Leadership style is the combination
of traits, skills, and behaviors leaders use as they interact with employees
(Lussier & Achua, 2004). In order
for one to favor a leadership style, one must understand where the leadership
styles originated. Throughout the years,
the topic of leadership has been debated. However, research indicates that
certain characteristics or traits are inherent in leaders (Murphy, 2005). According to research, the 1940’s
proffered leaders as maintaining certain traits. These traits were based on physical and
personality characteristics as well as intelligence and interpersonal skills
(Steers, Porter, & Bigley, 1996). Marquis
& Huston (2000) associated the Great Man Trait Theory with that of the
Aristotelian philosophy, which indicated that leaders were born and not made
and depending on the need a leader would surface.
The limitations of trait theory are
that leaders can not be developed through their skills and education (as cited
in Murphy, 2005).
In contrast with trait theories, the
behavioral methodology centered on the recognizable actions that made a person
an effective leader (Wright, 1996). Personal
Behavior Theories discussed in the University
of Michigan and Ohio State
University studies
identified two more Styles of Leadership:
job-centered (task) and employee-centered (people). The job-centered (task-initiating structure)
behavior focuses on the leader taking control in order to get the job done and the
employee-centered (people-consideration) behavior focuses on the leader meeting
the needs of employees and developing relationships (Lussier & Achua,
2004). The findings in the Michigan study indicated
that leaders who were highly employee oriented and allowed participation
fostered more productive teams. On the
other hand, leaders who were more concerned about accomplishing tasks
cultivated lower producing teams. The
findings from the Ohio
State University
study emphasized the consideration and initiating structure as the two
underlying structures found in the University
of Michigan study.
The Ohio State University study
concluded that both structures were separate components, but if a leader were
dedicated in both they could achieve higher results (Murphy, 2005). Research at the University of Iowa
expounded on the studies above and identified two basic leadership styles: Autocratic and Democratic. These and other
research studies asserted four (4) main leadership styles: concern for task,
concern for people, Directive Leadership and Participative Leadership (Wright,
1996). Fiedler (1967) explored the idea that
there was not just one ultimate style of leadership for a given circumstance,
but leaders would be more effective by varying their leadership style depending
on the situations that faced them.
Fiedler’s Model based leadership styles on either being task or
relationship oriented and the style use depended on whether the situation was
one of leader-member relations, task structure or position power (as cited in
Murphy, 2005).
Hersey and Blanchard theorized that
the style of leadership was determined by the employee’s perceptions. Hersey
and Blanchard’s theory expounded on Fiedler’s model by creating four (4)
leadership styles: Directing, Coaching,
Supporting and Delegating (Murphy, 2005). Building on the same principles of
the contingency theories above, House (1971) suggested that the path- goal
theory influences and motivates employee’s views and opportunities. Employee contentment, accomplishment of goals
and improved functioning would be derived from the leader’s direction,
training, guidance and support. Despite
the findings of this research, Marquis & Huston (2000) disagreed and noted
that situational theory focused on the situation rather than the interpersonal
and intrapersonal factors. The following leadership styles are derivatives of the ones discussed
above.
This research paper will examine
Autocratic, Laissez-Faire, Participative (democratic), Transactional and
Transformational leadership.
Comments
Post a Comment