A Semi-historical RompThrough Prevailing Perspectives on

Leadership

EDU 6040Leadership in Learning Organizations

Everyone Has a Theory

Your picture of leadership…THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF

THE HMUAN MNID 

I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg…

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is that the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the human mind deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?

Early Notions of Leadership Legends, Myths, Heroes:

Stories of individual heroes (and very rarely heroines) were central to Babylonia, Iceland, and Israel. Often, the greater the socioeconomic injustice or turmoil in a society, the more “super human” the leaders became.

Greek concepts : Nationalism/Governing: “He serves me most, who

serves his country best,” Iliad (Book X) Special: “the leader, mingling with the vulgar host, is in

the common mass of matter lost.” Odyssey (Book III) Justice and judgment Wisdom and counsel Shrewdness and cunning Valor

“Great Man” Perspective1900’s-1920’s

Key questions: Is leadership an innate ability?Are leaders born to lead?

Leadership studies highly biased towards political, military, aristocratic, or cultural elites. Leadership was considered an art, for which some fortunate people had an inbuilt genius.

Mechanistic and managerial perspectives Fredrick Taylor - Introduced the scientific analysis of tasks and

job-design time-study methods for managers to use in “managing” workers.

Henry Fayol - Introduced principles of management focused on command/control & coordination.

Max Weber - Defined a bureaucratic system based on rational system, not hereditary rule.

Trait Perspective1940s-1950’s

Key Question: What traits are common to all leaders?

During WWII, an essential question on the US mind was, “What traits do a nation’s (military) leaders need to win the war?” Researchers began to view leadership as a set of facilitative “traits”:

Leadership is “…the process of arranging a situation so that

variousmembers of a group, including the leader, can achieve

commongoals with maximum economy and a minimum of time and

work”(Bellows, 1949).

The U.S. government, through defense-research spending, began subsidizing study of leadership effectiveness, which increased interest throughout higher education.

Many Leadership Traits

 

Stogdill

(1948)

 

Mann(1959)

 

Stogdill

(1974)

Lord, DeVader

, & Alliger

(1986)

Kirkpatrick &

Locke(1991)

AlertnessInsightResponsibilityInitiativePersistenceSelf-ConfidenceSociability

MasculinityAdjustmentDominanceExtroversionConservatism

PersistenceInsightInitiativeSelf-ConfidenceResponsibilityCooperativenessToleranceInfluenceSociability

MasculinityDominance

MotivationIntegrityConfidenceCognitive AbilityTask Knowledge

Leadership Traits Distilled

Intelligence - Intellectual ability including verbal, perceptual, and reasoning capabilities

Self-Confidence - Ability to be certain about one’s competencies and skills

Determination - The desire to get the job done (i.e., initiative, persistence, dominance, drive)

Integrity - The quality of honesty and trustworthiness

Sociability - Leader’s inclination to seek out pleasant social relationships

Strengths (Trait Theories)

Intuitively appealing› Perception that leaders are different in that

they possess special traits› People “need” to view leaders as gifted

Credibility due to a century of research support Highlights leadership component in the

leadership process Deeper level understanding of how

leader/personality related to leadership process Provides benchmarks for what to look for in a

leader

Criticisms (Trait Theories)

Fails to delimit a definitive list of leadership traits

Doesn’t take into account situational effects List of most important leadership traits is

highly subjective Research fails to look at traits in relationship

to leadership outcomes Not useful for training & development

Behavioral Perspective (Focus on Skill & Style 1950’s-1970’s

Key Question: What do Leaders Do?

Behavior-focused perspectives on leadership examine the things leaders do or the patterns in those things

Leadership defined as acts by persons which influence other persons in a shared direction. (Seaman (1960)

The essential difference between a leader and an executive is the degree of personal initiative and personal risk that such initiative involves” (Jennings, 1960, page 16).

“Leadership is a position within society which is defined by the ability of the incumbent to guide and structure the collective behavior patterns of some or all of its members …It is at all times relational, interpersonal, and is based upon influence…” (Eidinger, 1967, page 15).

