Leadership History and Case Study

History Of Leadership Throughout much of history, leadership was viewed as an inherited position. It was rare that somebody would earn their way into a leadership position. Over time, a leadership model emerged that emphasized traits, and those who displayed those traits were funneled into a leadership system that, at best, worked on a linear hierarchy where tenure determined who held what position. The major gains in leadership theory occurred when the study of leadership moved beyond these two concepts.

By the 1940s and 50s, there was a move towards behavioral theories. Leaders weren't successful because of their traits, but because of the behaviors that existed, a concept that was similar but different. Behaviorism opened up the study of leadership, however. It was really the first theory that focused on emergent leadership over assigned leadership. It also began to separate the idea of management from that of leadership. That separation would grow stronger as leadership study progressed through the 20th century.

Contingency theories, situational leadership and similar approached in the 1960s highlighted the leadership behaviors were not certain, but could be tailored to the situation. A good leader, by this point, was considered an outcome. This was important, because it meant that leadership was something that could be taught, a fairly novel advancement in thinking at the time. Motivation became a key differentiator between leadership and management. In the 1970s there was a split between what a leader was motivating for.

Transactional leadership focused on day-to-day excellent -- improving efficiency, and managing performance of routine tasks. Transformational leadership was the counterpart, where a leader guided an organization through some sort of transformation -- often applied to changing industries, mergers and corporate reorganization. These different leadership paradigms -- the transactional/transformational dichotomy, situational leadership and behaviorism are all foundational elements of leadership study today, theories usually being based on combinations of these ideas.

The different concepts above were all refinements that looked at how leaders use their power, where that power comes from and what they use it for. The earlier theories have leaders whose power is assigned and formal. Trait theory, and behavioral theories, typically left power as formal, but the acquisition of power was viewed to be more emergent. The modern theories of leadership look at how leadership vests throughout the organization. One does not need formal power to have leadership, in particular in organizations that downplay formal power.

Many modern organizations invest their power almost entirely on those who demonstrate that they have power. Not every company is Gore, but a lot of companies are starting to move more in that direction, where one's ability to cultivate and demonstrate influence determines whether or not they are viewed as a leader. In Case 2.2, Carol Baines is first a leader with assigned power. Baines leads as more of a servant leader, someone who sees it as her role to facilitate the employees to perform well.

She provides for them, and in return asks that they have a similar dedication to the business. She has many of the traits of a leader in terms of leading by example, demonstrating strength, resiliency and compassion. These traits, along with listening and communication skills, all make Baines an effective leader. These traits contribute to the expansion of the company because they inspire the others within the company. They see how she carries herself in difficult times, and even when facing cancer is dedicated to others, and that motivates people.