HISTORICAL

DEVELOPMENT OF
LEADERSHIP
THEORY
01). The great man theory/trait theories (1900 to 1940)

02). Behavioral theories (1940 to 1980)

03). Situational and contingency leadership theories (1950 to 1980)

04). Interactional leadership theories (1970 to present)

05). Transactional and transformational leadership

06). Full-range leadership model/theory

 The great man theory/trait
01 theories
(1900 to 1940)
The Great Man theory and trait theories were the
basis for most leadership research until the mid-
1940s. The Great Man theory, from Aristotelian
philosophy, asserts that some people are born to
lead, whereas others are born to be led. It also
suggests that great leaders will arise when the
situation demands it.
Trait theories assume that some people have certain characteristics or
personality traits that make them better leaders than others.

Characteristics Associated With Leadership

• Intelligence
• Oral fluency • Skilled communicator
• Adaptability
• Self-confidence • Critical thinking
• Ability
• Diplomacy • Collaborative
• Knowledge
• Emotional intelligence priority setting
• Creativity
• Personal integrity
• Able to enlist cooperation
• Prestige
• Judgment
• Independence
•Cooperativeness
• Emotional balance and control
• Interpersonal skills
• Social participation
• Decisiveness
• Personable
• Alertness
• Risk taking
• Tact
• Charisma
 Behavioral theories
02 (1940 to 1980)
 The behavioral leadership theory focuses on how leaders behave,
and assumes that these traits can be copied by other leaders.
Sometimes called the style theory, it suggests that leaders aren’t
born successful, but can be created based on learnable behavior.
Behavioral theories of leadership focus heavily on the actions of a
leader—this theory suggests that the best predictor of leadership
success is viewing how a leader acts. Action rather than qualities are
the focal points of behavioral learning theory. At the end of the day,
the actions and actual behaviors of a leader are what defines success
in this theory.
—EXAMPLE:
A great example of the behavioral theory is looking at a task-
oriented leader. If there’s a problem with a team, a task-oriented
leader will look at the process to see if something needs to be
adjusted with the workflow. A people-oriented leader will look
at the individuals and go right to them, asking what the issue is.
Whatever behaviors you choose, the behavioral leadership
theory helps leaders focus on their actions and utilize their
decisions to be a great leader.
 Situational and
03 contingency leadership
theories (1950 to 1980)
The idea that leadership style should vary according to the situation or
the individuals involved was first suggested almost 100 years ago by
Mary Parker Follett, one of the earliest management consultants and
among the first to view an organization as a social system of
contingencies. Her ideas, published in a series of books between 1896
and 1933, were so far ahead of their time that they did not gain
appropriate recognition in the literature until the 1970s. Her law of the
situation, which said that the situation should determine the directives
given after allowing everyone to know the problem, was contingency
leadership in its humble
origins.
 Fiedler’s (1967) contingency approach reinforced these findings,
suggesting that no one leadership style is ideal for every situation.
Fiedler felt that the interrelationships between the group’s leader and
its members were most influenced by the manager’s ability to be a
good leader. The task to be accomplished and the power associated
with the leader’s position also were cited as key variables.

In contrast to the continuum from autocratic to democratic, Blake and

Mouton’s (1964) grid showed
various combinations of concern or focus that managers had for or on
productivity, tasks, people, and
relationships. In each of these areas, the leader-manager may rank
high or low, resulting in numerous
combinations of leadership behaviors.
Hersey and Blanchard (1977) also developed a situational approach
to leadership. Their tridimensional leadership effectiveness model
predicts which leadership style is most appropriate in each situation
on the basis of the level of the followers’ maturity. As people
mature, leadership style becomes less task focused andmore
relationship oriented

Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) built on the work of Lewin (1951)

as well as White and Lippitt (1960), suggesting that managers need
varying mixtures of autocratic and democratic leadership behavior.
They believed that the primary determinants of leadership style
should include the nature of the situation, the skills of the manager,
and the abilities of the group members.
 Interactional leadership
04 theories
(1970 to present)
 The basic premise of interactional theory is that
leadership behavior is generally determined by
the relationship between the leader’s personality
and the specific situation.
 (1970) Schein

an interactional theorist, was the first to propose a model of humans as complex beings whose
working environment was an open system to which they responded.

Schein’s model, based on systems theory, had the following assumptions:

• People are very complex and highly variable. They have multiple motives for doing things. For
example, a pay raise might mean status to one person, security to another, and both to a third.
• People’s motives do not stay constant; instead, they change over time.
• Goals can differ in various situations. For example, an informal group’s goals may be quite distinct
from a formal group’s goals.
• A person’s performance and productivity are affected by the nature of the task and by his or her
ability, experience, and motivation.
• No single leadership strategy is effective in every situation
 (1978) Hollander

To be successful, the leader must diagnose the situation and select appropriate strategies
from a large repertoire of skills. With leader and follower contributing to the working
relationship and both receiving something from it, Hollander saw leadership as a
dynamic two-way process.

