Great Man theory From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Napoleon, a typical "great man" said to have determined an era The Great Man Theory is a 19th-century idea according to which history can be largely explained by the impact of "great men", or heroes: highly influential individuals who, due to either their personal charisma, intelligence, wisdom, or political skill utilized their power in a way that had a decisive historical impact. The theory was popularized in the 1840s by Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle, and in 1860 Herbert Spencer formulated a counter-argument that has remained influential throughout the 20th century to the present; Spencer said that such great men are the products of their societies, and that their actions would be impossible without the social conditions built before their lifetimes.[1][2][3] Contents [hide]

1 Overview 2 Critique and criticisms 3 See also 4 References 5 External links

[edit]Overview Carlyle stated that "The history of the world is but the biography of great men", reflecting his belief that heroes shape history through both their personal attributes and divine inspiration.[4] In his book On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, Carlyle set out how he saw history as

having turned on the decisions of "heroes", giving detailed analysis of the influence of several such men (including Muhammad, Shakespeare, Luther, Rousseau, and Napoleon). Carlyle also felt that the study of great men was "profitable" to one's own heroic side; that by examining the lives led by such heroes, one could not help but uncover something about one's true nature.[5] Alongside with Carlyle the Great Man theory was supported by American scholar Frederick Adams Woods. In his work The Influence of Monarchs: Steps in a New Science of History [6] Woods investigated 386 rulers in Western Europe from the 12th century till the French revolution in the late 18th century and their influence on the course of historical events. The theory is usually contrasted with a theory that talks about events occurring in the fullness of time, or when an overwhelming wave of smaller events causes certain developments to occur. The Great Man approach to history was most fashionable with professional historians in the 19th century; a popular work of this school is the Encyclopdia Britannica Eleventh Edition (1911) which contains lengthy and detailed biographies about the great men of history, but very few general or social histories. For example, all information on the post-Roman "Migrations Period" of European History is compiled under the biography of Attila the Hun. This heroic view of history was also strongly endorsed by some philosophical figures such as Hegel, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, andSpengler, but it fell out of favor after World War II. In Untimely Meditations, Nietzsche writes that: "...the goal of humanity lies in its highest specimens" [3]. In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard writes that: "...to be able to fall down in such a way that the same second it looks as if one were standing and walking, to transform the leap of life into a walk, absolutely to express the sublime and the pedestrian -- that only these knights of faith can do -- this is the one and only prodigy."[7] Hegel, proceeding from providentialist theory, argued that what is real is reasonable and WorldHistorical individuals are World-Spirit's agents. Thus, according to Hegel, a great man does not create historical reality himself but only uncovers the inevitable future.[8] [edit]Critique and criticisms One of the most forceful critics of Carlyle's formulation of the Great Man theory was Herbert Spencer, who believed that attributing historical events to the decisions of individuals was a hopelessly primitive, childish, and unscientific position.[9] He believed that the men Carlyle called "great men" were merely products of their social environment. "[Y]ou must admit that the genesis of a great man depends on the long series of complex influences which has produced the race in which he appears, and the social state into which that race has slowly grown.... Before he can remake his society, his society must make him." Herbert Spencer, The Study of Sociology[10] The editors of the influential 18th century French encyclopedia Encyclopedie were ideologically opposed to biographies because they believed too much ink had already been spilled onhagiographies of church fathers and deeds of kings, and not enough about the average person or

