A glimpse on Leadership Theories

From the dawn of time and up until this day, people participated in groups to enhance their probability of survival. Humans are beings that form groups and communities, they are social creatures from their nature, designed not to live isolated from others. These groups need people to lead them, it doesn’t matter if we refer to a leader of a homo sapiens group millions of years ago, a King in the middle ages, or a president in 2021, a leader is a leader. In general, a leader is someone that guides and commands, and in older times, he was someone that inspired respect, fear, and power, like a Roman Emperor. As time went on, philosophers and scholars developed more and more theories about the necessary traits of the proper leader. In this article, we will present to you some of the theories over the years.

Great Man Theories

Basically, this theory is one of the first to ever exist, if not the first. From ancient times, people believed that someone is “born to lead” and his leadership capacity is something inherent to him. People actually believed that a leader is someone sent by the gods, a heroic and sometimes mythic figure whose destiny is to lead. It has to be mentioned that the ability to lead wasn’t considered solely as a right, but as a duty as well. Moreover, it was commonly believed that there certain integral characteristics that someone had to have to be able to lead (charisma, intelligence, confidence, social skills) and that these skills cannot be learned, but already exist as traits in a leader internally. Many rulers of ancient times belong to this category, rulers such as Marcus Aurelius, Alexander the Great, and Genghis Khan.

Contingency Theories

This theory scans the leadership objective from a very different point of view than the one before. Contingency theories mainly focus on environment-related variables. They mention that clearly no specific style is perfect for all occasions and argues that, a leader should evaluate his followers and environmental needs and act accordingly. Due to these theories, many people believe that the probability of success is not something that relies exclusively upon the leader’s abilities, but expands to the nature of the situation and the qualities of his supporters as well.

Relationship Theories

On this occasion, we are talking about leaders with high ethical and moral standards, about people who believe that lifting others and making their team rise is their duty and purpose. Leaders of this style do not believe that ordering people around could make much of a difference, instead, they choose to form connections with their followers, understand their capabilities and needs, and use each one to the task that he will contribute the most. They try to inspire people by making them see the importance of their goal, and the need for their expertise specifically. This kind of leader believes that, if they give people the opportunity and support to fulfill their potential, they can bring the best possible outcome in return. In other words, they invest in their people and together harvest the seeds of the team’s effort.

Trait Theories

Similar to Great Man Theories, they also support the belief that leaders are natural-born and not made, that people inherit and not acquire leadership attributes. These attributes consist of self-confidence, courage, extroverted nature, etc. The main difference here is that, in Trait Theories, it is clear that many leaders do not possess these attributes and vice versa, people that have the skills needed but are not drawn to leadership positions. They also mention that some traits are connected and are destined to coexist. For example, ambition and energy are connected with the desire to lead, honesty and integrity are the main pillars of self-confidence and, intelligence is coherent with job-related knowledge.

Behavioral Theories

Here we have the opposite of the Great Man Theories as these theories claim that “leaders are made, not born”. We can find their roots in behaviorism, they focus mainly on a leader’s actions and not his mental qualities, meaning that, someone can possess all the leader-related qualities and still act like a pawn and not as a master. Basically, they insist that someone actually can learn how to become a leader. This capability includes the teaching of “how-to” and also the lessons that someone takes due to different incidents in his life. For example, if a kid is introverted and not very dynamic, this can easily change based on the facts that he is going to face later in his life.

Participative Theories

These theories have much in common with the Relationship Theories, but they insist more on the importance of participation of the group members in the decision-making process. Here, the ideal leader takes everyone’s input into account and encourages each member’s contribution to the project. Moreover, the leader is responsible for the coordination and orchestration of the team, he has to facilitate the conversation, share information, offer guidance, and encourage constant participation. The leader here tries to make the most out of his team in practice and also in tactical planning.

Management Theories

We meet this kind of leadership in the business world, as most of the companies use this kind of tactic to lead their manpower. These theories focus on organization, group importance, and supervision. In a more general context, we have a system of rewards and punishments, where people are rewarded with bonuses for reaching a goal or are punished (even with the loss of their jobs) for acting irresponsibly and inefficiently.

Situational Theories

In this kind of theory, it is supported that a leader chooses the best course of action based on situational variables. Like in the Contingency Theories, different situations demand different types of decision-making and besides, different types of leadership. They claim that, if a leader is the most talented individual in a group, then a more authoritative style of leadership is suggested. In contrast, if the other members of the group are skilled individuals or even experts, then a more democratic style of leadership is suited for the best possible outcome.

In conclusion, we understand that the complexity of the human mind and therefore, of human behavior is so intense that, we cannot argue about which are the best and worst theories. Different points of view and different outcomes throughout history indicate that each and everyone one of them has a reason and points to enhance their thesis. We at Mindspace, want to make clear that a great leader is the alpha and omega of a team’s overall performance, and as an adage goes: “Do not fear a group of lions led by a sheep, but a group of sheep led by a lion”.