Are Leaders Born or Made Essay

Introduction

A leader is somebody who has followers. It is broadly acknowledged that leaders are not born but made. In arrange to be a good leader, one must have the experience, knowledge, commitment, persistence and importantly the expertise to arrange and work with others to attain objectives. Great leadership is developed through a never finishing process of self-study, instruction, preparing and the accumulation of significant experience (Bass&Bass,2008). Great leaders are in this way made, not born. Leadership includes a sort of responsibility aimed at accomplishing specific closes by applying the accessible assets (human and material) and guaranteeing a cohesive and coherent organization within the process. Leadership is apparently one of the most observed, yet least caught on wonders on earth (Burns, in Abbasialiya, 2010).

The objective of this study is to provide an overview of various theories of leadership and discusses the how it is applied on leadership in an organization to organize the ideas efficiently and effectively.

Theories of Leadership

There is very different opinion of leadership as there are characteristic that differentiate leaders from non-leaders. While most research nowadays has shifted from conventional characteristic or personality-based theories to a circumstance hypothesis which dictates that the circumstances hypothesis dictates that the circumstances in which authority is exercised are decided by the leadership skills and characteristics of the leader(Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009), all contemporary theories can drop beneath one of the following three viewpoints: leadership as a process, relationship, personality, and characteristics.

A. Great Man Theory

Great man theories accept that the capacity for leadership is inalienable, that extraordinary leaders are born not made. These speculations often portray leaders as gallant, mythic and destined to rise to authority when required. The term great man was utilized since, at the time, leadership was thought of fundamentally a quality of particularly military authority (Ololube,2013).One of the early ideas of leadership ,which is still well known in certain group of people or circle, is that leadership is an innate quality. The Great Man Theory of leadership states that those leaders who are not common by their characteristics and those who are incredible in specific are born rather than made American pragmatist, Sidney Catch, help extend Carlyle's perspective and highlighted the influence which can be made by the pivotal man vs. the event -making man (Dobbins & Platz, 1986).Based on the theory, leadership has certain features i.e. charm, enticement, commanding identity, tall degree of instinct power of judgement, boldness, insights, forcefulness and those are such types of characteristics that one possesses by their own rather than by learning through their own or by the experience. This type of extraordinary men tends to be less important and subsequently development of the organizations.(Macgregor,2003)

B. Trait Theory

It is like Great Man Theory this theory is the Trait Theory which states that leadership qualities or characteristics can be procured. Trait theories mostly analyses the traits their personality and behaviour which are common among leaders and are shared between them. It does not necessarily require to be innate. The trait theory of leadership states that some of the certain distinguishable characteristics which are special to leaders and those great leaders have those types of qualities to a few degrees. Leadership qualities may be natural, or they may be obtained through preparing and hone. Trait theories overlook around whether the characteristics of leadership either they were hereditary or gained later in life.Jenkins recognized two characteristics; new characteristics (those which are intensely subordinate upon genetics) as stature, insights, allure and those of viability characteristics (based on experience or learning), counting charisma, as principal component of leadership (Ekvall & Arvonen,1991).

C. Contingency theories

Contingency theory is also regarded as situational theory in which specific variables of environment is considered to determine the style of leadership relevant to certain situation. According to this theory, no single leadership style is fitting in all circumstances. Success depends upon a number of variables, including leadership style, qualities of adherents and situational highlights (Cherry,2012).The theories of contingency suggest that no leadership style is exact as a stand-alone as the leadership style utilize is dependent upon the components such as the quality, circumstance of the devotees or several other factors. “According to this theory, there's no single right way to lead since the inner and outside measurements of the environment that requires the leader to adjust to that specific situation”. A contingency factor is in this way any condition in any significant environment to be considered when planning an organization or one of its elements (Naylor, 1999) In most cases, leaders don't alter as it were the flow and environment, representatives inside the organization alter. Contingency theories of leadership center on variables related to the environment that might determine which style of leadership is best suited for a specific work situation.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

D. Style Behaviour theories

Behavioral theories of leadership are classified as such since they center on the study of the behaviors of a leader. For behavioural scholars, a leader behaviour is the leading indicator of his leadership influences and as a result, is the finest determinant of his or her authority success. Like one that does not fit all heads, so also one fashion cannot be successful in all circumstances. (Yukl,1989) presented three diverse leadership styles, This behaviour-focused approach gives genuine promoting potential, as behaviours can be conditioned in a way that one can have a reaction to stimuli. Workers engaging with equitable leaders show tall degree of fulfilment, imagination and inspiration and vitality independent of the nearness or absence of the leader; keeping up superior associations with the pioneer, in terms of efficiency while, absolutist leaders primarily, focused on more noteworthy amount of yield. Laissez faire leadership was considered to be pertinent.

