BENGAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

AND TECHNOLOGY, DURGAPUR

A
Project Report
on
“LEADERSHIP”
Submitted in the Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the
Award of the Degree of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
In
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
Submitted by
VIKASCHAND GUPTA – 169062610 , PRAVESH KUMAR SHARMA - 169036357
SHABIR KUMAR – 169051454 , MANISH KUMAR – 169025253
JAY KUMAR SHARMA - 169017194
Subject :- Principles of Management(HU-601)

Under the Guidance of

Miss Aiman Khatoon
Assistant Professor, BCET
 ABSTRACT
This study explored the nature of leadership styles in women and men.
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire was administered as a means of objective
assessment of the leadership style of various professionals. Previous studies
have identified and outlined the potential for women and men to exhibit
different stylistic tendencies in leadership roles. This study first aimed to
identify whether women would exhibit more transformational and men more
transactional leadership behaviours on the MLQ. Secondly, this study also
aimed to identify the predicting effect of gender and age on leadership styles in
an organizational setting. To test these hypotheses, statistical tests were
performed, including t-tests and seven sequential multiple regression analyses,
on the results of the leadership questionnaire. Contrary to previously established
meta-analyses of gender and leadership, this study found that neither women
nor men tended to exhibit more transformational or transactional behaviours.
Worth noting is the fact that women did differ significantly from men on one of
the five transformational subscales: individual consideration. Additionally, this
study’s results found no predictive capacity of age for leadership style. The
need for further research into the leadership styles of professionals of various
ages and at different levels in their field may in turn help streamline
professional training standards and the expectations of different individuals in
supervising capacities within a business system.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………… i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ……………………………………………………. iii

1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………….. 1

2. THEORY OF LEADERSHIP

2.1 Great Man Theory ………………………………………………………. 2

2.2 Trait Theory …………………………………………………………….. 2

2.3 Behavioural Theory ……………………………………………………... 2

2.4 Contingency Theory …………………………………………………….. 3

2.5 The Situation Theory ……………………………………………………. 3

2.6 The Path-Goal Theory …………………………………………………... 3

3. TRAITS OF LEADERSHIP ………………………………………………... 4

4. STYLES OF LEADERSHIP

4.1 TRADITIONAL STYLES ……………………………………………… 5

4.2 MODERN STYLES ……………………………………………………. 6

5. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………... 7

6. REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………... 8
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We gratefully acknowledgement for the assistance cooperation guidance and
classification provided by our HOD Sir Prof. DEEPAK DAS during the
development of our project “LEADERSHIP”. Our Extreme gratitude to MISS
AIMAN KHATOON, Asst Prof. who guided us throughout the project.
Without his Willing, Disposition, Spirit of accommodation, Frankness, Timely
clarification and above all faith in us.
His readiness to discuss all important matters at work deserves special attention.
We would also like to thanks to our parents and partners for their great effort
and cooperation to finalize this project.
 1. INTRODUCTION
Leadership has been characterized as “activity aimed at bringing about change
in an organization or social system to improve people’s lives”. Such
responsibility suggests that leaders are charged with an enormous burden to
effect organizational and social change. Hence, competent, steady, and
progressive leadership can be a critical factor that determines whether an
organization survives and thrives or succumbs to the pressures and challenges
of today’s increasingly competitive marketplace. Identifying successful
leadership qualities is a challenging and dynamic task and has been a topic of
decades-long debate among industrial psychologists (Terman, 1904). The
extensiveness of leadership studies in various organizational frameworks and
structures is a testament to its elusiveness. The overwhelming volume of
information on leadership adds to the complexity of trying to determine a single
definition of leadership. There are as many definitions of the word leadership as
there are perspectives on the nature of leadership itself. Researchers define
leadership differently depending upon the audience or unit of study. For
example, leadership qualities specific to fields within academia may be quite
different than those observed and valued in the business world. Such differences
tend to occur within the context in which they are applied. There are numerous
alternative perspectives of leadership held by popular business leaders, scholars,
and philosophers. Warren Bennis, a modern-day expert who has made
significant contributions to leadership and management theories, declared that
“leaders have a clear idea of what they want to do, personally and
professionally, and the strength to persist in the face of setbacks, even failures”
(Bennis, 1989, p. 7). Peter Drucker, another scholarly contributor to leadership
studies, identified a clear differentiation between management and 2 leadership
behaviours and qualities (Scullion, 2005). To further contribute to the
discussion, Judge et al. (2006) opined that “leaders are, by definition, at the
pinnacle of any society’s largest organizations and their actions have the
potential to change the course of history”.
 2. THEORY OF LEADERSHIP
2.1 Great Man Theory
According to the Great Man Theory (which should perhaps be called the
Great Person Theory), leaders are born with just the right traits and abilities for
leading – intellect, confidence, communication skills, and social skills.
The theory suggests that the ability to lead is inherent – that the best leaders are
born, not made. It defines leaders as valiant, mythic, and ordained to rise to
leadership when the situation arises. The term “Great Man” was adopted at the
time because leadership was reserved for males, particularly in military
leadership.