The U-M and OSU Studies

Throughout the 1950s-1960s, Ohio State and University of Michigan researchers tried to create a universal theory of leadership by examining how leaders combined task and relationship behaviors. Stogdill and his colleagues began examining leader behavior, rather than traits alone. Importantly, the emphasis was on describing what leaders do (how they behave).

Typically the research involved having subordinates in industrial, military, and educational organizations complete questionnaires (Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ)– consisting of some 150 items) about their leaders.

Ultimately, results were contradictory and unclear. Some research suggested every situation required a combination of high-task and high-relationship orientation, but other studies provided conflicting information.

The Ohio State (OSU) Studies

Researchers found that questionnaire responses indicated two types of leader behaviors: initiating structure and consideration.

› Initiating structure behaviors were task behaviors (e.g., scheduling work activities, defining role responsibilities, giving structure to the work context).

› Consideration involved behaviors such as building trust,

respect, and camaraderie between leaders and followers and among followers.

The Michigan (U-M) Studies

Research on the impact of leaders’ behaviors on small group contexts described two types of leadership behaviors: employee orientation and production orientation.

› Employee orientation behaviors, (like “consideration behaviors” identified in OSU studies), describe the behavior of leaders who show a strong human relations orientation with subordinates.

Production orientation behaviors stress technical and production aspects of a job.

Behavioral: A Question of Style Leadership Grid Theory (Blake &Mouton, 1964)

Blake and Moutin’s work drew heavily upon the early style research; sought to identify the proper integration of task- and relationship behaviors.

Their “management grid” described two dimensions along which managers and leaders may vary, 1-9. These measures interacted to create a grid describing five pure style types.

The Leadership Grid®

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Low

Low

High

HighConcern for Results

Co

nce

rn f

or

Peo

ple

1, 9 9, 9

1, 1 9, 1

Country Club Management

Team Management

Middle-of-the-Road

5, 5

Impoverished Management

Authority-Compliance Mgmt.

Authority-Compliance (9,1)

Definition: Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work such that human interference is minimal

Role Focus: More emphasis on task and job requirements and less emphasis on people

Communicating with subordinates outside task instructions not emphasized

Results driven; People regarded as tools to that end

Country Club (1,9)

Definition: Thoughtful attention to the needs of people leads to a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo

Role Focus: Low concern for task accomplishment coupled with high concern for interpersonal relationships

› De-emphasizes production; leaders stress the attitudes and feelings of people

› Positive climate fostered by being agreeable, eager to help, comforting, noncontroversial

Impoverished (1,1)

Definition: Minimal effort exerted to get work done is appropriate to sustain organizational membership

Role Focus: Leader unconcerned with both task and interpersonal relationships

› Going through the motions, but uninvolved and withdrawn

› Have little contact with followers and are described as indifferent, noncommittal, resigned, and apathetic

Middle-of-the-Road (5,5)

Definition: Adequate organizational performance possible through balancing the necessity of getting work done while maintaining satisfactory morale .

Role Focus: Leaders who are compromisers; have intermediate concern for task and people To achieve equilibrium, leader avoids conflict while

emphasizing moderate levels of production and interpersonal relationships

Described as expedient; prefers the middle ground, soft-pedals disagreement

Team (9,9)Definition: Work accomplished through committed

people; interdependence via a “common stake” in the organization’s purpose, which leads to relationships of trust and respect

Role Focus: Strong emphasis on both tasks and interpersonal relationships Promotes high degree of participation and

teamwork Leader stimulates participation, acts

determined, makes priorities clear, follows through, etc.

Strengths (Style theories)

› Broadened the field of leadership studies to include what leaders do, rather than merely who they are.

› Easily applied.

› A wide range of studies give some credibility to the findings of style-researchers, particularly regarding the effects on follower/subordinate satisfaction.

› The essential elements of the style approach—task and relationship—influenced subsequent generations of leadership research (e.g., Situational Theory).

Criticisms (Style theories)

› Hasn’t adequately shown how leaders’ styles are associated with performance outcomes.

› There is no universal leadership style.

› Implies that the most effective leadership behavior is the Team Management style (9,9), when in fact there is little evidence overall in support.

