Which Of The Following Are Four Conclusions We Can Draw From Trait Theory
Evolution of leadership theory
Statistics from Altmetric.com
- medical leadership
- leadership assessment
- clinical leadership
Introduction
Leadership is one of the most complex and multidimensional phenomena. It has been studied extensively over the years and has taken on greater importance than ever before in today'due south fast-paced and increasingly globalised world. Nonetheless, leadership continues to generate captivating and disruptive fence due to the complication of the subject. Bennis notes that 'leadership is the virtually studied and least understood topic of whatsoever in the social sciences' and 'never have so many laboured so long to say then little'.1
Researchers have proposed many unlike definitions and theories of leadership. Stogdill defines it every bit 'an influencing process aimed at goal achievement', focusing on leadership as a process directed at influencing a specific group of people to come across a stated objective.two Kouzes and Posner similarly believe that 'leadership is the fine art of mobilising others to want to struggle for the shared aspirations'3 and Maxwell states that leadership is simply influence.4 Nevertheless there is no one definition or particular leadership approach that is considered universal and efforts continue in trying to place what makes an effective leader.
Effective leadership is recognised every bit key to the success of whatsoever organisation. In fact, there has been a shift towards acknowledging the importance of man uppercase and organisational direction.5 6 But what is the divergence between leadership and direction? Leaders are generally viewed equally visionaries and strategist whereas managers monitor and control performance, maintaining order and stability in an organization.7 viii Some researchers argue that leaders and managers accept distinct roles and responsibilities while others affirm that leadership and management are complementary and it would exist difficult to dissever them in practice.7
The present paper traces the historical evolution of the primary leadership theories and reviews the progress that has been made over the years. Information technology explores four main eras in leadership theory: trait, behavioural, situational and new leadership.
Trait era: Great Human being theory (1840s) and trait theories (1930s–1940s)
In the 19th century, research on leadership was focused on the innate characteristics of a leader9 x and on identifying the personality traits and other qualities of effective leaders.11
The core belief of the Great Man theory is that leaders are born, not made or trained. In other words only a few, very rare, individuals possess the unique characteristics to be constructive leaders and attain greatness by divine design. Examples were often drawn from popular historical figures such as Julius Caesar, Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon Bonaparte. Information technology was believed that these individuals were natural built-in leaders with innate characteristics of leadership, which enabled them to atomic number 82 individuals while they shape the pages of history.
The Great Man theory then evolved into the trait theories. Trait theories fence that leaders can be built-in or made.seven In other words, that the traits of successful leaders can be either inherited or caused through grooming and practice. The aim was to place the correct combination of characteristics that make an effective leader and focus was on studying the mental, social and physical traits of leaders. Even so, a consistent set of traits was non produced and past 1950, it appeared that at that place was footling advantage in continuing with this approach and hence it was abandoned. Today, psychometric tools are an instance of trait theory principles in activity and are oftentimes used in staff recruitment. These tools highlight key personality traits and are used for personal operation and squad development.
Behavioural era: behavioural theory (1940s–1950s)
Behavioural theory evolved from trait theories and asserts that leaders are largely made, rather than born and that particular behaviours can be learnt to ensure effective leadership.11 12 It puts accent on the actual behaviour of the leader and not on their traits or characteristics, merely it largely ignores the situation and environment of the leader.
Research in this area resulted in different patterns of behaviour existence grouped together and labelled as styles.11 This became a prevalent approach within management training—perhaps the best known existence Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid.xiii Today, this theory is exemplified in the numerous leadership-training programmes, which involve the development of leadership skills and behaviours, thus supporting the belief that leadership is largely learnt.
Situational era: contingent and situational theories (1960s)
It was later recognised that the environment plays a significant role in the leader-follower dynamic and this conventionalities dominated the situational era.xiv Equally the name suggests, the situational era is focused on leadership in particular situations, rather than on the traits or behaviours of leaders. This implies that leaders must be able to appraise the context in which they operate and then determine what mode will 'fit' the situation best. Because the best style is dependent on the situation, this approach is known every bit the contingency theory of leadership.
Fred Fiedler developed 1 of the starting time contingency theories of leadership.xv His theory focuses on the importance of context in effective leadership and supports the belief that at that place is no i best set of leadership traits or behaviours. However, Fiedler asserst that because a leader's style is fixed, they should be put into situations that all-time match their mode. In other words, effectiveness as a leader is determined by how well their leadership way matches a particular context.
New leadership era: transactional, transformational theories (1990s) and others (2000s)
For the beginning time, it was recognised that focusing on one aspect or dimension of leadership cannot address all the complexity of the phenomenon.16 In a world that has become more complex and challenging, a need emerged for leadership theories that support circumstances of rapid change, confusing technological innovation and increasing globalisation. This led to the new leadership era, moving away from the above-mentioned traditional theories of leadership, which define leadership as a unidirectional, top-downwards influencing process, cartoon a distinct line betwixt leaders and followers. Instead, the focus became on the circuitous interactions among the leader, the followers, the situation and the organisation as a whole, with particular attention dedicated to the latent leadership capacities of followers.
Transactional and transformational theories
The above-mentioned context encouraged the popularity and adoption of two leadership theories: transformational and transactional theories,17 and too gave rise to approaches such as the Lean strategy18 and active methodology19 to help deal with the fast pace of change and increasing complexity of the challenges faced. Transformational leadership is a theory in which leaders encourage, inspire and motivate followers.twenty This theory is used when an organization needs to be revitalised, is undergoing significant alter or requires a new management. It is peculiarly vital to today's fast-paced technological industry where innovation and agility can make or break an organisation. Examples of transformational leaders include the likes of Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs and Beak Gates.
