Introduction:

Leadership has been described as the "process of social influence in which one person
can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task." Definitions
more inclusive of followers have also emerged. Alan Keith stated that, "Leadership is
ultimately about creating a way for people to contribute to making something extraordinary
happen." Tom DeMarco says that leadership needs to be distinguished from posturing.

The following sections discuss several important aspects of leadership including a

description of what leadership is and a description of several popular theories and styles of
leadership. This article also discusses topics such as the role of emotions and vision, as well
as leadership effectiveness and performance, leadership in different contexts, how it may
differ from related concepts (i.e., management), and some critiques of leadership as generally
conceived.

1
Organizations

An organization that is established as an instrument or means for achieving defined

objectives has been referred to as a formal organization. Its design specifies how goals are
subdivided and reflected in subdivisions of the organization. Divisions, departments, sections,
positions, jobs, and tasks make up this work structure. Thus, the formal organization is
expected to behave impersonally in regard to relationships with clients or with its members.
According to Weber's definition, entry and subsequent advancement is by merit or seniority.
Each employee receives a salary and enjoys a degree of tenure that safeguards her/him from
the arbitrary influence of superiors or of powerful clients. The higher his position in the
hierarchy, the greater his presumed expertise in adjudicating problems that may arise in the
course of the work carried out at lower levels of the organization. It is this bureaucratic
structure that forms the basis for the appointment of heads or chiefs of administrative
subdivisions in the organization and endows them with the authority attached to their
position.

In contrast to the appointed head or chief of an administrative unit, a leader emerges

within the context of the informal organization that underlies the formal structure. The
informal organization expresses the personal objectives and goals of the individual
membership. Their objectives and goals may or may not coincide with those of the formal
organization. The informal organization represents an extension of the social structures that
generally characterize human life — the spontaneous emergence of groups and organizations
as ends in themselves.

In prehistoric times, humanity was preoccupied with personal security, maintenance,

protection, and survival. Now humanity spends a major portion of waking hours working for
organizations. Her/His need to identify with a community that provides security, protection,
maintenance, and a feeling of belonging continues unchanged from prehistoric times. This
need is met by the informal organization and its emergent, or unofficial, leaders.

Leaders emerge from within the structure of the informal organization. Their personal
qualities, the demands of the situation, or a combination of these and other factors attract
followers who accept their leadership within one or several overlay structures. Instead of the
authority of position held by an appointed head or chief, the emergent leader wields influence

2
or power. Influence is the ability of a person to gain co-operation from others by means of
persuasion or control over rewards. Power is a stronger form of influence because it reflects a
person's ability to enforce action through the control of a means of punishment.

A leader is a person who influences a group of people towards a specific result. It is

not dependent on title or formal authority. (elevos, paraphrased from Leaders, Bennis, and
Leadership Presence, Halpern & Lubar). Leaders are recognized by their capacity for caring
for others, clear communication, and a commitment to persist. An individual who is
appointed to a managerial position has the right to command and enforce obedience by virtue
of the authority of his position. However, she or he must possess adequate personal attributes
to match his authority, because authority is only potentially available to him. In the absence
of sufficient personal competence, a manager may be confronted by an emergent leader who
can challenge her/his role in the organization and reduce it to that of a figurehead. However,
only authority of position has the backing of formal sanctions. It follows that whoever wields
personal influence and power can legitimize this only by gaining a formal position in the
hierarchy, with commensurate authority. Leadership can be defined as one's ability to get
others to willingly follow. Every organization needs leaders at every level.

Management

Over the years the philosophical terminology of "management" and "leadership" have,
in the organisational context, been used both as synonyms and with clearly differentiated
meanings. Debate is fairly common about whether the use of these terms should be restricted,
and generally reflects an awareness of the distinction made by Burns (1978) between
"transactional" leadership (characterised by e.g. emphasis on procedures, contingent reward,
management by exception) and "transformational" leadership (characterised by e.g. charisma,
personal relationships, creativity).

Group leadership

In contrast to individual leadership, some organizations have adopted group leadership.