2.2 Trait Theory

The Trait Theory is very similar to the Great Man Theory. It is founded on the
characteristics of different leaders – both the successful and unsuccessful ones.
The theory is used to predict effective leadership. Usually, the identified
characteristics are compared to those of potential leaders to determine their
likelihood of leading effectively.
Scholars researching the trait theory try to identify leadership characteristics
from different perspectives. They focus on the physiological attributes such as
appearance, weight, and height; demographics such as age, education, and
familial background; and intelligence, which encompasses decisiveness,
judgment, and knowledge.

2.3 Behavioural Theory

In Behavioural Theory, the focus is on the specific behaviours and actions of
leaders rather than their traits or characteristics. The theory suggests that
effective leadership is the result of many learned skills.
Individuals need three primary skills to lead their followers – technical, human,
and conceptual skills. Technical skills refer to a leader’s knowledge of the
process or technique; human skills means that one is able to interact with other
individuals; while conceptual skills enable the leader to come up with ideas for
running the organization or society smoothly.
2.4 Contingency Theory
The Contingency Theory emphasizes different variables in a specific setting that
determine the style of leadership best suited for the said situation. It is founded
on the principle that no one leadership style is applicable to all situations.

2.5 The Situation Theory

The Situational Theory is similar to the Contingency Theory as it also proposes
that no one leadership style supersedes others. As its name suggests, the theory
implies that leadership depends on the situation at hand. Put simply, leaders
should always correspond their leadership to the respective situation by
assessing certain variables such as the type of task, nature of followers, and
more.
According to situational theory, a leader exercises a particular form of
leadership based on the maturity level of his or her team.

2.6 The Path-Goal Theory

This model emphasizes that the leader behaviour be such as to complement the
group work setting and aspirations. This approach is based upon the expectancy
theory of motivation and reflects the worker’s beliefs that efforts will lead to
successful result. The leader sets up clear path and clear guidelines through
which the subordinates can achieve both personal and work-related goals and
assists them in achieving these goals.
This will make the leader behaviour acceptable and satisfying to subordinates
since they see the behaviour of the leader as an immediate source of satisfaction
or as a source of obtaining future satisfaction.
 3. TRAITS OF LEADERSHIP
A Leader has a certain inherent qualities and traits which assist him in playing a
directing role and wielding commanding influence over others.
Some of these traits according to Jago are:-
• Energy, drive
• Appearance, presentability
• A sense of cooperativeness
• Enthusiasm
• Personality-height and weight
• Initiative
• Judgement
• Self confidence
• Sociability
• Tact and diplomacy
• Moral courage and integrity
• Willpower and flexibility
• Emotional stability
• Knowledge of human relations