Transactional leadership, on the other hand, relies on authority to motivate employees.20 The leader exchanges reward for follower effort and punishes any follower who fails to meet their goals. In this context, the follower'due south perception concerning fairness and equity of the exchange with the leader is vital.21 Transactional leadership works best in mature organisations that already have clearly defined structure and goals, to keep them on runway, and reinforce the status quo. Examples of transactional leaders include managers, who tend to focus on supervision, processes and follower performance.
Others
The continued shift in leadership concepts led to the development of shared, collective and collaborative leadership practices.22 23 According to these, success in an organisation is more dependent on coordinative leadership practices distributed throughout the organisation rather than the deportment of a few individuals at the top. Servant leadership became popular once once more, emphasising the importance of followers. Servant leaders seek to back up their team members and are near concerned with serving people get-go.24 More than recently, inclusive leadership also emerged, focusing on a person-centred arroyo.25 It is based on the dynamic processes that occur between leaders and followers and focuses on empowering followers to becoming leaders. Finally, contemporary leadership theory also includes complication leadership, which emerged every bit a means to deal with the complexity of our modern earth. This theory takes a whole-system view, considering contextual interactions that occur across an entire social organization.26
Decision
Leadership theory is a dynamic phenomenon and continues to alter over time. It has been studied extensively over the years and several theories take emerged (table 1). Traditional leadership theories include the Great Man theory, which maintains that leaders are born to lead thus possessing certain inherent characteristics that destines them to pb. Trait theory evolved from the Great Man theory and specifies that leaders are tin can exist born or made and that the combination of certain characteristics is needed to be an effective leader. Behavioural theory then followed, asserting that leaders are largely made with a focus on the deportment of the leader equally opposed to their personality traits. In that location was then recognition that certain environmental factors are of import and contingency and situational theories were added to the mix. The modernistic era followed and involved a shift from focusing on the leaders and their attributes to considering the complex and continuous interactions and interrelationships amongst the leader, the followers and the situation. The resulting theories include shared, commonage and collaborative leadership every bit well every bit inclusive leadership. Finally, complication leadership too emerged, focusing on the whole system of an system.
View this table:
- View inline
Table 1
Summary of the master leadership theories
Examining the historical development of leadership theories provides some necessary perspective every bit well as context within which to appreciate the complexity of the subject field. Each theory has its merits and drawbacks and seems to provide part of the answer to the leadership puzzle. In today's circuitous, dynamic and globalised globe, organisations are consistently dealing with alter and uncertainty and no one theory has been able to address all the concerns regarding leadership. Many consider the traditional hierarchical views of leadership as less and less relevant given the complication of our mod world. This led to a shift in focus from the characteristics and behaviours of leaders to a more than systemic perspective, focusing on leadership as a collective social procedure resulting from the interactions of multiple factors. New leadership theories were consequently formulated in an attempt to bargain with the new reality of organisations and business, resulting in newer and more relevant definitions of leader, follower and situation.
Express checkout
The present newspaper explores the historical evolution of leadership theory, which includes four main eras: trait, behavioural, situational and new leadership. The focus was initially on natural born leaders and identifying the traits of the effective leader. Behavioural leadership so followed and focused on the actions of a leader. The situational and contingent theories in turn assert that the best leadership style is the one that best fits a given context. These traditional leadership theories offered part of the respond to the leadership puzzle but none had all the answer. These were then followed by the new leadership theories, which are inclusive of additional factors, generally prefer a more than systemic arroyo to leadership and take into account the multifaceted and complex nature of our modern globe and the importance of followership in constructive leadership.
In exercise
Hospital trusts in the U.k. are large, circuitous, and mature organisations within the National Wellness Service (NHS) with established structures and processes. Traditional leadership theory tells us that transactional leadership is ideal in this situation for keeping an established organisation on rail, maintaining the condition quo and ensuring the execution of plans. Transactional leadership is likewise known to exist constructive in guiding efficiency decisions, which are aimed at cutting costs and improving productivity. However, considering the NHS is non only a mature arrangement but also undergoing tremendous modify, leaders may switch styles and adopt a transformational leadership approach to engage followers in implementing alter and encouraging innovation.
Healthcare organisations may also benefit from the application of other more than contemporary leadership theories such equally collaborative, inclusive and shared leadership, which blur the stardom betwixt leader and follower and adopt a person-centred arroyo that focuses on the empowerment and development of followers. Compassionate leadership is too relevant in the context of patient care. And complexity leadership theory tin can also help the NHS understand how to thrive in today'south uncertain and turbulent times using a procedure-orientated, contextual and interactive approach to infiltrate leadership at all levels. The challenge is for healthcare professionals to be able to recognise which leadership theory is most relevant to their clinical practice and know how to effectively apply these theories in the workplace.
Asking Permissions
If you wish to reuse whatever or all of this commodity delight use the link below which volition take you to the Copyright Clearance Center'south RightsLink service. Y'all volition be able to get a quick cost and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
© Author(s) (or their employer(south)) 2022. No commercial re-use. Run into rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Source: https://bmjleader.bmj.com/content/5/1/3
Posted by: williamsherat1979.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Which Of The Following Are Four Conclusions We Can Draw From Trait Theory"
Post a Comment