In this situation, more than one person provides direction to the group as a whole. Some
organizations have taken this approach in hopes of increasing creativity, reducing costs, or
downsizing. Others may see the traditional leadership of a boss as costing too much in team

3
performance. In some situations, the maintenance of the boss becomes too expensive - either
by draining the resources of the group as a whole, or by impeding the creativity within the
team, even unintentionally.

A common example of group leadership involves cross-functional teams. A team of

people with diverse skills and from all parts of an organization assembles to lead a project. A
team structure can involve sharing power equally on all issues, but more commonly uses
rotating leadership. The team member(s) best able to handle any given phase of the project
become(s) the temporary leader(s). Additionally, as each team member has the opportunity to
experience the elevated level of empowerment, it energizes staff and feeds the cycle of
success.

Leaders who demonstrate persistence, tenacity, determination and synergistic

communication skills will bring out the same qualities in their groups. Good leaders use their
own inner mentors to energize their team and organizations and lead a team to achieve
success.

According to the National School Boards Association (USA)

These Group Leadership or Leadership Teams have specific characteristics:

Characteristics of a Team

•There must be an awareness of unity on the part of all its members.

•There must be interpersonal relationship. Members must have a chance to contribute,
learn from and work with others.
•The member must have the ability to act together toward a common goal.

Ten characteristics of well-functioning teams:

•Purpose: Members proudly share a sense of why the team exists and are invested in
accomplishing its mission and goals.
•Priorities: Members know what needs to be done next, by whom, and by when to
achieve team goals.
•Roles: Members know their roles in getting tasks done and when to allow a more
skillful member to do a certain task.

4
 •Decisions: Authority and decision-making lines are clearly understood.
•Conflict: Conflict is dealt with openly and is considered important to decision-making
and personal growth.
•Personal traits: members feel their unique personalities are appreciated and well
utilized.
•Norms: Group norms for working together are set and seen as standards for every one
in the groups.
•Effectiveness: Members find team meetings efficient and productive and look forward
to this time together.
•Success: Members know clearly when the team has met with success and share in this
equally and proudly.
•Training: Opportunities for feedback and updating skills are provided and taken
advantage of by team members.

Primates

Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson, in Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of
Human Violence present evidence that only humans and chimpanzees, among all the animals
living on earth, share a similar tendency for a cluster of behaviors: violence, territoriality, and
competition for uniting behind the one chief male of the land. This position is contentious.
Many animals beyond apes are territorial, compete, exhibit violence, and have a social
structure controlled by a dominant male (lions, wolves, etc.), suggesting Wrangham and
Peterson's evidence is not empirical. However, we must examine other species as well,
including elephants (which are matriarchal and follow an alpha female), meerkats (who are
likewise matriarchal), and many others.

It would be beneficial, to examine that most accounts of leadership over the past few
millennia (since the creation of Christian religions) are through the perspective of a
patriarchal society, founded on Christian literature. If one looks before these times, it is
noticed that Pagan and Earth-based tribes in fact had female leaders. It is important also to
note that the peculiarities of one tribe cannot necessarily be ascribed to another, as even our
modern-day customs differ. The current day patrilineal custom is only a recent invention in
human history and our original method of familial practices were matrilineal (Dr. Christopher
Shelley and Bianca Rus, UBC). The fundamental assumption that has been built into 90% of

5
the world's countries is that patriarchy is the 'natural' biological predisposition of homo
sapiens. Unfortunately, this belief has led to the widespread oppression of women in all of
those countries, but in varying degrees. (Whole Earth Review, Winter, 1995 by Thomas
Laird, Michael Victor). The Iroquoian First Nations tribes are an example of a matrilineal
tribe, along with Mayan tribes, and also the society of Meghalaya, India. (Laird and Victor, ).

By comparison, bonobos, the second-closest species-relatives of man, do not unite

behind the chief male of the land. The bonobos show deference to an alpha or top-ranking
female that, with the support of her coalition of other females, can prove as strong as the
strongest male in the land. Thus, if leadership amounts to getting the greatest number of
followers, then among the bonobos, a female almost always exerts the strongest and most
effective leadership. However, not all scientists agree on the allegedly "peaceful" nature of
the bonobo or its reputation as a "hippie chimp".

