Leadership Theories Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Leadership Theories - Essay ExampleIt is a unvoiced call because leading and followers are unique human beings and at that placeby each situation has an vague entity factored in. A range of leadership theories have tried to put forth different leadership styles which is the recurring pattern of behaviours exhibited by a leader. A leaders style is based on the degree of concern to the execution of the line and the people who do the task.The early Trait theories of the 1920s and 1930s, tried to understand the specific traits that differentiated leaders and non-leaders. These may be physical traits like age, height, weight, or social characteristics like being popular, charismatic or diplomatic or personal traits like being self-confident and adaptable. Task-related characteristics include being driven to excel, pass judgment of responsibility, having initiative, and being results-oriented.Trait theories concentrated on the inherent individual traits rather the situation but thei r drawback was that they did non take up into account situational differences. Also, they did not take into account the fact that when these attributes are cultivated by gentility and training whether they were as effective as the inherent qualities. Due to the uniqueness of situations and individuals, trait theories lost their balloting when compared to situational theories.Contingency Theories take into account environmental factors and recommend adaptable leadership behaviour to actual situational requirements. Fiedlers casualty theory was based on the premise that good leadership is always a match among leadership style and situational demands. What crops in a particular environment may not be successful in a different environment. Fiedlers theory consisted of three contingency variables. The first was the leader-member relations (good or poor) that determined group support for the leader. The second was the task structure (high or low) that specified the accuracy of the task and goals. And the third was the position power that determined the power or authority of the manager to punish or reward his subordinates. These are combined in a weighted sum that is termed Favourable at iodin end and unfavourable at the other. Task oriented style worked with better member relations small-arm or relationship oriented style is defined for other circumstances. Thus, a given situation talent call for a manager with a different style or a manager who could take on a different style for a different situation. Fiedlers theory is successful only when there is a good match between style and situation. The task-motivated style leader takes pride in his work and feels happy in the achievement of company goals. The relationship-oriented manager seems to place more emphasis relationship building. therefrom this works only when the prospective managers have the right situation that suits their predominant style and is dependent on internal and external constraints.The leadership qualities that are required to make a good leader posterior vary in different organisations, teams and situations. This is one of the fundamental principles underlying most popular leadership systems much(prenominal) as Situational Leadership (developed by Blanchard and Hersey in the late 1960s). Hersey and Blanchards Situational Leadership model suggests that successful leaders tush adjust their styles depending on the readiness of the followers to perform in a given situation. The leadership styles portray are combinations of task oriented and relationship