Behavioral: A Question of Skill(1955, reemergence 1990’s)

Actually more about what a leader is capable of doing than what a leader does…

Three categories of skills (Katz 1955): Technical skill Human Skill Conceptual Skill

Basic Administrative SkillsKatz (1955)

Technical Skills (things)

Human Skills (people)

Conceptual Skills (ideas)

Manager Director VP Exec VP CEO

Skills Model Mumford, Zaccaro, et al (2000)

Competencies

Problem-Solving Skills

Social Judgment Skills

Knowledge

Leadership Outcomes

Effective Problem Solving

Performance

Individual Attributes

Crystallized Cognitive Abilities

Motivation

Personality

Environmental Influences

Career Expectations

Strengths (skills perspective)

Made leadership available to anyone; can be developed and improved

Complicated enough to capture dynamics of many leadership situations, social skills, problem-solving, environment, etc.

Lends itself to teaching other leaders

Criticisms (skills perspective)

Skills extend beyond the bounds of leadership so theories are less precise

Weak in predictive value. Skills may correlate with leaders’ success, but HOW do they influence performance?

Situational Perspective(First emerged in 1970’s)

Key Question: How does the situation influence leadership effectiveness?

Situational Leadership asserts that different situations demand different kinds of leadership. To be an effective leader, leaders must fit their style to the demands of different situations.

Situational Leadership (SI)Hersey and Blanchard (late 1960’s)

Built on the work of the OSU and U-M teams. This model considers two components:

› Leadership style may be defined as the behavior pattern of an individual who attempts to influence others. It includes both directive (task) behaviors and supportive (relationship) behaviors.

› Development level of subordinates refers to the degree to which employees/followers have the competence and commitment necessary to accomplish a given task. Employees are at a high level of development if they are interested in their work, and know how to do their work. Employees with low levels of development are those with high commitment, but low competence.

The behavior pattern of an individual who attempts to influence others; includes:

› Directive behaviors - Help group members in goal achievement via one-way communication through:

Giving directions Establishing goals & how to achieve

them Methods of evaluation & time lines Defining roles

› Supportive behaviors - Assist group members via two-way communication in feeling comfortable with themselves, co-workers, and situation

Effective leaders are those who exercise appropriate degree of task orientation and relationship orientation relative to the maturity of followers. Specifically, as the level of follower maturity increases, effective leader behavior involves less structuring and less social support.

Based on combinations of these two dimensions, leadership styles can be divided into four distinct categories:

High directive-low supportive (S1) = “directing” High directive-high supportive (S2) = “coaching” High supportive-low directive (S3) = “supporting” Low supportive-low directive (S4) = “delegating”

Employees are conceptualized as moving backwards and forwards along the continuum of development depending upon the task at hand.

The job of leaders, therefore, is to diagnose where employees are in their development, then adapt the leader’s style to match the needs of the follower.

High

Developmental Level of Followers

Delegating

Low SupportiveLow Directive

S 4

Supporting

High SupportiveLow Directive

S 3

Coaching

High DirectiveHigh Supportive

S 2

Directing

High DirectiveLow Supportive

S 1

Low High

Su

pp

ort

ive

Beh

avio

r

Directive Behavior

D4 D3 D2 D1

Developed DevelopingHigh Moderate Low

Strengths (Situational Leadership)

Marketplace approval. Situational leadership is perceived as providing a credible model for training employees to become effective leaders.

Practicality. Situational leadership is a straightforward approach that is easily understood and applied in a variety of settings.

Prescriptive value. Situational leadership clearly outlines what you should and should not do in various settings.

Leader flexibility. Situational leadership stresses that effective leaders are those who can change their style based on task requirements and subordinate needs.

Differential treatment. Situational leadership is based on the premise that leaders need to treat each subordinate according to his/her unique needs.

Criticisms (Situational Leadership)

Lack of an empirical foundation raises theoretical considerations regarding the validity of the approach

Further research is required to determine how commitment and competence are conceptualized for each developmental level

Conceptualization of commitment itself is very unclear

Replication studies fail to support basic prescriptions of situational leadership model

Does not account for how particular demographics influence the leader-subordinate prescriptions of the model

Fails to adequately address the issue of one-to-one versus group leadership in an organizational setting

Questionnaires are biased in favor of situational leadership

Contingency TheoryFiedler (1964)

Key question: What style of leadership is most likely to be successful in a specific situation?