Historical views

Sanskrit literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten
types of leaders are explained with examples from history and mythology.

Aristocratic thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's blue blood or
genes: monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions
against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction: see the divine right of

6
kings. Contrariwise, more democratically-inclined theorists have pointed to examples of
meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent.

In the autocratic/paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of

leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to
such models as patriarchal and posit against them emotionally-attuned, responsive, and
consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies.

Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on "right living" relate
very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a
tradition of filial piety.

Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and

discipline . . . Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of
humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence on the
strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result
in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate to its function, then one
can be a leader. — Sun Tzu

In the 19th century, the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of
leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary traces the word
"leadership" in English only as far back as the 19th century.) One response to this denial of
élitism came with Leninism, which demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres to act as
the vanguard of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the dictatorship of the
proletariat.

Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between
secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their
detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized
stewardship of divinely-provided resources - human and material - and their deployment in
accordance with a Divine plan. Compare servant leadership.

For a more general take on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the
statesman.

Action oriented environments

7
 This is a unique approach to team leadership that is aimed at action oriented
environments where effective functional leadership is required to achieve critical or reactive
tasks by small teams deployed into the field. In other words leadership of small groups often
created to respond to a situation or critical incident.

In most cases these teams are tasked to operate in remote and changeable environments
with limited support or backup (action environments). Leadership of people in these
environments requires a different set of skills to that of front line management. These leaders
must effectively operate remotely and negotiate both the needs of the individual, team and
task within a changeable environment. This has been termed Action Oriented Leadership.
Some example action oriented leadership is demonstrated in the following ways:
extinguishing a rural fire, locating a missing person, leading a team on an outdoor expedition
or rescuing a person from a potentially hazardous environment.

Titles emphasizing authority

At certain stages in their development, the hierarchies of social ranks implied different
degrees or ranks of leadership in society. Thus a knight led fewer men in general than did a
duke; a baronet might in theory control less land than an earl. See peerage for a
systematization of this hierarchy, and order of precedence for links to various systems.

In the course of the 18th and 20th centuries, several political operators took non-
traditional paths to become dominant in their societies. They or their systems often expressed
a belief in strong individual leadership, but existing titles and labels ("King", "Emperor",
"President" and so on) often seemed inappropriate, insufficient or downright inaccurate in
some circumstances. The formal or informal titles or descriptions they or their flunkies
employ express and foster a general veneration for leadership of the inspired and autocratic
variety. The definite article when used as part of the title (in languages that use definite
articles) emphasizes the existence of a sole "true" leader.

Critical thought

8
 Noam Chomsky and others have brought critical thinking to the very concept of
leadership and have provided an analysis that asserts that people abrogate their responsibility
to think and will actions for themselves. While the conventional view of leadership is rather
satisfying to people who "want to be told what to do", these critics say that one should
question why they are being subjected to a will or intellect other than their own if the leader
is not a Subject Matter Expert (SME).

The fundamentally anti-democratic nature of the leadership principle is challenged by

the introduction of concepts such as autogestion, employeeship, common civic virtue, etc.,
which stress individual responsibility and/or group authority in the work place and elsewhere
by focusing on the skills and attitudes that a person needs in general rather than separating
out leadership as the basis of a special class of individuals.

Similarly various historical calamities are attributed to a misplaced reliance on the

principle of leadership.

Varieties of individual power

According to Patrick J. Montana and Bruce H. Charnov, the ability to attain these
unique powers is what enables leadership to influence subordinates and peers by controlling
organizational resources. The successful leader effectively uses these power(s) to influence
employees, and it is important for the leader to understand the uses of power to strengthen the
leadership functioning.

The authors distinguish the following types of organizational power:

•Legitimate Power refers to the different types of professional positions within an

organization structure that inherent such power. E.g. Manager, Vice President, Director,
Supervisor, et cetera. These levels of power commands to the hierarchical executive levels
within the organization itself. The higher position such as President of the company has a
higher power than the rest of professional positions in the hierarchical executive levels.

