Leadership Theory, Analysis and Applications Leadership Theory Analysis and Application

A successful leader is an individual who influences his or her followers towards attaining the organization's aspirations. Thus, leadership is that process of influencing or convincing others to attain the organization's goals. There are three noteworthy points in this definition of leadership. The first is that the act of being a leader is a social influence one. One cannot be called a leader if he or she does not have followers. Secondly, a good leader elicits voluntary compliance from the followers. This is the best feature of leadership since voluntary complying followers will do a better job than those complying because of formal authority. Lastly, leadership elicits a purposeful and goal-oriented behavior from the followers (Lussier & Achua, 2013). Leadership is perhaps the most commonly discussed topic in organizational sciences. Thousands of studies and results have been published and many books have also been written on business-oriented, academic journals and other kinds of publications. In spite of the numerous studies on leadership and related concepts, the relationship between leadership and important variables such as performance, commitment, and employee satisfaction still remains uncertain, to the extent that Fred Luthans in his 2005 work titled Organizational Behavior stated that leadership remains an unexplainable concept.

A leadership theory endeavors to explain some concept or aspect of leadership. Leadership theories have an important value in helping individuals to have more understanding on how to be better leaders and how to handle certain situations correctly. Thus, the main objective of leadership theories is to inform practice. Leadership theories are classified into four major classes, namely integrative, contingency, behavioral and trait. Apart from leadership theory there is leadership paradigm. Leadership paradigm is a shared mindset that reflects a fundamental approach of studying, thinking, perceiving and understanding leadership. Several changes have taken place in leadership paradigm over the last 6 decades. The aforementioned leadership paradigms represent a shift in leadership conceptualization (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2006; Lussier & Achua, 2013).

1. Leadership theories

i. Path-Goal Leadership Theory

Path-Goal leadership theory describes leadership styles and behaviors that best fit certain workplaces and employees in order to achieve set goals (House & Mitchell, 1974). The objective is to increase followers' satisfaction, empowerment, and motivation so that they can improve their performance. The Path-Goal model draws from Vroom's (1964) expectancy theory. In the expectancy theory, Vroom states an individual will act in a particular way if he or she expects that their conduct will bring about a particular outcome and on the attractiveness of the said outcome to that individual. Path-Goal theory was first explained by Martin Evans (1970) and later expounded further by House (1971).

The best way to explain the Path-Goal theory is as a process in which individuals choose certain behaviors that they think best fit the needs of their employees and those of the working environment so that they may lead their employees through a path towards the attainment of their day-to-day goals (Northouse, 2013). According to this theory, for employees to attain their objectives, a leader needs to motivate, support, and assist them in identifying and setting goals; overcoming challenges; bettering their performance; and providing proper rewards for work done (House & Mitchell, 1974). Workers often interpret their superior's behaviors (level of ability, affiliation, and the degree of structure needed) based on their own individual needs. For instance, if a leader provides more structure than what the employees need, they will become less motivated. Thus, there is a need for leaders to understand that the needs of their employees and the best motivation for them.

Advantages

In instances where something needs to be done immediately (e.g. emergencies or complicated situations with time constraints) this is the best leadership model.

According to Robert House (the theory's formulator), all theories are often eventually incorrect. A theory that cannot be in danger of being disapproved cannot be alive (House, 1971). Thus, this theory provides room for adaptability.

The revised Path-Goal theory has more emphasis on group participation, making it more useful to us in knowledgeable and intelligent groups.

The theory is easy to explain and convey. The analogy of a path that needs to be cleared and employees who need to be guided along this path can easily be explained and incorporated.

Disadvantages

The Path-Goal theory assumes that employees are not sure or aware of their actual need, thus it is undemocratic.

In case a leader has flaws there is a high likelihood that the model will fail.

Not all leaders are rational, and their "path" might be delusory, putting other group in jeopardy.

This model could collapse since it often places...

She makes sure that the employees are able to speak to her openly about different issues. She mentors and coaches her employees on handling different tasks and responsibilities. Simply put, she is interested in the needs and interests of her employees. She also takes into account Brako's goals and aspirations and rewards those employees who make efforts towards those goals. In other words, her leadership style is achievement oriented (Northouse, 2013 p. 150). Even though this case study doesn't indicate what types of responsibilities her team is tasked with, it appears that this leadership style is effective and that organizational goals are being achieved (Shriberg & Shriberg, 2011).
2. The Contingency Leadership Theory

The behavioral leadership theory and the trait leadership theory were efforts to find the best leadership style for all work environments and thus these two theories were referred to as universal theories. In the 1960s, it became clear that there is not one leadership style that suits all situations (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993). This resulted in the change of leadership paradigm from universal theories to contingency theory. Contingency leadership theory is an attempt to describe different leadership styles based on the situation, the followers and the leaders. Simply put, it explains the way in which particular behaviors or traits will bring about leadership success in a particular situation. This theory emphasizes on situational variables such as the characteristics of followers, external environment and the nature of work performed.

Contingency approaches are placed within the management as mid-range theories between the two radical views, which maintain that either universal principles of organization and management are present or that every organization is unique and that all scenarios should be evaluated individually. The contingency approach involves identification of regularly recurring settings as well as monitoring how various strategies, structures, and behavioral procedures get by in every setting (Fielder, 1986). Major contingency theories have been suggested and evaluated relating to organizational structures, surroundings, and characteristics; organizational strategies and competitive conditions; and organizational characteristics and behavioral procedures. Apart from open utilization by numerous authors, the contingency approach has been a primary theme for theory building and research throughout the management literature.

Pros

1. Theories founded on contingencies comprise unique characteristics, though in a general manner.

1. The theory is actually a common-sense aspect of the world to those that realize that context and system dynamics are important features of a leader-led situation.

1. Contingency theories inspire thinking about a certain feature of a leader-led situation which requires more focus.

Cons

1. A contingency theory might be conveyed in too general a manner to have particular applicative value.

1. Determining the aspects of a situation could be extremely subjective and might not seize the truth of a leader-led situation.

1. Any validation and verification of a modeled system is naturally challenging (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993).

Application

A manager at Artisol Inc. is experiencing a situation with a worker who normally comes late to work. The manager could have a drafted protocol for this particular situation whereby there is just one option: present the worker a notice. However, under the contingency point-of-view, the manager might choose to better understand the situation through a deliberation on the matter with the worker (regarding his/her lateness), and later on deciding on the most suitable course of action to take. The value of this depends on the information the manager obtains regarding the employee: perhaps there are mitigating circumstances that are could be somewhat simple to work around. In this case, the contingency approach permits the worker to maintain his/her job and saves the manger from experiencing the trouble of dismissing a worker and hiring another. The ability of a leader to manage under contingency point-of-view greatly relies on the nature of the surroundings and the relation of the organization to that surrounding. Thus, the organizational structure is a major aspect of the approach that management could take in resolving issues under contingency theory (Luthans, 2005).

3. The Integrative Leadership Theory

Not long ago, theorists have conceptualized leadership more widely with a mutual influence procedure. In the mid to late 1970s, the paradigm started to move the integrative, to tie the theories together or neo-charismatic theory. As the name suggests, integrative leadership theories try to merge the trait, contingency, and behavioral theories to elaborate successful, influencing leader-follower relationships (Avolio & Luthans,…