Theories of a Leader

This essay will approach types of world power much(prenominal)(prenominal) as to utilize and influence others, to either reward or punish, to nurture by role of an organization, and to identify with a draw such as rock or film personality. This essay will cover half dozen categories of power and these interlink with each other and brings a better counselling on theories of power. The functions of drawing cardship atomic number 18 humanityy and varied, depending upon the basic problem with a group must deal with, and the type of attractership style in action, which is dependent on the leaders buns of power.Power, in the case of leadership, is divided into six categories, however, each corporation be linked with another, as they atomic number 18 inter-related. Expert and Informational power atomic number 18 concerned with skills, knowledge and information, of which the holders of such abilities, are able to utilize, to influence others ie technicians and computer perso nnel. Reward and Coercive power, take issue from the previously menti mavend, as they involve the ability to either reward or punish persons being influenced, in order to gain compliance.Legitimate power, is power which has been confirmed by the very role social organization of the group or organization itself, and is accepted by all as correct and without dispute, such as in the case of the armed forces or the police force. denotative power, on the other hand, involves those being influenced, identifying with the leader, ie. rock or film personalities victimisation their image to enter the political arena. Most leaders make use up of a combination of these six types of power, depending on the leadership style used. bossy leaders, for ex angstromle, use a mixture of legitimate, coercive and reward powers, to dictate the policies, plans and activities of a group. In comparison, a democratic or participative leader would use in world(a) referent power, involving all members of the group in the decision-making process. In my inquiry I have found that by the use of meta-analysis uncovers an approach beyond the general focus of theories of leadership. notwithstanding within the central study of the term opening, I explore this article to expand this essay in more detail. fit to Hunter and Hirsh (1987), most discoveries and advances in cumulative knowledge are no longer being made by those who conduct primary research studies, just by those who use meta-analysis to uncover the latent meaning of quick literature. In addition, meta-analysis bears the empirical building blocks for theory since results derived from such analyses indicate what needs to be explained by theory.Although meta-analysis has been criticized for not directly generating theory (Guzzo, Jackson &mKatzell, 1987), the results of meta-analyses are indispensable for theory construction, keeping in mind that theory development is a creative process distinct from cumulating results c rossways studies. Nevertheless, at that place is no reason that meta-analysis cannot deal with theory and explanation as comfortably as with description. In fact, efforts sponsored by the Russell salvia Foundations meta-analysis project are intentional to move meta-analytic techniques beyond the descriptive into the theory development domain (Russell Sage Foundation, 1991).Leadership itself, has been accompanied throughout time, by numerous theories, all claiming to respond the question, Are leaders born(p) or made? Those who accept the verdict, that leaders are born and not made, maintain, that there are certain inhering qualities such as initiative, courage, news show and humour, which altogether pre-destine a man to be a leader the essential pattern is given at give birth (Adler, 1991, p. 4)Two leadership theories which concentrate on this point, are the Great man/ gravid woman and theTrait theories. The smashing man/ not bad(p) woman theory, hence to Wrightsman, inv olves its partners believing that major events, both nationally and internationally, are influenced by those persons in power. A sudden act by a great man could, according to this theory, change the fate of the nation (Wrightsman, 1977, p. 638) The distinction theory expands further on this conjecture, by concentrating on the personal characteristics of the leader.The theory, which until the mid-1940s formed the basis of most leadership research, cited traits believed to be characteristic of leaders, the list of which grew in space over the years, to include all manner of physical, personality and cognitive factors, including height, intelligence and communication skills. However, few traits emerged to conclusively differentiate leaders from non-leaders. The traits an individual has may, subjoin the probability that a person will become a leader, though whether such leadership is guaranteed, is uncertain.Nevertheless, it can be seen to be true that close to flock are more li kely than others to assume leadership positions. The research on trait theories of leadership has shown that many other factors are burning(prenominal) in determining leader success, and that not every unrivaled who possesses these traits will be a leader (Adler, 1991, p. 267) As interest in the trait approach to leadership declined, researchers focused their attention on the leaders actions kind of than their attri thates, which led to the emergence of the behaviouristic theories.The most widely publicized exponent of this approach was Robert Blake and Jane Moutons Managerial Grid, which try to explain that there was one best style of leadership, by non-homogeneous combinations of two factors regarding a concern for production and people. Due to the disillusionment with the fore-mentioned trait theory, the sideal approach suggested that the traits required of a leader differed, according to varying situations.The situational approach, which predominated in the 1950s, held that whether a given person became a leader of a group, had zip to do with his/her personality, but had everything to do with such factors as the flow of events and heap surrounding a group. To put it simply, the leader was a person who was in the right place at the right time. Rather than a great man causing a great event to happen, the situational approach claims that great events are the product of historical forces that are gong to happen hether peculiar(prenominal) leaders are present or not (Adair, 1984, p. 8)Unfortunately, this theory withal didnt answer, why one member of a group emerged as the leader, rather than another, or why one particular leader proved to be a better leader in some situations than another. The emergence of a related theory, the interactionist approach, attempted to explain the existing anomalies. The interactionist theory proposed that both the characteristics of the individual, and the situation in which the group found itself, accounted for whom wou ld become the leader.Resulting from this theory, was the view that leaders are both born and made, due to the leader requiring certain abilities and skill, but as the situation and the needs of the group changed, so to the person acceptable as leader changed. Developing such abilities and skills requires no position of authority but does require commitment to self, commitment to the organization and its employees, action, and thoughtful, on-going self-assessment. Such a syllabus of personal development, ideally begun as a part of the formal teaching process, can assist significantly in learning how to influence others, up, down, and across the organization.Thus, one can learn how to become what Cohen (1990) has called an uncrowned leader, a person who exerts influence over others but lacks positional authority. It takes many hours of research to provide a strong research paper however this essay touches exactly the surface. The functions of a Leader are many and varied. Its hard to say the one theory is better than the other because as my research shows, it takes more than one approach to accomplish a task with overall proficiency. From upper focusing to the first line supervisor, each situation, each environment, and each group of people requires a different approach.In some circumstances a leader is considered to be a leader only if he/she knows the organizational structure well and knows how to execute a plan. By reviewing the theories of the previously mentioned theories, the term leader doesnt necessarily mean he/she is a leader. Therefore a leader can have more than one meaning and the theories of leadership may need to be more refined. However this essay focuses more on the standard process of identification of a leader and the theories that identify such. If a leader is trainable to understand that different approaches are needed for different situations, then a leader can succeed.However if a born leader hasnt had the exposure to an array of situa tions, then he/she will not be effective. It stands to reason regarding a leader is born is that a leader may be born but if that person isnt exposed to an array to various situations and factors, then that born leader will become a failure. However I agree a leader may be born and a follower is a follower but a follower can influence other followers especially if that person has personal magnetism such as wiser experience, cultured education, and mature personality.So a leader may be born but a follower by my own experience Ive seen followers who are leaders and assist leaders to perform their best. Therefore sometimes a leader and follower can complement each other thus strengthening the environment and or situation. Therefore my own observations show that there are ranks of leaders and ranks of followers. separately side of the line can have leadership. Theories are many but now that we have all these theories, it may appear that we need more research to better recognize the l eaders not recognized by the standard approach.