life in general.[citation needed] To this end Encyclopedie had almost no biography articles. However, this policy was contentious among the encyclopedists and so some biographies were "hidden" inside articles; for example, the article on Wolstrope (Woolsthorpe), England[11] is almost entirely about the life of Newton. Tolstoy's War and Peace features criticism of Great Man Theories as a recurring theme in the philosophical digressions. According to Tolstoy, the significance of great individuals is imaginary; as a matter of fact they are only history's slaves realizing the decree of Providence.[12] William James in his lecture 'Great Men and Their Environment' [13] underlined the importance of the Great Man's congruence with the surroundings (in the broad sense), though his ultimate point was that environments and individuals shape each other reciprocally, just as environments and individual members of animal species do according to Darwinian theory. Among modern critics of the theory of Great Man one should mention Sidney Hook, whose book The Hero in History is devoted to the role of the hero and in history and influence of the outstanding persons.[14] Leonid Grinin defines a historical figure (a Great Man) thus: "Owing to his personal features, or to a chance, or to his social standing, or to the peculiarity of the epoch, an individual by the very fact of his existence, by his ideas or actions (or inaction) directly or indirectly, during his lifetime or after his death may have such an influence upon his own or another society which can be recognized significant as he left a noticeable mark (positive, negative or unambiguous) in history and in the further development of society."[15] So, he concludes that the role of Great Man depends on a number of factors, or none at all. Great Man Theory of Leadership

inShare

Are some people born to lead? If we look at the great leaders of the past such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Queen Elizabeth I, and Abraham Lincoln, we will find that they do seem to differ from ordinary human beings in several aspects. The same applies to the contemporary leaders like George W. Bush and Mahatma Gandhi. They definitely possess high levels of ambition coupled with clear visions of precisely where they want to go. These leaders are cited as naturally great leaders, born with a set of personal qualities that made them effective leaders. Even today, the belief that truly great leaders are born is common.

Top executives, sports personalities, and even politicians often seem to possess an aura that sets them apart from others. According to the contemporary theorists, leaders are not like other people. They do not need to be intellectually genius or omniscient prophets to succeed, but they definitely should have the right stuff which is not equally present in all people. This orientation expresses an approach to the study of leadership known as the great man theory.

Assumptions The leaders are born and not made and posses certain traits which were inherited Great leaders can arise when there is a great need. Theory Much of the work on this theory was done in the 19th century and is often linked to the work of the historian Thomas Carlyle who commented on the great men or heroes of the history saying that the history of the world is but the biography of great men. According to him, a leader is the one gifted with unique qualities that capture the imagination of the masses.

Earlier leadership was considered as a quality associated mostly with the males, and therefore the theory was named as the great man theory. But later with the emergence of many great women leaders as well, the theory was recognized as the great person theory.

The great man theory of leadership states that some people are born with the necessary attributes that set them apart from others and that these traits are responsible for their assuming positions of power and authority. A leader is a hero who accomplishes goals against all odds for his followers. The theory implies that those in power deserve to be there because of their special endowment. Furthermore, the theory contends that these traits remain stable over time and across different groups. Thus, it suggests that all great leaders share these characteristic regardless of when and where they lived or the precise role in the history they fulfilled.

Criticism Many of the traits cited as being important to be an effective leader are typical masculine traits. In contemporary research, there is a significant shift in such a mentality.

Conclusion Prompted by the great man theory of leadership, and the emerging interest in understanding what leadership is, researchers focused on the leader - Who is a leader? What are the distinguishing

characteristics of great and effective leaders? This gave rise to the early research efforts to the trait approach to leadership.

Great Man Theory

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership theories > Great Man theory Assumptions | Description | Discussion | See also

Assumptions Leaders are born and not made. Great leaders will arise when there is a great need. Description Early research on leadership was based on the the study of people who were already great leaders. These people were often from the aristocracy, as few from lower classes had the opportunity to lead. This contributed to the notion that leadership had something to do with breeding. The idea of the Great Man also strayed into the mythic domain, with notions that in times of need, a Great Man would arise, almost by magic. This was easy to verify, by pointing to people such as Eisenhower and Churchill, let alone those further back along the timeline, even to Jesus, Moses, Mohammed and the Buddah. Discussion The 'great man' theory was originally proposed by Thomas Carlyle. Gender issues were not on the table when the 'Great Man' theory was proposed. Most leaders were male and the thought of a Great Woman was generally in areas other than leadership. Most researchers were also male, and concerns about androcentric bias were a long way from being realized. It has been said that history is nothing but stories of great men. Certainly, much has this bias, although there is of course also much about peoples and broader life. See also Trait Theory

Cultural Dictionary great man theory definition An approach to history associated with the nineteenth-century Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle, who declared, The history of the world is but the biography of great men. Carlyle argued that heroes shape history through the vision of their intellect, the beauty of their art, the prowess of their leadership, and, most important, their divine inspiration.

