Historical Leadership Theories

Historical Leadership Theories

Student Name

Institutional Affiliation

Historical Leadership Theories

The term leadership was conceptualized during the different experiences in the 17^th century while the term leader was applicable way before the biblical era. The subject and understanding of leadership have evolved through the ages from the conception of the Great Man Theory in the 19^th century. The subject of leadership draws different forms of reactions and interest within the society. In this case, the concept of leadership is presented as a set of traits, qualities as well as behaviors as exhibited by an individual. These qualities and traits tend to trigger participation, development as well as a high level of commitment within different areas of application. There is a various aspect of the society that has a significant influence on the nature of leadership. These include aspects of culture as well as organizational behaviors. This calls for flexibility of mindset as well as actions in line with emotional intelligence. In this case, exploring the various aspects of the history of leadership theory allows for great reconsideration on the demands on leaders within contemporary society. A significant period in the 20^th century was marked by leadership that potentially relied on rationality and mechanistic perspectives for the development of leadership theory and practice (Badshah, 2012).

I Great Man Theory

Great man theory focuses on the fact that great leaders are born or rather the character of being a great leader is inborn. This theory asserts that an individual is either naturally born a leader or not. This theory was birthed during the times when the society thought that leadership was primarily a male quality especially in the military wing. This theory becomes popular during the 19^th century with the contributions of some personalities contributing to the notion that great leadership is inborn. According to the historian Carlyle, world history is a collection of the biographies of great men. From his perspective, leading effectively is a function of divine inspiration combined with the right characteristics (Cherry, 2017).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Characteristics
      
   
   

The great man theory comprises of certain characteristics that help reinforce its concepts within the society. For instance, this theory considers leadership to comprise of qualities that are neither taught nor learned within the formal set-up. These include certain human qualities such as commanding personality, ability to persuade followers, intelligence, high levels of intuition, high-level aggressiveness, and being action oriented. Further, the belief that characterizes this theory is that leadership is contained in the genes and can as well be generational (Cherry, 2017).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Strengths
      
   
   

The further implications of this theory that acts as the basis of its strength include the fact that leadership is part of divinity. In this case, leaders are considered gifts from God and cannot be subject to manipulation from men. Secondly, not everybody who aspires for leadership can attain a high level of greatness. In this case, there are many dependencies on inborn leadership qualities that are considered sufficient for success and greater influence. This theory confers a divine right on Kings to exercise their rule and reign on a continuous hereditary basis. The supernatural authority can only provide the legitimacy of this kind of leadership. Further, the theory draws its credibility on the fact that great leaders possess some unique and mystique characters accorded with awe by their followers. In this case, there actions and qualities of personality are enough to inspire and command respect (Cherry, 2017).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Criticisms
      
   
   

In the first place, this theory is considered as lacking any scientific proof as well as empirical validity, therefore considered speculative. There is also the aspect of the improbability of various inherent human traits, and this forms part of the weakest point of this theory. Critics also fail to understand how great leaders can be made independent of their prevailing environmental conditions. Some theorists argue that born leaders are freaks of nature, therefore, very unreliable in meeting the current demands of a growing society. Some believe that leadership is made through the acquisition of certain characteristics as well as the skills necessary for influencing society. At the same time, critics and theorists argue that leadership qualities and traits are insufficient for achieving effectiveness. Therefore, situational factors play an important role in shaping leadership (Cherry, 2017).

1. 
   Trait Theory
   

Trait theory is a modification of the Great Man Theory and points to the fact that leadership qualities or rather traits are acquired. In this case, the theory argues that traits need not necessarily be inborn since leadership qualities can either be inborn or acquired through formal training and practice. In this case, different identifiable characteristics are considered unique to leaders (Badshah, 2012).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Characteristics
      
   
   

Leaders under trait theory are characterized by certain attributes that include intelligence, personality, ability to communicate, being socially responsible, pragmatic, and a sense of realism. In this case, leaders should possess some level of intelligence that enables them to understand both the context and content of their functions greatly. Leaders should be capable of grasping every dynamic of different environmental variables which are crucial in influencing their activities (Northouse, 2019).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Strengths
      
   
   

This leadership style affirms that leaders are distinctive in all aspects and further provides benchmarks necessary for identifying leaders.

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Criticisms
      
   
   

Despite trait theory identifying some of the traits keys to leadership, the theory fails to make a clear judgment as to whether these traits are inherent to individuals or whether they are developed through formal means such as education and training. A study by Stogdill upon reviewing 124 traits discovered a low positive correlation between leadership and different variables such as age, weight, height, appearance, and attitude of an individual (Badshah, 2012).

1. 
   Behavioral Theory
   
   
   
   1. 
      Characteristics
      
   
   

This theory emphasizes the fact that leaders emerge as a product of environmental conditions and nature. This approach tries to identify the performance of good leaders on tasks with a focus on correlations between specific behaviors and effectiveness of leadership. Further, this theory focuses on different dimensions of leadership that include task-oriented and people oriented. In the aspect of the task behavior leadership focuses on goal achievement (Badshah, 2012). On the other hand, people focus concerns with people well-being, supportive leadership that ensures people are comfortable within their environments.

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Associated theories
      
      
      
      1. 
         The Managerial Grid model/ Leadership Grid
         
      
      
   
   

The Managerial Grid style of leadership focuses on productivity and the well-being of the people. The interlinking nature of these two concerns especially by management determines the extent by which hierarchy is used. In the leadership grid, there is a belief that a dominant managerial style coupled with a set of managerial assumptions cannot fully reflect the reality of an individual’s managerial approach. The concept of the backup theory is applicable in this case if the dominant theory fails in pursuit for desired results. Importantly, the leadership grid asserts that managerial styles are subject to modification through further formal or self-training (Badshah, 2012).

1.  
   
   
   1.  
      
      
      1. 
         Role Theory
         
      
      
   
   

This theory considers leadership as an everyday activity exercised from socially defined roles. The roles are defined by a set of behaviors, duties, rights as well as expectations. This theory observes that an individual’s behaviors tend to be predictable and are mostly specific to contexts. However, role conflict occurs in the vent that an individual is expected to act simultaneously on multiple roles that carry different expectations (Landis et al., 2014).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Strengths
      
   
   

The behavioral theory focuses on the possibility of developing leadership traits through experience and formal procedures. Further, the theory portrays leadership as a characteristic that can be developed by individuals (Landis et al., 2014).

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Criticisms
      
   
   

According to Van Wart (2014), Behavioral theory exhibited a very long list of traits and characteristics which ultimately were considered less powerful predictors across different situations. This is because; the learning of practices does not guarantee the proper implementation of the theory. Further, the study by Stodgill at Ohio State University discovered that there were no consistent patterns of traits detected amongst a group of leaders.

1. 
   Comparative Analysis (of historical theories)
   
   
   
   1. 
      Commonalities
      
   
   

The historical theories view leadership as a set of objective characteristics or qualities that an individual has to master.

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Commonalities
      
   
   

There is an emphasis on identifiable actions required of any leader amidst any given situation. In all cases, leaders should exhibit certain common personality traits, and there are no major differences in potential amongst individuals.

1.  
   
   
   1. 
      Difference #1
      
   
   

The inability of trait studies to quantify leadership fails the attributes of Great Man theory as discussed in this study. In this case, leadership is not only an inborn trait but also effective leadership can be formalized through teaching.