All about a Leader-Match-- Effective leadership is contingent upon matching the right leadership style to the situation

Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Measure Low LPC’s are task motivated.

Gain self esteem primarily from productivity Attend to interpersonal relationships but secondarily Primary needs: accomplishing goals Secondary needs: getting along with people

Mid LPC’s are socio-independent Self-directed Not overly concerned with task or with how people think of them More removed from situation and act more independently than

low or high LPC

High LPC’s are motivated by Relationships Major satisfaction in interpersonal relationships Sees good qualities even in LPC Attends to tasks after relationships are in good shape

Contingency Model (Fiedler, 1967)

Good Poor

High Structure

Low Structure

High Structure

Low Structure

Strong

Weak Strong

Weak Strong

Weak Strong

Weak

Leader-Member Relations

Task Structure

Position Power

Preferred Leadership Style

Low & Mid LPCs

High LPCs

Low LCPs

Transactional Perspective1970’s

Origins lie in early 20th-century “management-sciences”. In its original form, the perspective viewed management in economic terms – as exchanges of rewards for good performance, punishments for poor performance.

Heavily influenced by Frederick Taylor’s Five Principles of Scientific Management:

1. Shift all responsibility for the organization of work from the worker to the manager.

2. Use scientific methods to determine the most efficient way of doing work; design the workers’ tasks accordingly, specifying the precise way in which it is to be done.

3. Select the best person to perform the job thus designed;

4. Train the worker to do work efficiently;

5. Monitor worker performance, intervening when exceptionally productive or deficient.

In the early 1970s, theorists Jacobs (1970) & Hollander (1978) developed an updated transactional theory of leadership. Their model:

› Brought followers into focus by highlighting power relations, and the negotiations necessary among people of unequal power and different agendas.

› Held that followers are significantly involved in negotiating any exchange or transaction that results in a decision or a course of action.

› Acknowledged the fact that followers have minds of their own, and that their opinions and ideas also influence the leader: that leadership is, in fact, a social system characterized by feedback between leaders and followers.

Some political scientists also became interested in the exchange model of leadership because it seemed to: › 1) appeal to the discipline’s interest in analysis of influence

relationships, › 2) reflect the pluralistic underpinnings of American democracy, and › 3) imply a more powerful role for followers. In exchanging promises

for votes, for example, the transactional leader works within the framework of the self-interests of his or her constituency, thus, followers are alleged to wield as much power as leaders.

The leader’s effectiveness, therefore, is defined as the extent to which he or she “delivers” on the promises made to followers in exchange for their support; where delivery is achieved, reciprocal support is presumed to grow, further enhancing the leader’s power, stature, and capability of delivering on future promises made to followers.

Advocates of exchange emphasized its normative nature, its efficiency considerations, and its beneficial implications for followership.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX)

Key Question: What kinds of relationships contribute to success?

LMX theory conceptualizes leadership as a process centered in the interactions between leaders and followers.› LMX theory first described by Dansereau, Graen,

& Haga (1975), Graen & Cashman (1975), and Graen (1976)

› Theory has undergone a number of revisions since its inception and continues to be of interest to researchers

› LMX theory challenges the assumption that leaders treat followers in a collective way.

Phases in Leadership MakingGraen & Uhl-Bien (1995)

Stranger

Scripted

Acquaintance Partner

Roles

Influences

Exchanges

Interests

One Way

Low Quality

Self

Tested

Mixed

Medium Quality

Self / Other

Negotiated

Reciprocal

High Quality

Group

TIME

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Phase 1

• Interactions rule bound• Rely on contractual relationships• Relate to each other within prescribed organizational roles• Experience lower quality exchanges• Subordinate motives directed toward self-interest

Stranger

Phase 2

Acquaintance• Offer by leader/subordinate for improved career-

oriented social exchanges • Testing period of taking on new roles and leader

providing new challenges• Shift from formalized interactions to new ways of

relating• Quality of exchanges improve along with greater trust

and respect• Less focus on self-interest, more on goals of the group

Phase 3

Mature Partnership• Marked by high-quality LMX exchanges • Experience high degree of mutual trust, respect, and

obligation toward one another• Tested relationship that is dependable• High degree of reciprocity between leader and

subordinate• May depend on each other for favors and special

assistance• Highly developed patterns of relating that produce

positive outcomes

Strengths (LMX)