Kamus kebudayaan definisi teori lelaki hebat Satu pendekatan kepada sejarah yang berkaitan dengan abad kesembilan belas Scotland sejarah Thomas Carlyle, yang diisytiharkan, "sejarah dunia tetapi biografi tokoh-tokoh besar." Carlyle berhujah bahawa sejarah wira bentuk melalui penglihatan akal mereka, keindahan mereka seni, kehebatan kepimpinan mereka, dan yang paling penting, ilham ilahi mereka.

Technical Details

Name: Great Man Theory Author: Popularized by Thomas Carlyle Classification:Great Man Theory Year: 1840's

Pro's

Starting point for the understanding of which human traits make great leaders Con's

Leadership is a restricted community No scientific validity Overview

You may have heard people saying, "Great leaders are God-gifted, not man-made"? This quote reflects the results conveyed by a very popular theory known as Great Man Theory of Leadership, which relates to the fact that leadership traits are inbuilt. In other words, there is a binary answer to the question of knowing whether you are a leader or not, meaning that you were either born as a great leader or not! Factors such as your up-bringing, education, experiences are only modeling your leadership abilities; they aren't responsible for making you a leader.

The History of Great Man Leadership Theory

During the 19th century, the Great Man Theory of Leadership became very popular. The theory was formulated mainly by analyzing the behaviors of mainly military figures of the time. In the 1800s, authoritative positions were held solely by men and were typically passed on from father to son. Thus, it's not a coincidence that the theory was named "Great Man Theory" as there weren't any women that were given the opportunity to rise when the occasion presented itself.

The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle was deeply involved with this Great Man Theory of Leadership and had even stated that the history of this world was basically the combined biographies of these great men. Mr. Thomas Carlyle believed that effective leaders were a package of Godly motivation and the right personality.

Some Arguments against Great Man Theory

Herbert Spencer (1820 - 1903), famous sociologist said that great leaders were only products of the atmosphere and society they worked and lived in. In other words, society was shaping these great men as oppose to them shaping society!

Great Man Theory: Is it a myth?

The Great Man Theory is so engraved in our souls that we almost instantly connect authoritative figures has having leadership qualities that should be replicated to become successful!

For example: Think of your favorite President or Prime Minister, depending where you live. Now, think of the leadership attributes that you believe makes him or her worthy of the leadership label. Lastly, make sure you seriously consider this before continuing on. Okay, the big realization: are

these traits emanating from his being or are they the fruits of all of the great leaders that are guiding him or her behind the scene and who are never or almost never given the appropriate credit!

Yes, this simple exercise really demonstrates the fact that these "Great Man" subscribers aren't alone nor are they the results of their "Godly motivation and personalities", as stated by Mr. Thomas Carlyle. I'm not saying that they aren't great leaders, they certainly can be. However, we need to realize that these "great man" weren't born great leaders, they had the potential of being a great leader just as the rest of us, and their leadership abilities have, just like us, evolved from their education, experiences and personalities combined with the social context in which they lived.

At last

There is no doubt that the Great Man Theory has no real credibility in terms of explaining how we can become a great leader other than being born a leader. However, the writings of Thomas Carlyle were definitely responsible for getting many great people thinking about leadership!

Want to expand on the discussion?

We encourage you to expand on the discussion, add to the critique or even share your vision with regards to the future applications of the theory.

Read more: http://www.leadership-central.com/great-man-theory.html#ixzz28JEYGi1m