Theories of Leadership and Their Appropriateness in the Educational Workplace - Essay Example

Theories of Leadership and their Appropriateness in the Educational Workplace Name Course Name and Code Instructor’s Name Date Introduction Various experts in leadership have advanced different theories to help understand the quality of effective leaders in the workplace since early 20th century. In business, leadership is the process through which an individual influences a group of people with a singular objective of achieving organizational goals. It is the art and science of inspiring and enabling others to accomplish shared dreams (Judge, et al., 2004). In this regard, leaders influence their followers through their character, personality, passion, and/or charisma. Understanding leadership is something that have been pursued for many decades and various leadership theories have been forwarded to help in studying the physical traits together with the outward behavior of great leaders as well as the less tangible qualities like the leader’s ability to build a trusting relationship with his/her followers. Trait, situational, and contingency theories are the leadership theories that have been developed to help understand the leadership concept. This paper discusses the appropriateness of leadership theories in an educational workplace based on the said leadership theories. Trait Leadership Theory This theory is based on the question; “What type of person makes a good leader?”This theory of leadership is based on a hypothesis that individuals are born with traits that are inherited and some of these acquired qualities are specifically best for leading others (Management Study Guide, 2013). Trait leadership is regarded as an integrated pattern of personal traits that mirror a myriad of personal differences as well as foster systematic leader effectiveness across different groups and organizational situations (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). Accordingly, it is alluded that successful leaders have the right leadership qualities, which are a combination of traits including their physical stature like height, mental traits such as intelligence, and social traits like personality. Similarly, this theory postulates that successful leaders share numerous traits that are common to effective leadership (Avolio, et al., 2003). Additionally, it is assumed that leaders are innate, instinctive quality that you may or may not have. In this regard, the trait theory has been instrumental in identifying traits and qualities of an effective leader including: trustworthiness, assertiveness, empathy, excellent decision-making skills, empathy as well as acceptability; which are vital for any effective leader. The theory implies that leaders are born leaders with leadership qualities that predispose them to be effective in their leadership duties (Avolio, et al., 2003). With regard to the above explanation, understanding trait leadership model is founded on the research involving successful and unsuccessful leaders; a key procedure in determining leadership effectiveness. In accordance with this, lists of different leadership traits are compared to those of potential leaders in order to evaluate if they have higher probabilities of succeeding or failing (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). Under this leadership model, proponents identified effective leadership qualities basing on physiological; intellective; personality; task-related; demographic; and social characteristics (Avolio, et al., 2003). These qualities are essential in determining leader emergence and effectiveness. The theory implies that, successful leaders posses interests, personality, and abilities that are different from less effective leaders. Various studies have been conducted with regard to this model of leadership theory and all have come to a conclusion that the above traits do not determine whether and individual will develop into an effective leader or not, however, these are significant predispositions that bestow individuals with leadership capacities. Core characteristics of an effective leader Achievement drive: highly ambitious, initiative, unending efforts, and energy Motivation: have an inborn drive and aspiration to be leaders in order to achieve group objectives (Judge, et al., 2004). They are honesty and trustworthy: a reliable and person of integrity Have Self-confidence: courageous and belief in themselves as performers Have Cognitive abilities: can exercise and execute excellent judgment, have effective analytical capacities and conceptual skills Have business skills: their knowledge about the industry together with other technical matters is vast and excellent The exhibit emotional maturity: they do not suffer from emotional disorders, must be well adjusted Other traits include: flexibility, charisma, and creativity (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). Strengths of Trait leadership theory The theory serves as the basis against whish one’s leadership qualities can be evaluated It is a valid theory since various studies have determined its foundation and basis Provides extensive understanding, skills and knowledge of the leader element in the art of leadership (Bolman & Deal, 2003) Limitations/disadvantages of trait theory Critics of this theory have established the following: It is vulnerable to subjective judgment in establishing who is an effective leader The length of possible traits of an effective leader is extremely long; where there are more than 100 dissimilar leadership traits of successful leaders in many leadership positions. The identified traits are just generalities There are disagreements as to what traits are the best for an effective leader The theory also links physical traits like height and weight to effective leadership something that is not true (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). Situational Theories This theory states that different situations require different leadership styles. In this regard for one to be an effective leader depends holistically on his ability to adapt or adjust to the prevailing situation (Leadership-central.com, 2013). The determinants of how a leader adjusts to a situation are wholly dependent on the evaluation of the leader’s follower’s competencies. More importantly, the evaluation of these elements dictates the leader to employ the use of either a more directive or supportive leadership style. Hersey and Blanchard developed this theory in 1969 based on Reddin’s 3-D management style theory (Leadership-central.com, 2013). The leader in this account is required to adapt his leadership style in order to accomplish the team goals. This can be achieved by diagnosing both the skills and willingness level of an individual or group and there after prescribing or coming up with a plan, that will appropriately balance his followers’ competencies and commitment to complete the assignment. Equally important, the situational theory also requires a situational leader to continually balance the amount of direction with building relationships since the motivation of people change over time. Some of the qualities of a situational leader include: passion, honest, clearly communicate and always have good judgment, and above a situational leader must be flexible