21st Century Leadership: Theories, Competencies, and Trends

21st Century Leadership

What does leadership mean today? The 21st century environment presents entirely different challenges and needs from previous centuries with regard to leadership. Studies have shown that emotional and social intelligence are two major areas pertinent to 21st century leadership, as they relate to how well leaders can effectively establish positive relationships with followers (Boyatzis, 2008; Den, Deanne, & Belschak, 2012; Higgs, 2013; Schyns & Schilling, 2013). There are, nonetheless, many styles and theories of leadership discussed by both professionals and researchers today. These styles and theories range from servant leadership to authoritarian leadership. Yet as Higgs (2013) shows, in the 21st century, a "sense making" paradigm is needed in order for an appropriate model of leadership to be implemented that "is relevant to the context of complexity and change facing organizations in the early twenty-first century" (p. 273).

This sense-making paradigm is actually a throwback to what Luthans (1988) identified nearly three decades ago — namely the need for management to be mentally and emotionally supportive of and available to subordinates: "successful managers . . . are not engaged in the same day-to-day activities as effective managers" but are leaders who "find that the way to get ahead . . . is to be friendly . . . both inside and outside the firm . . . find a common interest . . . and interact with [workers] on that level" (p. 130). The key to successful leadership in the 21st century is to identify the needs of a complex and diverse workforce population, wherein generational gaps can cause misunderstandings and cultural differences can lead to resentment.

The proponents of behavioral theories of leadership maintain the popular belief that great leaders are made, not born. This theory illuminates the actions of leaders rather than their mental qualities or internal states, and postulates that people can learn to become leaders through teaching and observation. According to Bass (1990), this is accomplished by teaching an individual the most appropriate behavioral response to any given situation. This means that contemporary leaders will learn good-quality leadership from current professionals — some of whom emerged in this century — and through interaction with modern systems such as email, social media, and other IT-related interactive platforms. The 21st century has, in this respect, been seen to totally reshape the conception of leadership.

Another concept of leadership relates to transformational theory, which is shown by Cavazotte, Moreno, and Hickmann (2012) to utilize emotional intelligence (EI) to a significant extent in order to transform workers into their optimal selves. Then there is the transactional style of leadership, which focuses on more routine tasks where a rewards-and-punishment system is in place to motivate workers. For longer-term projects, however, the transformational style speaks more to the needs of organizations looking to tap the potential of their workers over the long haul (Harms & Crede, 2010).

History of Leadership and Modern Trends

The history of leadership can be viewed most readily in the societal shifts that have taken place over time across continents, as social structures are ultimately most reflective of leadership concepts (King, Johnson, & Van Vugt, 2009). A large commonality among the various threads interwoven in the history of leadership is the idea that strong leadership is an outcome of experience — a quality that is honed and refined over time and demonstrated by those who have been tested: "age correlates with leadership . . . [where] knowledge and training" are requisite "but not in domains that require risk-taking and physical bravery" (King, Johnson, & Van Vugt, 2009, p. 912).

Leadership styles and theories have also developed over time in ways that reflect social norms. In the modern era, the idea of the "Great Man" — which held that leaders were born rather than made — has been replaced by theories grounded in the psychological concepts devised throughout the 20th century: Trait Theory, Behavioral Theory, the University Theories, Contingency Theories, Organizational Culture Theory, Motivational Theory, and Needs Theory are just a few examples of the types of ideas about leadership that have grown out of the 20th century's focus on psychology as a means of understanding human behavior. These theories and concepts have built upon one another over the years so that each is a reaction to what came before. Of course, in some cases a new idea has come along that is completely radical and different from the others, based on a new approach to human understanding (Maslanka, 2004). Nonetheless, even before the 20th century, leadership was a concept that philosophers, statesmen, and religious thinkers all propounded upon. From Machiavelli to the modern political and organizational leaders of today, leadership has been a topic on which everyone has an opinion.

The main styles of leadership that have taken center stage in the modern era have largely come from the University Theories models. The role of EI and transformational leadership within today's discussions of 21st century leadership are now predominant because they reflect the trend in modern culture that seeks to maximize potential and use every available resource toward achieving the overall organizational aim in the most effective long-term manner. The role of ethics has also become important in leadership, as the fall of corporations like Enron has demonstrated the need for transparency, trust, authenticity, and virtue among leaders to ensure lasting success.

Today's trends in leadership include ideas about how leaders should assist others to grow. Thus, many assumptions are still made in any leadership discussion — the main one being that leaders always attempt to "empower others" (Conger, 1989, p. 17). Leadership is also defined as the art of "instilling a sense of power" within followers, and most leaders in the modern era tend to embody this idea. Another assumption made about leadership is that leaders should possess a number of qualities and characteristics that older societies identified as virtues — or good habits — such as truthfulness, honesty, openness, communicativeness, and empathy (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009). There are a number of leadership approaches that can be utilized to facilitate leaders who operate according to this assumption: transformational leadership, confrontational leadership, and the application of emotional intelligence, among others.

Another trend in leadership today is the concept of self-management — a type of leadership that places the onus of development on the individual (Yukl, 2010). This approach also underpins essentially all styles of leadership, because if the individual is not oriented toward betterment, empowerment, and the achievement of goals through overcoming obstacles, then that individual will never be fully effective within an organization. At some point, self-management must take hold regardless of the leadership style adopted by those in authority.