LMX theory validates our experience of how people within organizations relate to each other and the leader

LMX theory is the only leadership approach that makes the dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the leadership process

LMX theory directs our attention to the importance of communication

Solid research foundation on how the practice of LMX theory is related to positive organizational outcomes

Criticisms (LMX)

Inadvertently supports the development of privileged groups in the workplace; appears unfair and discriminatory

The basic theoretical ideas of LMX are not fully developed

Because of various scales and levels of analysis, measurement of leader-member exchanges is being questioned

Transformational Perspective

James MacGregor Burns, in Leadership (1978), advanced a notion of leadership known as transformational leadership theory.

› Burns: “[Transformational leadership] appeals to the moral values of followers…and occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p 20).

› Transformational leadership refers to the process whereby an individual engages with others to create a bond which raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower – typically for the purpose of bringing substantial change to the organization.

Burns saw leadership as a structured interaction between leader and followers that permits significant social processes of change.

Transformational changes within society embrace material, psychological, cultural, and institutional dimensions.

When the transforming leader engages others by exploiting their higher-order needs, the resulting collective act produces a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents.

Types of Leadership DefinedBurns (1978)

TRANSACTIONAL Focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and their followers

TRANSFORMATIONAL Process of engaging with others to create a connection that increases motivation and morality

LAISSEZ-FAIRE Non-leadership. Leaders make no real attempt to move or to meet followers’ needs

Transformational vs. Transactional

› Transacting leadership motivates followers by appealing to their self-interest. It makes use of three general strategies:1. contingent rewards; 2. active management by exception; 3. passive management by exception.

Together, these approaches may induce follower compliance, but is unlikely to generate enthusiasm and commitment.

› Transformational leaders (as described by Burns and, later, by Bass) evoke from their followers feelings of trust, admiration, loyalty and respect by: 1. Making them aware of the importance of task outcomes;2. Inducing them to transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the

group (“Leadership is nothing if not linked with collective purpose”);3. Activating their higher-order needs.

› For Burns, the transforming leader focuses on ends, while the transacting leader negotiates and bargains over the means. 

Factor 1

Idealized Influence(Charisma)

Factor 2

InspirationalMotivation

Factor 3

IntellectualStimulation

Factor 4

IndividualizedConsideration

Factor 5

Contingent RewardConstructiveTransactions

Factor 6

Active Mgmt. by ExceptionPassive Mgmt. by Exception

Corrective Transactions

Factor 7

Laissez-FaireNontransactional

Transformational

TransactionalLaissez-Faire

Transformational Leadership Bass (1985)

Non-leadership Factor

Laissez-FaireThe absence of leadership. A hands-off, let-things-ride approach. Refers to a leader who abdicates responsibility, delays decisions, gives no feedback, and makes little effort to help followers satisfy their needs.

Transactional Leadership FactorsContingent RewardThe exchange process between leaders and followers in which effort by followers is exchanged for specified rewards

Management by ExceptionLeadership that involves corrective criticism, negative feedback, and negative reinforcement

• Active - Watches follower closely to identify mistakes or rule violations

• Passive - Intervenes only after standards have not been met or problems have arisen

Transformational Leadership Factors

The 4 “I”s

Individualized InfluenceDescribes leaders who act as strong role models for followers

Inspirational MotivationLeaders who communicate high expectations to followers, inspiring them through motivation to commitment and engagement in the shared vision of the organization

Intellectual StimulationStimulates followers to be creative and innovative; challenges their own beliefs and values and those of leader and organization

Individualized ConsiderationLeaders who provide a supportive climate in which they listen carefully to the needs of followers

CharismaCharisma - A special personality characteristic that gives superhuman

or exceptional powers and is reserved for a few, is of divine origin, and results in the person being treated as a leader

Dominant Desire to

influence Confident Strong moral

values

Personality Effect onCharacteristics Behaviors Followers

Sets Strong Role Model

Shows Competence

Articulates Goals

Communicates High Expectations

Expresses Confidence

Arouses Motives

Trust in Leader’s ideology

Belief similarity to leader

Unquestioning acceptance

Affection toward leader Obedience Identification Emotional Involvement Heightened goals Increased confidence

Bass’s Reapplication of Burns Bass accused Burns of three errors: (1) Burns did not pay attention to the

portfolio of followers' needs and wants, (2) Burns restricted transformational leadership to moral ends, and, (3) Burns set up a single continuum running from transactional to transformational leaderly types.