in order to adapt to the ever changing situations (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). This leadership model has two pillars; the maturity level of the followers and the style of leadership. With regard to this leadership model, there are different styles of leadership emanate from four basic behaviours as shown below S-1 Telling; the followers are told what to do and how to do it by their leader S-2 selling; here the followers are provided with information and direction be their leader , however, there is extensive communication followers, leaders sell their message to their followers in order to make them perceive to have participated in decision making process. S-3 Participation; more focus is on relationship rather than direction and hence the leader works with the team to and share responsibilities of decision making with the followers (Leadership-central.com, 2013) S-4 Delegation; responsibilities are passed onto the followers; however, the leader always monitors the progress (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). Similarly, this theory discusses four maturity levels of the leader or of those who are being led: M1: this level of maturity describes those individuals who lack skills, knowledge, or confidence to work on their own and hence they need to be pushed around for them to accomplish any task. M2: the followers might be willing to accomplish a specific duty; however, they do not have the skills and competencies to complete it effectively. M3: the workers are ready to do a task, poses the needed knowledge and competencies, however, lack confident in their capabilities M4: here the followers are highly skilled, equipped with the needed competencies, committed to the task and are confident to work on their own (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). The Hersey-Blanchard model maps each leadership style to each maturity level as displayed in the table below: Maturity Level Most Appropriate leadership style M1: Low maturity S1: Telling/directing M2: Medium maturity, limited skills S2: Selling/coaching M3: Medium maturity, higher skills but lacking confidence S3: Participating/supporting M4: High maturity S4: Delegating (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). The application of this model dements on the maturity levels of individuals within a team (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). Advantages It is simple hence easy to apply Similarly, because of its simplicity, a leader can easily choose which style of leadership to use Group competence and maturity are in most cases ignored in good leadership; this theory ensures that these factors are taken into consideration all the times. Disadvantages Situational theory might not be applicable in situations where managers are as administrators This theory might not applicable to situations that are complex and demand for time that is always a limited resource. The testing of the theory does not clearly reflect the predictions. Contingency Theories Contingency leadership theory: This implies that the leader’s success is founded on contingencies with regard to how well his/her style of leadership conforms to a particular situational condition. In this regard, effective leadership is dependent on the level of compatibility between the leader’s leadership qualities and that of a particular context (Bass & Bass, 2008). Similarly, the effectiveness of a leader is a function of an integration of different contingencies including task, his followers, and/or group variables. Accordingly, the success of a specific pattern behaviour of the leader is contingent upon situational requirements. This theory is contradictory to the situational theory that demands for leader to adapt to a situation (Bass & Bass, 2008). A situation in contingency context has a different meaning because it is associated to the development level of the company together with the three factors of contingency, which include: Leader-Member-Relations: this is an acceptance leadership measure between the organizational hierarchies. In essence, if the followers have trust, confidence, and the leader has efficiently motivated his/her followers, then it is positive (Marzano, et al., 2005) Task Structure: this is the simplicity measure of the tasks or projects, the procedures for achieving the set goals. Above all there is clear procedures to follow and thus progress can be easily tracked (Marzano, et al., 2005). Positional Power: this measures the degree of ability that the leader has to influence productivity and performance of his followers, whether he/she has the ability punish or rewards them. Understanding the Contingency model Making decision by any leader in this regard is determined by his/her style of leadership and the degree of participation he/she needs to get from the team is affected by three main factors: The quality of the decision: what is the importance of coming up with the solution that are right? In this regard, high quality decision is only achieved when the leader involve his/her followers in the decision making process (Bass & Bass, 2008). Commitment of the followers: if the leader’s team is effective, will others buy into his/her, decision? In this perspective, when the followers accept the decision then the leader should increase the participation levels. Constraints of time: what is the amount of time that will the leader need to make the decision? The more the time the more the leader has the luxury of involving followers thus the decision is used as an opportunity for team building (Marzano, et al., 2005). Contingency decision-making: it is also called the normative decision theory, similarly is also referred to as Vroom and Yetton’s decision participation contingency theory. This theory purports that the success of a decision making process is defined by various elements of a situational condition such as the relevance of the decision quality and acceptance. In addition, the quantity of important information that the leader possesses together with his/her followers; the possibility of the followers to accept an autocratic decision or fully take part in making a good decision if allowed to participate; and above all the level of disagreement among the followers with regard to their chosen alternatives (Bass & Bass, 2008). Vroom and Yetton developed different decision making procedures where two are autocratic ways of decision making, two consultative while one involves the use of the group in making a decision. A1: the leader makes the decision alone based on the known. A2: the leader decides alone after soliciting information from his/her followers. C1: the leader together with his/her followers shares the issue at hand and then he/she decides alone G2: there is extensive information sharing between the leader and his/her followers with regard to the issue at hand and there after seeks and accepts consensus agreement. Comparison between these theories The three theories described above have one thing in common; effective leadership. The Trait theory defines an effective leader as having specific qualities including: leadership drive, honesty, self-confidence, cognitive ability, and business knowledge. Situational theories on the other hand defines effective leader basing on his/her ability to adapt to specific