•Reward Power given the power to managers that attain administrative power over a
range of rewards. Employees whom work for managers desire the reward from the manager,

9
they will be influenced by receiving them as the product of work performance. The rewards
may be the obvious—pay raise or promotions.

•Coercive Power given the manager's ability to punish an employee whom did not
follow the company policy, loss of profit, et cetera. Punishment can be determined range of
mild to serious punishment... a mild punishment is a suspension and serious punishment is
actual termination.

•Expert Power an expert power attained by the manager by their own talents such as
skills, knowledge, abilities, or previous experience. Any of these manager has the power
within the organization will be very valuable and important manager in the company.

•Charisma Power a manager has a charisma that will positively influence on workers,
and admired manager that creates the opportunity for interpersonal influence. A person has
chrisma, and this will confer great power as a manager.

•Referent Power a power that gained by association. This person with whom he or she
is associated or has a relationship, often referred to assistant or deputy.

•Information Power a person who has possession of important information at a

important time when such information is needed to organizational functioning. Someone who
has this information knowledge has genuine power. Manager's secretary would be in a
powerful position if a secretary has information power.

Theories

Students of leadership have produced theories involving traits, situational interaction,

function, behavior, power, vision and values, charisma, and intelligence among others.

Early history

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for centuries.
History's greatest philosophical writings from Plato's Republic to Plutarch's Lives have
explored the question of "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying
this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that

10
leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that
leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the "trait theory of leadership."

This view of leadership, the trait theory, was explored at length in a number of works
in the previous century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton,
whose works have prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841),
Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. In
Galton's (1869) Hereditary Genius, he examined leadership qualities in the families of
powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when moving
from first degree to second degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited.
In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great
initial support for the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the leader.

For decades, this trait-based perspective dominated empirical and theoretical work in
leadership. Using early research techniques, researchers conducted over a hundred studies
proposing a number of characteristics that distinguished leaders from nonleaders:
intelligence, dominance, adaptability, persistence, integrity, socioeconomic status, and self-
confidence just to name a few.

Rise of alternative theories

11
 In the late 1940s and early 1950s, however, a series of qualitative reviews of these
studies prompted researchers to take a drastically different view of the driving forces behind
leadership. In reviewing the extant literature, Stogdill and Mann found that while some traits
were common across a number of studies, the overall evidence suggested that persons who
are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations. Subsequently,
leadership was no longer characterized as an enduring individual trait, as situational
approaches (see alternative leadership theories below) posited that individuals can be
effective in certain situations, but not others. This approach dominated much of the
leadership theory and research for the next few decades.

Reemergence of trait theory

New methods and measurements were developed after these influential reviews that
would ultimately reestablish the trait theory as a viable approach to the study of leadership.
For example, improvements in researchers' use of the round robin research design
methodology allowed researchers to see that individuals can and do emerge as leaders across
a variety of situations and tasks. Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed
researchers to conduct meta-analyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and
summarize the findings from a wide array of studies. This advent allowed trait theorists to
create a comprehensive and parsimonious picture of previous leadership research rather than
rely on the qualitative reviews of the past. Equipped with new methods, leadership
researchers revealed the following:

•Individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks
•Significant relationships exist between leadership and such individual traits as:

• intelligence
• adjustment
• extraversion
• conscientiousness
• openness to experience
• general self-efficacy

12
 While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, its reemergence
has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in sophisticated conceptual
frameworks.

Specifically, Zaccaro (2007) noted that trait theories still:

1. Focus on a small set of individual attributes such as Big Five personality traits, to
the neglect of cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills, expertise, and problem-
solving skills
2. Fail to consider patterns or integrations of multiple attributes
3. Do not distinguish between those leader attributes that are generally not malleable
over time and those that are shaped by, and bound to, situational influences
4. Do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the behavioral diversity
necessary for effective leadership

Attribute pattern approach

Considering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several researchers have
begun to adopt a different perspective of leader individual differences - the leader attribute
pattern approach. In contrast to the traditional approach, the leader attribute pattern approach
is based on theorists' arguments that the influence of individual characteristics on outcomes is
best understood by considering the person as an integrated totality rather than a summation of
individual variables. In other words, the leader attribute pattern approach argues that
integrated constellations or combinations of individual differences may explain substantial
variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness beyond that explained by single
attributes, or by additive combinations of multiple attributes.