The current trends associated with describing leadership suggest that leaders' behavior can be grouped into four major categories: 1) task-oriented behaviors, 2) relation-oriented behaviors, 3) change-oriented behaviors, and 4) passive leadership. Leaders with task-oriented behaviors exhibit transactional-leader behaviors. They offer contingent reward and manage by exception — actively monitoring for deviations from standards (Management by Exception Active, or MBEA). These tasks are often defined by time and space. The 21st century has brought with it a shift in the tasks carried out in organizations on a daily basis; attending to social media and responding to comments from followers, for example, was not a priority in the previous century but is now a requirement for most organizations. This means that even task-oriented leaders must be shaped by contemporary demands.

Task-oriented leaders are capable of defining task roles and role relationships among group members (Bass, 1990). They can coordinate group members' actions and determine standards of task performance, ensuring that group members perform up to those standards. A transactional leader makes clear what is expected in terms of task performance and the rewards for meeting those expectations, can anticipate task-oriented problems, and takes corrective action when necessary. Clear expectations and performance standards in turn shape follower commitment, motivation, and behavior.

Understanding Leadership in the 21st Century

A leader's actions in the 21st century should attract followers' respect and encourage them to focus on the welfare of the group — particularly in a society that is increasingly preoccupied with social media and global events rather than local concerns, as was more common in the previous century. Some aspects of transformational leadership, such as individualized consideration, have a relational orientation. A transformational leader must create and facilitate change within an organization, and a change-oriented leader must develop and communicate a vision for that change. Burns (1978) states that such changes are important in a fast-changing work environment; otherwise, the efforts of the team may be rendered obsolete within a short time.

The 21st century is both creative and innovative. Technology and global access to information encourage new ways of thinking and consequent changes in how activities are carried out. The leader in such an environment must encourage innovative thinking and be willing to take risks. Bass (1985) further states that transformational leaders should capitalize on inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation — using the former to communicate a compelling vision for the future and the latter to seek different perspectives from group members, challenge assumptions, and take calculated risks.

Under circumstances where problems do not exist or are not apparent, a leader may choose not to actively engage (Gastil, 1994). This is known as passive leadership. The absence of leader behavior is commonly referred to as laissez-faire (LF) leadership; such an approach may be detrimental in the contemporary society due to the highly competitive environment organizations now face.

Conclusion

Leadership ideas have changed throughout time. Classical leadership theories focused on embracing virtue so that actions would lead to positive results regardless of environment. Over time, however, objective views of the Good were challenged and new approaches became necessary. Today, in a global society, there is a need for leaders to unite followers under a shared vision — and this requires restraint, command, empathy, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and a host of other qualities that lend support to both Trait Theory and Situational Theory as highly effective approaches for addressing the needs of 21st century leadership.

References

Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., and Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, pp. 421–449.

Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill's handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Bass and Avolio's transformational leadership. Organizational Culture, 17(1), pp. 112–121.

Bhargava, R. (2012). Likeonomics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Blair-Loy, M. and Jacobs, J. A. (2003). Globalization, work hours, and the care deficit among stockbrokers. Gender & Society, 17(2), pp. 230–249.

Boje, D. M. (2000). Transformational leadership. Available from

Bolino, M. C. and Turnley, W. H. (2003). Counternormative impression management, likeability, and performance ratings: The use of intimidation in an organizational setting. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(2), pp. 237–250.

Boyatzis, R. (2008). Competencies in the 21st century. Journal of Management Development, 27(1), pp. 5–12.

Burgoon, B. and Raess, D. (2007). Globalization and working time: Work-place hours and flexibility in Germany. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labor Studies.

Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V. and Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of leader intelligence, personality and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership and managerial performance. Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), p. 443.

Conger, J. A. (1989). Leadership: The art of empowering others. Academy of Management Executive, 3(1), pp. 17–25.

Cronin, T. (2008). All the world's a stage: Acting and the art of political leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 19(4), p. 459.

Den, H., Deanne, N. and Belschak, F. D. (2012). When does transformational leadership enhance employee proactive behavior? The role of autonomy and role breadth self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), pp. 194–202.

Francke, A. (2014). 21st century leaders: Building practice into the curriculum to boost employability. Available from

Gastil, J. (1994). A meta-analytic review of the productivity and satisfaction of democratic and autocratic leadership. Small Group Research, 25, pp. 384–410.

Harms, P. and Crede, M. (2010). Emotional intelligence and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 17(1), p. 5.

Higgs, M. (2013). How can we make sense of leadership in the 21st century? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5), pp. 273–284.

Homrig, M. A. (2001). Transformational leadership. Available from

King, A., Johnson, D. and Van Vugt, M. (2009). The origins and evolution of leadership. Current Biology, 19(19), pp. 911–916.

Larson, R. and Tran, S. (2014). Invited commentary: Positive youth development and human complexity. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 43, pp. 1012–1017.

Luthans, F. (1988). Successful vs. effective real managers. Academy of Management Executive, 2(2), pp. 127–132.

Marshall, S., Parker, P., Ciarrochi, J. and Heaven, P. (2014). Is self-esteem a cause or consequence of social support? A 4-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 85(3), pp. 1275–1291.

Maslanka, A. (2004). Evolution of leadership theories. Masters Theses: Paper 655.

Morton, M. and Montgomery, P. (2013). Youth empowerment programs for improving adolescents' self-efficacy and self-esteem: A systematic review. Research on Social Work Practice, 23(1), pp. 22–33.

Rutherford, S. (2001). 'Are you going home already?': The long hours culture, women managers and patriarchal closure. Time & Society, 10(2–3), pp. 259–276.

Schyns, B. and Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analytic review of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, pp. 138–158.

Wardrope, W. (2005). Beyond Hofstede: Cultural applications for communicating with Latin American businesses. Irvine, CA: Association for Business Communication Annual Convention.

White, B. (2011). Seven qualities of a good leader. Available from http://www.groco.com/readingroom/bus_goodleader.aspx

Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.