Bass has argued that transformational leadership is universally applicable. He proposed, that regardless of culture, transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend their own self-interests for the good of the group or organization, followers become motivated to expend greater effort than would usually be expected.

Bass contends that "most leaders do both (transformation and transaction) in different amounts" and that "transformational and transactional leadership are likely to be displayed by the same individual in different amounts and intensities" (p. 26). 

"The transactional leaders works within the organizational culture as it exists; the transformational leader changes the organizational culture." The transformational leader even "changes the social warp and woof of reality."

In sum, transformational is hierarchically superior to transactional leadership valuation, but all leaders practice some form or degree of transactional leadership, too.

Full Range of Leadership Model

Source: Bass & Avolio (1994)

4 “I”s

CR

MBE- A

MBE- P

Effective

Ineffective

Freq

uenc

y

Active

Passive

NonleadershipLF Laissez-Faire

TransactionalMBE-P Mgmt by Exception PassiveMBE-A Mgmt by Exception ActiveCR Contingent Reward

Transformational 4 “I”sIdealized InfluenceInspirational MotivationIntellectual StimulationIndividualized Consideration

LF

Additive Effect of TL

Individualized Influence

+ Inspirational Motivation

+ Intellectual Stimulation

+ IndividualizedConsideration

Transformational Leadership

Contingent Reward+

Management byException

ExpectedOutcomes

Performance BeyondExpectations

Transactional Leadership

Source: Bass & Avolio (1990)

TL motivates followers beyond the expected by:1. raising consciousness about the value and importance of specific and

idealized goals2. transcending self-interest for the good of the organization3. addressing higher-level needs

Recent Elaborating on Transformational Theory

Bennis and Nanus (1985) studied ninety top corporate and industry leaders. Their list of newly discovered leader traits include: logical thinking, persistence, empowerment, and self-control.

But, most of all they rediscovered transformational (leaders) as being different from transactional (managers).  The transformation is to make followers into self-empowered leaders, and into change agents. The leader's job is to articulate Vision and Values clearly so the new self-empowered leaders know where to go.

The Traits of a Transformational leader are the “4 I's:” Idealized Influence (leader becomes a role model) Inspirational Motivation (team spirit, motivate, and

provide meaning and challenge). Intellectual Stimulation (creativity & innovation) Individual Consideration (mentoring)

Strengths (Transformational Model) Broadly researched. TL has been widely

researched, including a large body of qualitative research centering on prominent leaders and CEOs in major firms.

Intuitive appeal. People are attracted to TL because it makes sense to them.

Process-focused. TL treats leadership as a process occurring between followers and leaders.

Expansive leadership view. TL provides a broader view of leadership that augments other leadership models.

Emphasizes follower. TL emphasizes followers’ needs, values, and morals.

Effectiveness. Evidence supports that TL is an effective form of leadership.

Criticisms (Transformational Model)

Lacks conceptual clarity Dimensions are not clearly delimited Parameters of TL overlap with similar conceptualizations of

leadership

Measurement questioned Validity of MLQ not fully established Some transformational factors are not unique solely to the

transformational model

TL treats leadership more as a personality trait or predisposition than a behavior that can be taught

TL is elitist and antidemocratic

Suffers from heroic leadership bias

TL is based primarily on qualitative data

Has the potential to be abused

SUMMARY: 8 Categories of Leadership Theory

1. “Great Man” Theories

2. Trait Theories

3. Contingency Theories

4. Situational Theories

5. Behavioral Theories

7. Management Theories (also known as Transactional)

8. Relationship Theories (also known as Transformational)