E. Process Leadership Theory

The leadership was bestowed on an individual who was by nature a hireling. “The hireling leader centers on desires of the adherent and helps them to end up more independent more liberated and knowledgeable”. The worker leader is additionally more concerned with the “have-nots” and recognizes them as rise to (Greenleaf, 1996). Leadership theory has moved from innate characteristics and rights, to secured characteristics and styles, to situational and relationship sorts of authority, to the work of bunches and bunch shapes and, as of presently, to the interaction of the bunch of people with an emphasis on the person and organizational work of bunches and accumulate shapes and, right presently, to the interaction of the gather of people with an emphasis on the person and organizational moral progression.(Yammarino,1999)

F. Transactional Theory

This type of leadership was portrayed where leader and their supporters affiliations were grounded upon a number of arguments between adherents and leaders (House&Shamir,1993).The transactional theory was“ based on correspondence where leaders not as it were impact adherents but are beneath their impact as well”. A few followers uncovered that transactional leadership appears inconsistent in response with their leaders” and the nature in respect to its followers ( Bass and Avolio1994) watched transactional leadership “as a sort of contingent-reward leadership that had dynamic and positive trade between leaders and followers whereby supporters were compensated or recognized for finishing concurred upon objectives” From the leader, these rewards might embroil appreciation for justifying increments, rewards, and work accomplishment.For great work, positive support may well be traded justify pay for advancements, and expanded execution coop.Transactional leadership sees administration in terms of an trade between leader supporter at its most essential this exchange includes the trade of remunerate for work.

Transactional theories, too known as management theories, center on the role of supervision, organization and group performance and the trades that take place between leaders and supporters. These theories are based on authority or a system of rewards and disciplines (Cherry, 2042).

G. Transformational Theory

Relationship theories, moreover, known as transformational theories, center on the connections shaped between pioneers and followers. In these theories, leadership is the process by which a individual locks in with others and is able to form an association that comes about in expanded inspiration and profound quality in both followers and leaders. As per Bass, transformational leader, “attempts to initiate followers to reorder their needs by rising above self-interests and endeavour for higher arrange needs”. This theory adjusts the Maslow (1954) higher arrange needs hypothesis. Transformational leadership could be a course that changes and approach targets on convictions, values and demeanours that illuminate leaders‟ hones and the capacity bring change. The transformational leaders are considered by their capability to distinguish the require for alter, pick up the understanding and commitment of others, make a vision that guides alter and insert the alter(MacGregorBums,2003). Transformational leadership, on the other hand, ‘originates within the individual values and convictions of leaders, not in an trade of commodities between pioneers and followers’ (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987, pp. 649-650). Rather than work in one style or the other, Bass proposes that transformational leadership can increase the impacts of transactional leadership, citing Presidents Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy as cases of leaders comfortable swapping between styles (Bass & Bass, 2008).

H. Skills Theory

The skills theory of leadership emphasizes that knowledge acquired through learning and experience is an important factor which is very crucial for undertaking effective leadership practice. A strong conviction in skills theory often states that considerable effort and resources can be committed to leadership training and improvement (Wolinski, 2010).

References:

1. Abbasialiya, A. (2010). The concept of leadership Retrieved January 11, 2013. from http://expertscolumn.com/ content/ concept-leadership.
2. Bass, B., Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership, Research and Managerial Application New York: Simon & Schuster
3. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research & managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
4. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997) Full range leadership development: manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Mindgarden, Palo Alto, Calif
5. Dess, G. G., & Picken, J. C. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century. Organizational Dynamics, 29 (4), 18–33.
6. Dobbins, G. H., & Platz, S. J. (1986). Sex differences in leadership: How real are they? Academy of Management Review, I, 118-127.
7. Ekvall, G., & Arvonen, K. (1991). Change-centered leadership: An extension of the two-dimensional model. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 7, 17–26.
8. Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power & greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press
9. House, R. J., & Shamir, B. (1993). Toward the integration of transformational, charismatic, and visionary theories. M. M. Chemers, & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and direction, 81–107
10. McGregor, D. M. (2003). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.
11. Waldo, D. (2001). The enterprise of public administration. Novato, CA: Chandler & Sharp.
12. Yukl, G. (2001). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hal
13. Yammarino, F. J. (1999). CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-of-management and evels-of analysis effects. Academy of Management Review, 24, 266-286 https://www.apsc.gov.au/transactional-leadership-and-transformational-leadership.