Behavioral and style theories

In response to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to research
leadership as a set of behaviors, evaluating the behavior of 'successful' leaders, determining a
behavior taxonomy and identifying broad leadership styles. David McClelland, for example,
Leadership takes a strong personality with a well developed positive ego. Not so much as a
pattern of motives, but a set of traits is crucial. To lead; self-confidence and a high self-
esteem is useful, perhaps even essential. [Kevin Mick]
13
 A graphical representation of the managerial grid model

Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal work on
the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers evaluated the
performance of groups of eleven-year-old boys under different types of work climate. In
each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of group decision making, praise
and criticism (feedback), and the management of the group tasks (project management)
according to three styles: (1) authoritarian, (2) democratic and (3) laissez-faire. Authoritarian
climates were characterized by leaders who make decisions alone, demand strict compliance
to his orders, and dictate each step taken; future steps were uncertain to a large degree. The
leader is not necessarily hostile but is aloof from participation in work and commonly offers
personal praise and criticism for the work done. Democratic climates were characterized by
collective decision processes, assisted by the leader. Before accomplishing tasks, perspectives
are gained from group discussion and technical advice from a leader. Members are given
choices and collectively decide the division of labor. Praise and criticism in such an
environment are objective, fact minded and given by a group member without necessarily
having participated extensively in the actual work. Laissez faire climates gave freedom to the
group for policy determination without any participation from the leader. The leader remains
uninvolved in work decisions unless asked, does not participate in the division of labor, and
very infrequently gives praise. The results seemed to confirm that the democratic climate was
preferred.

14
 The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model was
developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964 and suggests five different leadership
styles, based on the leaders' concern for people and their concern for goal achievement.

B.F. Skinner is the father of Behavior Modification and developed the concept of
positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement occurs when a positive stimulus is presented
in response to a behavior, increasing the likelihood of that behavior in the future. The
following is an example of how positive reinforcement can be used in a business setting.
Assume praise is a positive reinforcer for a particular employee. This employee does not
show up to work on time every day. The manager of this employee decides to praise the
employee for showing up on time every day the employee actually shows up to work on time.
As a result, the employee comes to work on time more often because the employee likes to be
praised. In this example, praise (i.e. stimulus) is a positive reinforcer for this employee
because the employee arrives (i.e. behavior) to work on time more frequently after being
praised for showing up to work on time.

The use of positive reinforcement is a successful and growing technique used by

leaders to motivate and attain desired behaviors from subordinates. Organizations such as
Frito-Lay, 3M, B.F. Goodrich, Michigan Bell, and Emery Air Freight have all used
reinforcement to increase productivity. Empirical research covering the last 20 years suggests
that reinforcement theory has a 17 percent increase in performance. Additionally, many
reinforcement techniques such as the use of praise are inexpensive, providing higher
performance for lower costs.

Situational and contingency theories

Situational theory also appeared as a reaction to the trait theory of leadership. Social
scientists argued that history was more than the result of intervention of great men as Carlyle
suggested. Herbert Spencer (1884) said that the times produce the person and not the other
way around. This theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics;
according to this group of theories, no single optimal psychographic profile of a leader exists.
According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large
part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions."

15
 Some theorists started to synthesize the trait and situational approaches. Building upon
the research of Lewin et al., academics began to normatize the descriptive models of
leadership climates, defining three leadership styles and identifying which situations each
style works better in. The authoritarian leadership style, for example, is approved in periods
of crisis but fails to win the "hearts and minds" of their followers in the day-to-day
management; the democratic leadership style is more adequate in situations that require
consensus building; finally, the laissez faire leadership style is appreciated by the degree of
freedom it provides, but as the leader does not "take charge", he can be perceived as a failure
in protracted or thorny organizational problems. Thus, theorists defined the style of
leadership as contingent to the situation, which is sometimes classified as contingency theory.
Four contingency leadership theories appear more prominently in the recent years: Fiedler
contingency model, Vroom-Yetton decision model, the path-goal theory, and the Hersey-
Blanchard situational theory.