According to Hollander, a leadership exchange involves three basic elements:

•The leader, including his or her personality, perceptions, and abilities
•The followers, with their personalities, perceptions, and abilities
•The situation within which the leader and the followers function, including formal and
informal group norms, size, and density
 (1977), Kanter

She postulated that the leader becomes empowered through both formal and
informal systems of the organization. A leader must develop relationships with a
variety of people and groups within the organization in order to maximize job
empowerment and be successful. The three major work empowerment
structures within the organization are opportunity, power, and proportion.
 (1981) Ouchi
Incorporate Japanese style management
Theory Z, is an expansion of McGregor’s Theory Y and supports
democratic leadership.
Characteristics of Theory Z
 consensus decision making
 fitting employees to their jobs
 job security
 slower promotions
 examining the long-term consequences of management decision making,
quality circles
 guarantee of lifetime employment
 establishment of strong bonds of responsibility between superiors and
subordinates holistic concern for the workers.
 (1984) Nelson and Burns suggested that organizations and their leaders have four

developmental levels and that these levels influence productivity and worker satisfaction.

Reactive leader Responsive Proactive level Last level

 Focuses on the  the leader is  The leader and  high

past able to mold followers performance
 crisis driven subordinates to become more teams
 frequently work together as future oriented  maximum
abusive to a team, although and hold productivity and
subordinates the leader common driving worker
maintains most values. satisfaction are
decision-making Management apparent
responsibility and decision
making are more
participative.
 (1989) Kanter

Best summarized the work of the interactive theorists by her assertion

that title and
position authority were no longer sufficient to mold a workforce where
subordinates are encouraged to think
for themselves, and instead managers must learn to work synergistically
with others.
 Transactional and
05 transformational
leadership
Burns (2003), a noted scholar in the area of leader–follower interactions,
was among the first to suggest that both leaders and followers have the
ability to raise each other to higher levels of motivation and morality.
Identifying this concept as transformational leadership, Burns maintained
that there are two primary types of leaders in management.

• The traditional manager, concerned with the day-to-day operations, was

termed a transactional leader.
• The manager who is committed, has a vision, and is able to empower
otherswith this vision was termed a transformational leader
 TRANSACTIONAL TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADER: LEADER:

• Focuses on management tasks • Identifies common values

• Is commited
• Uses trade-offs to meet goals
• Does not identify shared values
• Examines causes
• Uses contingency reward
• Is a caretaker
• Inspires others with vision
• Has long-term vision
• Looks at effects
• Empowers others
 => Bass and Avolio (1994) - transformational leadership leads followers to
levels of higher morals because such leaders do the right thing for the right
reason, treat people with care and compassion, encourage followers to be
more creative and innovative, and inspire others with their vision. This new
shared vision provides the energy required to move toward the future.

=> Huber (2015) - most important tenants of transformational leadership is

collective empowerment.
=> American Nurses Association (2016) - leaders do more
than delegate, dictate, and direct; they help others achieve
their highest potential.

=> Kouzes and Posner (2012) - exemplary leaders foster a

culture in which relationships between aspiring leaders and
willing followers can thrive.
This requires the development of the five
practices:

1. Modeling the way

2. Inspiring a shared vision
3. Challenging the process
4. Enabling others to act
5. Encouraging the heart
 Full-range
06 leadership
model/theory
 It is this idea that context is an important mediator of
transformational leadership that led to the creation of a full-
range leadership model (FRLM) Iate in the 20th century.

Bass and Avolio (1993) first described a full range leader as

a leader who could apply principles of three specific styles
of leadership at any given time:
transformational, transactional and laissez-faire.
 MacKie (2014) suggests the FRLM “encompasses both the
transformational elements of leadership (that is building trust, acting with
principle and integrity, inspiring others, innovating, and developing
others), transactional elements (that includes both constructive elements,
e.g., contingent reward and corrective elements and management by
exception) and avoidant or laissez-faire leadership behaviors”

Further work by Antonakis, Avolio, and Sivasubramaniam (2003),

suggested there are nine factors impacting leadership style and its impact
on followers in the FRLM; five are transformational, three are
transactional, and one is a nonleadership or laissez-faire leadership factor
 Nine Factors in the Full-Range Leadership Model (as described by
Rowold & Schlotz, 2009)

Factor 1 inspirational motivation transformational

Factor 2 idealized influence ( attributed) transformational
Factor 3 idealized influence ( behavior) transformational
Factor 4 intellectual stimulation transformational
Factor 5 individualized consideration transformational
Factor 6 contingent reward transactional
Factor 7 active management -by-exception transactional
Factor 8 management-by-exception passive transactional
Factor 9 nonleadership laissez-faire
The first factor, inspirational motivation, is characterized by the leader’s articulation
and representation of vision. Idealized influence (attributed), the second factor,
relies on the charisma of the leader to create emotional ties with followers that build
trust and confidence. The third factor, idealized influence (behavior), results in the
leader creating a collective sense of mission and values and prompting followers to
act on these values. With the fourth factor, intellectual stimulation, leaders
challenge the assumptions of followers’ beliefs as well as analyze subordinates’
problems and possible solutions. The final transformational factor, individualized
consideration, occurs when the leader is able to individualize his or her followers,
recognizing and appreciating their unique needs, strengths, and challenges.
The first transactional factor, as described by Rowold and Schlotz (2009), is contingent
reward. Here, the leader is task oriented in providing followers with meaningful
rewards based on successful task completion. Active management-by-exception, the
second transactional factor, suggests that the leader watches and searches actively for
deviations from rules and standards and takes corrective actions when necessary. In
contrast, the third transactional factor, management-by-exception passive, describes a
leader who intervenes only after errors have been detected or standards have been
violated. Finally, the ninth factor of full-range leadership theory is the absence of
leadership. Thus, laissez-faire is a contrast to the active leadership styles of
transformational and transactional leadership exemplified in the first eight factors.
THANKYOU!