prevailing situation. Lastly, the contingency theory defines effective leadership as being dependent on the degree of compatibility between the leadership characteristics and that of a particular situation; how his/her leadership style matches a specific context. Contrast The trait theory wholly depends on the individual traits and behaviour to define the effectiveness of a leader; physical traits like weight and height are also used to determine the effectiveness of a leader something that is not true or tangible (Derue, et al., 2011). Situational Theory uses the degree to which a leader can adjust to a situation to determine his/her leadership effectiveness; this theory might not applicable to situations that are complex and demand for time that is always a limited resource (Derue, et al., 2011) The contingency theory on the other hand assumes that effective leadership is dependent on the level of compatibility of the leader’s leadership style with that of a specific situation thus making it completely different from trait and situational theories (Derue, et al., 2011). Assumptions underlying these theories The trait theory assumes that leaders are born with inherited leadership traits, there are specific traits that are best suited for leadership, and, individuals who make successfully leaders poses the right leadership trait combination Situational theory assume that effective or successful leadership wholly depends on the situation as well different situational require different styles of leadership Contingency Theory assumes that the ability of the leader to leader is based on different contingent factors that include style of leadership, the abilities and competencies of the followers and situational factors Appropriateness of these theories in the Educational Workplace All these theories are applicable in the educational workplace setting. Each theory will described independently Appropriateness of the trait theory The school setting is made up leadership at different since the school organization comprise of different entities including the head of the school, teachers, students and the subordinate staff. In order for leaders across these levels to be effective in their performance, they must possess leadership qualities including achievement drive, self-confidence, honesty and integrity, cognitive ability, emotional maturity, and leadership driven. A leader who possesses these traits in the school environment will be able to influence his/her followers towards meeting the schools goals and objectives. Similarly, when the school leaders have enough knowledge regarding this theory they will utilize the information in evaluating their positions as well how they can have the required traits to strengthen their positions. Appropriateness of the situational theory The school is a dynamic social entity and hence various situations and conditions are encountered. In order for the performance in the various situations to be excellent, the school’s leadership should and must be able to aptly adapt to the different situations as they are displayed for them to have outstanding outcomes. For instance, when dealing with junior classes, the leader can use leadership styles appropriate for individuals with low maturity such as telling and directing. Accordingly, middle level classes where the students have medium maturity with limited skills, leaders at these levels will use selling and coaching leadership styles to influence their followers. In upper middle classes, students have medium maturity with higher skills but lack confidence; here the leader will use the participation and supporting leadership styles. Lastly, in upper classes, the students’ exhibit higher maturity and thus the leader use the delegating type of leadership. Contingency theory and its appropriateness in the school setting This theory implies that the leader’s success is based on contingencies on how well the leader style of leadership matches a particular situational setting. In a school there are various circumstances that will demand the leader’s ability to streamline his/her leadership style to the prevailing condition in order for successful outcomes. At lower classes leaders tend to have vast knowledge and thus they know what the lower class students need know. In this regard the leader will take the known information and decides what to do. Similarly, the heads of departments within a school might be a school might be asked the general head (the principle) to present their departmental needs, however, the principle might decide which needs must be met basing on the information from the heads of departments. In the same line of argument, the principle may decide to have a consultative meeting where he will share the problem with the heads of department in person, listen to their suggestions and then makes the decision alone. Consequently, he/she will share the issue with the heads of departments in a group, listens to their ideas and afterwards decides alone. More effectively, the leader will share the problem with the departmental heads and then seeks accepts a consensus agreement. Conclusion Leadership is the process by which an individual affects a group of people with the main objective of achieving organizational goals. It is the art and science of stimulating and enabling others to achieve shared dreams. Various theories have been put forward to try to understand the art and science of leadership. This paper has given a comprehensive discussion of trait theory, situational theory, and contingency theory. Similarly, the assumptions underlying these theories have also been discussed. More importantly, the paper has explained the appropriateness of these theories in an educational setting. Bibliography Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Jung, D. I., and Berson, Y. 2003. Leadership models, methods, and applications. Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 12, pp. 277-307 Bass, B. M., and Bass, R. 2008. The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, 4th Ed. New York: Free Press. Bolman, L. G., and Deal, T. E. 2003. Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership, 3rd Ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., and Humphrey, S. E. 2011. Trait and behavioural theories - of leadership: An integration and :meta‐analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7-52. Hersey, P., and Blanchard, K. H. 1977. Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 3rd ed. New Jersey/Prentice Hall Judge, T. A., Colbert, A. E., and Ilies, R. 2004. Intelligence and Leadership: A Quantitative Review and Test of Theoretical Propositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 542-552. Leadership-central.com 2013. Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory. Retrieved on 13/08/2013, from; http://www.leadership-central.com/situational-leadership-theory.html Management Study Guide. 2013. Trait Theory of Leadership. Retrieved on 13/08/2013, from; http://www.managementstudyguide.com/trait-theory-of-leadership.htm Marzano, R.J., Waters, T., and McNulty, B.A. 2005. School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. 2004. Leader traits and attributes: The nature of Leadership, (pp. 101-124). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: :Sage Publications, Inc. Read More