The Fiedler contingency model bases the leader's effectiveness on what Fred Fiedler
called situational contingency. This results from the interaction of leadership style and
situational favorableness (later called "situational control"). The theory defined two types of
leader: those who tend to accomplish the task by developing good-relationships with the
group (relationship-oriented), and those who have as their prime concern carrying out the
task itself (task-oriented). According to Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both task-oriented
and relationship-oriented leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the
situation. When there is a good leader-member relation, a highly structured task, and high
leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable situation". Fiedler found that
task-oriented leaders are more effective in extremely favourable or unfavourable situations,
whereas relationship-oriented leaders perform best in situations with intermediate
favourability.

Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton (1973) and later with Arthur Jago
(1988), developed a taxonomy for describing leadership situations, taxonomy that was used
in a normative decision model where leadership styles were connected to situational
variables, defining which approach was more suitable to which situation. This approach was
novel because it supported the idea that the same manager could rely on different group
decision making approaches depending on the attributes of each situation. This model was
later referred as situational contingency theory.

16
 The path-goal theory of leadership was developed by Robert House (1971) and was
based on the expectancy theory of Victor Vroom. According to House, the essence of the
theory is "the meta proposition that leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviors that
complement subordinates' environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for
deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit
performance. The theory identifies four leader behaviors, achievement-oriented, directive,
participative, and supportive, that are contingent to the environment factors and follower
characteristics. In contrast to the Fiedler contingency model, the path-goal model states that
the four leadership behaviors are fluid, and that leaders can adopt any of the four depending
on what the situation demands. The path-goal model can be classified both as a contingency
theory, as it depends on the circumstances, but also as a transactional leadership theory, as the
theory emphasizes the reciprocity behavior between the leader and the followers.

The situational leadership model proposed by Hersey and Blanchard suggests four
leadership-styles and four levels of follower-development. For effectiveness, the model posits
that the leadership-style must match the appropriate level of followership-development. In
this model, leadership behavior becomes a function not only of the characteristics of the
leader, but of the characteristics of followers as well.

Functional theory

Functional leadership theory (Hackman & Walton, 1986; McGrath, 1962) is a

particularly useful theory for addressing specific leader behaviors expected to contribute to
organizational or unit effectiveness. This theory argues that the leader's main job is to see that
whatever is necessary to group needs is taken care of; thus, a leader can be said to have done
their job well when they have contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion (Fleishman et
al., 1991; Hackman & Wageman, 2005; Hackman & Walton, 1986). While functional
leadership theory has most often been applied to team leadership (Zaccaro, Rittman, &
Marks, 2001), it has also been effectively applied to broader organizational leadership as well
(Zaccaro, 2001). In summarizing literature on functional leadership (see Kozlowski et al.
(1996), Zaccaro et al. (2001), Hackman and Walton (1986), Hackman & Wageman (2005),
Morgeson (2005)), Klein, Zeigert, Knight, and Xiao (2006) observed five broad functions a
leader performs when promoting organisation's effectiveness. These functions include:

17
 (1) environmental monitoring,

(2) organizing subordinate activities,

(3) teaching and coaching subordinates,

(4) motivating others, and

(5) intervening actively in the group's work.

A variety of leadership behaviors are expected to facilitate these functions. In initial

work identifying leader behavior, Fleishman (1953) observed that subordinates perceived
their supervisors' behavior in terms of two broad categories referred to as consideration and
initiating structure. Consideration includes behavior involved in fostering effective
relationships. Examples of such behavior would include showing concern for a subordinate or
acting in a supportive manner towards others. Initiating structure involves the actions of the
leader focused specifically on task accomplishment. This could include role clarification,
setting performance standards, and holding subordinates accountable to those standards.

Transactional and transformational theories

The transactional leader (Burns, 1978) is given power to perform certain tasks and
reward or punish for the team's performance. It gives the opportunity to the manager to lead
the group and the group agrees to follow his lead to accomplish a predetermined goal in
exchange for something else. Power is given to the leader to evaluate, correct and train
subordinates when productivity is not up to the desired level and reward effectiveness when
expected outcome is reached.

