (Fleishman, 1953, p 4).Examples of how this leadership style may present in the motionplace acknowledge the leader who lets melt down-whole members know what is expected of them who schedules the work to be done encourages the use of a exchangeable work procedures assigns work-unit members to particular tasks plans tasks for work-unit members makes his or her attitudes agnise to the work unit clarifies work roles and asks for results (Fleishman, 1953, p 4).The second leadership style identified by the Ohio bow theory of leadership was termed consideration (Fleishman, 1953, p 5). This leadership style described the leader who is people-oriented and participative, and transformational (Fleishman, 1953, p 5). Examples of how this leadership style may present in the work includes, the leader who treats all work-unit members as his or her equal is friendly and accessible does little things to make work nice puts suggestions made by the work unit into operation looks out for personal social welf atomic number 18 of work unit members encourages a auxiliary socio-emotional work atmosphere maintains high incorrupte in the work-unit and promotes a collaborative work atmosphere (Fleishman, 1953, p 5).Around t he same prison term period The University of Michigan conducted similar studies to the Ohio rural area work (Katz, et al, 1950, p 23) based on questionnaire responses by leaders subordinates and also developed a two-leadership style theory (Katz, et al, 1950, p 43). The first leadership style was termed production revolve about (Katz, et al, 1950, p 44). Examples of how this leadership style may present in the workplace includes, the leader who places an emphasis on the technical or task aspects of the job is concerned generally with accomplishing groups goal and who regards group members as room to an end (Katz, et al, 1950, p 44).The second leadership style offered by the Michigan landed estate University theory was termed employee centered (Katz, et al, 1950, p 46). Examples of how this leadership style may present itself in the workplace includes, the leader who places an emphasize interpersonal relations who takes a personal kindle in the needs of employees and who accep ts individual differences among members of his / her team (Katz, et al, 1950, p 44). These front studies of leadership theories move conclusions from research data that only looked at the single dimension of leadership being the observation of the leaders traits and behaviors. Although these studies provided valuable insight into which leadership traits and behaviors may have been associated with higher takes of productiveness, the theories neediness the depth of understanding that a high-voltage model would bring which accounts for the interaction of the leaders subordinates and the workplace situation.Modern Leadership Theories dynamic models of situational and transformational leadershipThe leadership theory termed situational theory is based on the occur of direction and socio-emotional support a leader should provide to a specific situation (Blanchard et al, 1999, p 59). This theory developed by Hersey and Blanchard, recognizes four different leadership styles that are te lling, selling, participating and delegating (Blanchard et al, 1999 p 60). The leader determines which style to use depending upon the specific task that is to be accomplished and the maturity level of the fol starters.The maturity of the chase was a termed coined to beg off the willingness of the following to take responsibility for tell their own behavior (Blanchard et al, 1999, 60). A confederacy of a demanding task with a low maturity level would require the leadership style of telling (Blanchard et al, 1999, p 60). The leadership style of selling would also admit a situation with a demanding task and low level of fol demoralise maturity while the leader is still amenable for the goal being achieved the followers are encouraged to participate (Blanchard et al, 1999, p 61). The leadership style of participating suits situations of a less(prenominal) demanding task and low-level maturity of the followers (Blanchard et al, 1999, p 61). Finally the leadership style of delegat ing is matched to a high level of follower maturity and therefore is accommodate to all levels of demand in wrong of task (Blanchard et al, 1999, p 61).The transformational leadership theory recognizes the changing demands that an validation may face, like the situational leadership theory however it places its superlative emphasis on leadership behavior and traits (Northhouse, 2004, p 173). While this may see like a return to the earlier more limited theories of leadership as developed in the mid 1900s via Ohio State and Michigan State Universities it is in accompaniment seen as a very fanciful and flexible leadership theory (Northhouse, 2004, p 173).The transformational leader instills feelings of confidence, admiration and commitment in the followers. Such a leader inspires the followers to forgo their own interests for the good of the organization (Northhouse, 2004, p 178). Transformational leaders appeal to the moral and ideals of followers and inspire them to look at pr oblems in new and creative slipway (Northhouse, 2004, p 183). Studies have correlated the transformational leadership theory in the workplace leads to lower staff turnover rates, higher productivity and higher employee satisfaction.In summary, the evolution of leadership theories has developed from the relatively static and one-dimensional views of the genius traits and behavior theories studied in the 1900s to the dynamic and flexible theories of situational and transformational leadership theories developed in the late 1900s.ReferencesBlanchard, K. H, Zigarmi, P. and Zigarmi, D. (1999), Leadership and the One time of day Manager, New York, Harper Collins.Fleishman, E.A. (1953). The description of supervisory behavior. Personnel Psychology, 37, 1-6Katz, D., Maccoby, N. and Morse, N.C. (1950). Productivity, Supervision and Morale in an Office Situation. Ann Arbor, Survey Research Center.Northhouse, P.G. (2004). Leadership Theory and Practice. New York, Sage Publications.