These traits are not universal in nature. Not all these leaders have these traits.
Not all of these traits work at all times. While some of these traits differentiate
successful managers and leader from unsuccessful ones, it is the behaviour of
leaders, either as a result of traits or otherwise, which is more tangible and
obvious and less abstract than traits.
 4. STYLES OF LEADERSHIP
4.1 TRADITIONAL STYLES
Early theories of leadership claimed that groups performed at their optimum if
they were led by “the most adequate all-around leader” (Borgatta, Bales, &
Couch, 1954, p. 755). Logically researchers wanted to isolate those traits that
distinguished a leader from that of an average leader. The trait theories of
leadership evolved from the assertion that leaders’ characteristics differ from
those of non-leaders. Researchers sought to dissect the personality traits that
could be considered universal among effective leaders (Kirkpatrick & Locke,
1991). Stogdill’s (1948) and Mann’s (1959) review of such studies reported a
slightly positive relationship between intelligence and leadership. These reports
had a chilling effect on trait studies going forward. Researchers were expecting
to find more profound, consistent traits that could predict leadership perceptions
among various groups in different situations (Lord, de Vader, & Alliger, 1986).
With approximately 18,000 words that describe personality (Allport & Odbert,
1936), trimming down traits into a manageable number would be a daunting
task. Just the sheer number of descriptions for personality may be one reason for
the disappointing results of early trait studies. Even though much progress was
not made between Stogdill’s (1948) and Mann’s (1959) review, Lord et al.
(1986) revisited traits as predictors of leadership with their meta-analysis. With
the resurgence of this research, there was a need to determine a concise,
thorough, and inclusive model of personality traits that would be suitable for the
business and psychology community (McCrae & Costa, 1985). McCrae and
Costa (1985) attempted to provide clarity to the trait debate by comparing the
Eysenck scales (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) to the widely reproduced five-factor
model (Goldberg, 1980). Eysenck scales included four dimensions: neuroticism,
extraversion, psychoticism, and lie. Tupes and Christal (1961) suggested that
the five-factor model includes 6 neuroticism, extraversion, conscientiousness,
agreeableness, and culture (or openness to experience).
By comparing these scales, McCrae and Costa discovered five core personality
traits: conscientiousness, emotional stability, agreeableness, extraversion, and
openness to experience. These traits were deemed the five-factor model, or
FFM. The FFM is still one of the valid basic tools of an industrial
organizational psychologist today. In fact, a meta-analysis shows the FFM
relevance as it relates to trait theory. Extraversion had the highest average
correlation, .31, with leader effectiveness. Conscientiousness was a close
second, with a correlation of .28, followed by openness to experience (.24),
neuroticism (–.24), and agreeableness (.08) (Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt,
2002). Based on the resurgence of the FFM and its relevance in today’s
organizations, trait theory research will continue well into the future.
4.2 MODERN STYLES
Although enormous strides in leadership research have occurred, there remains
a desire and need to continue building on the guiding principles that influence
the development and refinement of leadership theories (Bennis, 2007). A
comprehensive theory of leadership does not 8 exist and cannot be achieved
without the collaborative efforts of many academic disciplines. The hope for the
future is to fill in the gaps in our knowledge with advancement in empirical and
theoretical foundations of leadership. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Ahearne, and
Bommer (1995) provided a thorough review of traditional leadership theories,
suggesting that many of these studies have not been replicated and much of the
information conveyed is incomplete. Historical studies and the traditional
theories of leadership have led us to examine the topics of more modern
theories, such as transformational and transactional leadership. A common
theme derived from the attempted leadership definitions is the importance of
influence in the leadership process. The salient theme found in modern theories
and processes of leadership is charisma. Charisma is derived from the Greek
words charis, meaning grace, and charizesthai, meaning to favor. The first use
of the word in a scientific setting was demonstrated by German sociologist Max
Weber. Weber felt charisma was a result of magical, captivating, and gifted
personalities (Bass & Avolio, 1990). He classified authority in three types:
charismatic, traditional (feudal), and rational (legal). Through his studies, he
explored the connection between charisma and both noneconomic and
economic sources of authority (Sashkin & Burke, 1990). Weber felt charismatic
leaders emerged during turbulent times to steer followers in the right direction
with their powerful influence (Hollander & Offermann, 1990). Robert House, of
the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, also addressed
charismatic leadership. He was the first to study charisma in a contemporary
setting. House (1977) felt that charismatic leaders possessed certain traits that
enabled followers to exceed well beyond the performance expectations of the
leader. Leaders exhibited high levels of self-confidence, faith, and trust in their
followers, foresight, leading by example, and the genuine belief that followers
could accomplish their goals. In turn, followers shared many of the leader’s 9
beliefs, work ethics, and vision for the future. The followers formed close bonds
with the leaders that resulted in a sense of self-confidence and trust in the
leader’s ability (House, 1977).
 5. CONCLUSION
The Leadership skills approach takes into account the knowledge and abilities
that the leader has. A leader can learn certain skills and turn himself into a
remarkable one, the model describes leadership in terms of skills and therefore
makes leadership available to everyone. This model provides an expansive view
of leadership that incorporates wide variety of components (like problem
solving skills, social judgment skills) and a structure consistent with leadership
education programs.
Transformational leaders are highly skilled at leading process. They recognize
and understand the operative process and are able to guide it in a way that
ensures relevant, synergistic outcomes. When process bogs down, they are able
to assess the problem, intervene, and redirect the process. Good leaders respect
the sequential nature of process and allow it to unfold within its natural time
frame. They have the judgment to determine when a process needs a little extra
nudge or redirection. Tomorrow’s transformational leader is a master at
empowering others, resolving conflict, creating effective teams, and managing
change and transition. This style of leadership has been associated with
significant benefits for organisations, it is clear that it will not be suited to all
circumstances. In some cases, leaders are not needed at all and leadership
substitutes can be equally effective. To some extent the study of leadership has
come full circle in the search for the factors that make a leader effective. Recent
research has revisited the role of individual characteristics in leadership and
emphasised the concept of 'emotional intelligence', like the ability to perceive
and manage one's own emotions and those of others.
 6. REFERENCES
[1] Management Theory & Practices, J S Chandan(Assistance Professor of
Management, Medger Ever College City University of New York), 2nd
edition 2007.

[2] Principles of Management, Partha Chatterjee (Asst. Professor, Department

of MBA, Bengal College of Engineering and Technology, Durgapur).

[3] http://thescholarship.ecu.edu/bitstream.

[4] https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/careers/soft-skills/leadership-

[5] www.wikipedia.com/leadership.