The transformational leader (Burns, 1978) motivates its team to be effective and
efficient. Communication is the base for goal achievement focusing the group on the final
desired outcome or goal attainment. This leader is highly visible and uses chain of command
to get the job done. Transformational leaders focus on the big picture, needing to be
surrounded by people who take care of the details. The leader is always looking for ideas that
move the organization to reach the company's vision.

Emotions
18
 Leadership can be perceived as a particularly emotion-laden process, with emotions
entwined with the social influence process. In an organization, the leader's mood has some
effects on his/her group. These effects can be described in 3 levels:

1. The mood of individual group members. Group members with leaders in a

positive mood experience more positive mood than do group members with leaders in a
negative mood. The leaders transmit their moods to other group members through the
mechanism of emotional contagion. Mood contagion may be one of the psychological
mechanisms by which charismatic leaders influence followers.
2. The affective tone of the group. Group affective tone represents the consistent
or homogeneous affective reactions within a group. Group affective tone is an aggregate of
the moods of the individual members of the group and refers to mood at the group level of
analysis. Groups with leaders in a positive mood have a more positive affective tone than do
groups with leaders in a negative mood.
3. Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy.
Public expressions of mood impact how group members think and act. When people
experience and express mood, they send signals to others. Leaders signal their goals,
intentions, and attitudes through their expressions of moods. For example, expressions of
positive moods by leaders signal that leaders deem progress toward goals to be good.The
group members respond to those signals cognitively and behaviorally in ways that are
reflected in the group processes.

In research about client service, it was found that expressions of positive mood by the
leader improve the performance of the group, although in other sectors there were other
findings.

Beyond the leader's mood, her/his behavior is a source for employee positive and
negative emotions at work. The leader creates situations and events that lead to emotional
response. Certain leader behaviors displayed during interactions with their employees are the
sources of these affective events. Leaders shape workplace affective events. Examples –
feedback giving, allocating tasks, resource distribution. Since employee behavior and
productivity are directly affected by their emotional states, it is imperative to consider
employee emotional responses to organizational leaders. Emotional intelligence, the ability to

19
understand and manage moods and emotions in the self and others, contributes to effective
leadership in organizations. Leadership is about being responsible.

Neo-emergent theory

The Neo-emergent leadership theory (from the Oxford school of leadership) espouses
that leadership is created through the emergence of information by the leader or other
stakeholders, not through the true actions of the leader himself. In other words, the
reproduction of information or stories form the basis of the perception of leadership by the
majority. It is well known that the great naval hero Lord Nelson often wrote his own versions
of battles he was involved in, so that when he arrived home in England he would receive a
true hero's welcome. In modern society, the press, blogs and other sources report their own
views of a leader, which may be based on reality, but may also be based on a political
command, a payment, or an inherent interest of the author, media or leader. Therefore, it can
be contended that the perception of all leaders is created and in fact does not reflect their true
leadership qualities at all.

Environmental leadership theory

The Environmental leadership model (Carmazzi) describes leadership from a Group

dynamics perspective incorporating group psychology and self awareness to nurture
"Environments" that promote self sustaining group leadership based on personal emotional
gratification from the activities of the group.

The Environmental Leader creates a platform through education and awareness where
individuals fill each others emotional needs and become more conscious of when, and how
they affect personal and team emotional gratifications. This is accomplished by knowing why
people "react" to their environment instead of act intelligently.

"Environmental Leadership is not about changing the mindset of the group or

individual, but in the cultivation of an environment that brings out the best and inspires the
individuals in that group. It is not the ability to influence others to do something they are not
committed to, but rather to nurture a culture that motivates and even excites individuals to do
what is required for the benefit of all. It is not carrying others to the end result, but setting
the surrounding for developing qualities in them to so they may carry each other." Carmazzi
20
 The role of an Environmental Leader is to instill passion and direction to a group and
the dynamics of that group. This leader implements a psychological support system within a
group that fills the emotional and developmental needs of the group.

Styles

Leadership style refers to a leader's behaviour. It is the result of the philosophy,

personality and experience of the leader.

Kurt Lewin

Kurt Lewin and colleagues identified different styles of leadership:

•Autocratic

•Participative

•Laissez-Faire

Autocratic or authoritarian style

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the
leader, as with dictator leaders.

They do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic
management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits
quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each
decision to himself until he feels it is needed to be shared with the rest of the group.

Participative or democratic style

The democratic leadership style favors decision-making by the group as shown, such
as leader gives instruction after consulting the group.

They can win the cooperation of their group and can motivate them effectively and
positively. The decisions of the democratic leader are not unilateral as with the autocrat
because they arise from consultation with the group members and participation by them.

Laissez-faire or free rein style

21
 A free rein leader does not lead, but leaves the group entirely to itself as shown; such a
leader allows maximum freedom to subordinates, i.e., they are given a free hand in deciding
their own policies and methods.

Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is
little time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly
more experience or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be
most effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of
expertise, a more democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted
should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing
the interests of its individual members.

Performance

In the past, some researchers have argued that the actual influence of leaders on
organizational outcomes is overrated and romanticized as a result of biased attributions about
leaders (Meindl & Ehrlich, 1987). Despite these assertions however, it is largely recognized
and accepted by practitioners and researchers that leadership is important, and research
supports the notion that leaders do contribute to key organizational outcomes (Day & Lord,
1988; Kaiser, Hogan, & Craig, 2008). To facilitate successful performance it is important to
understand and accurately measure leadership performance.

Job performance generally refers to behavior that is expected to contribute to

organizational success (Campbell, 1990). Campbell identified a number of specific types of
performance dimensions; leadership was one of the dimensions that he identified. There is no
consistent, overall definition of leadership performance (Yukl, 2006). Many distinct
conceptualizations are often lumped together under the umbrella of leadership performance,
including outcomes such as leader effectiveness, leader advancement, and leader emergence
(Kaiser et al., 2008). For instance, leadership performance may be used to refer to the career
success of the individual leader, performance of the group or organization, or even leader
emergence. Each of these measures can be considered conceptually distinct. While these
aspects may be related, they are different outcomes and their inclusion should depend on the
applied/research focus.

CONCLUSION
22
 All the qualities described explain why a Nelson Mandela could attract all those
starry-eyed young people and why people can be so awestruck in his presence. He is a good
person whose magnanimity is breathtaking, speaking of a nobility of spirit in his willingness
to forgive those who treated him so shabbily. People recognize that goodness. As for the
other kind of leaders, when they inevitably bite the dust, few lament their passing. They
become just a part of the flotsam and jetsam of history.

References

Notes

1. ^ Chemers, M. M. (2002). Meta-cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence

of transformational leadership: Efficacy and Effectiveness. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, F.
J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership.
2. ^ Kouzes, J., and Posner, B. (2007). The Leadership Challenge. CA: Jossey
Bass.
3. ^ Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency
23
 4. ^ Locke et al. 1991
5. ^ (Richards & Engle, 1986, p.206)

Books

•Blake, R.; Mouton, J. (1964). The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership
Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co..
•Carlyle, Thomas (1841). On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic History. Boston,
MA: Houghton Mifflin.
•Fiedler, Fred E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. McGraw-Hill: Harper
and Row Publishers Inc..
•Heifetz, Ronald (1994). Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press. ISBN 0-674-51858-6.
•Hemphill, John K. (1949). Situational Factors in Leadership. Columbus: Ohio State
University Bureau of Educational Research.

Journal articles

•House, Robert J. (1971). "A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness". Administrative

Science Quarterly (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University) 16 (3):
321–339. doi:10.2307/2391905. http://jstor.org/stable/2391905.
•House, Robert J. (1996). "Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a
reformulated theory". Leadership Quarterly 7 (3): 323–352. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(96)90024-7.
•Lewin, Kurt; Lippitt, Ronald; White, Ralph (1939). "Patterns of aggressive behavior
in experimentally created social climates". Journal of Social Psychology: 271–301.
•"Leadership: Do traits matter?". Academy of Management Executive 5 (2). 1991.

24