However sociological approach is to evaluate the description of leader that result from their point in society; social class; education; gender and religion; ethnic and kinship networks”(Wilmington 1993) Leadership trait theory is basically based on the idea of leaders are born and not made. Usually traits are considered to be part of a person’s qualities from birth. As per this point of view, leadership trait theory tends to assume that people are born as leaders and not made as leaders. (Gill 2006) This is a genetic approach in that it is assumed that leaders are born rather than made.
There is an explanation to a major difficulty raised in conjunction with the genetic approach; the offspring of a great leader may not have leadership abilities because the wrong traits were inherited. It thus appears that the trait theory of leadership is a clear concise view of the origins and nature of dervish, but same is not the case, scientific investigation has produced extremely contradicting evidence, traits denoting leadership in one scientific study are not found in others and the situation is further complicated by the sheer number of supposed leadership traits. Montana , Charka AAA) There is great of value in identifying the character traits related with leadership. It is even important to recognize the character traits that supporters look for in a leader. These traits will be the characteristics of an individual who is normally likely to draw followers. However, the concept that leadership traits are inborn ND fixed seems to be incorrect. It is true that many of our styles and tendencies are prejudiced by our personalities and the way we are born but, people know that it is possible for someone to change their character traits for the worse. F a person is known for being honest, the can learn to be dishonest. The complete thought of saying that someone was “corrupted” is based on the fact that people are able to get bad character traits.. The book “The Leadership Challenge” identifies some character traits that are generally associated with good leaders. The top five traits are: * Honest * Inspiring Forward-Looking * Competent * Intelligence The difficulty with trait theory of leadership is that, being a genetically based theory, it doesn’t assume that traits are learned, which appears to be the case most of times.
Many leadership traits such as communication skills, interpersonal skills etc can be learned easily Behavioral theory Trait theory completely focused on traits and therefore had a good response of criticism. Partly as response to this criticism, later generation scholars focused on leadership as a set of behaviors rather than traits’. These scholars assumed that it was not important to possess a particular set of personal traits than it was to engage in leadership behaviors that would help to achieve desired results from followers.
Some of the behavior approaches emphasized the importance of employee- centered & participative forms of leadership (Lenin, Lippies and White 1939). (Viviane , Crotches 1998) Behavioral approach to leadership sought to determine the “one best leadership style” that would work effective in all situations. This approach focuses mainly on the origins and effectiveness of leadership, but its search for the one best leadership style is a weakness.
Behavioral approach is a research based attempt to understand leadership. It was developed in several famous universities studies of leadership in business environment. Although the various studies used different terms to describe the dimensions of leadership, they are usually called as task orientation and employee orientation. Task orientation consists of actions taken by the leader to accomplish the job, such as assigning the task and organizing the work, supervising and evaluating work performance.
Employee orientation consists of the actions that characterize the way in which a leader relates to and approaches braininess. The research on both these types later reached the following conclusions: 1) Leadership has at least two dimensions and is more complex than advocated by either a genetic or a leadership trait approach. 2) Leadership styles are flexible 3) Leadership styles are not innate, they can be learned. 4) There is no one right style of leadership.
Even though the behavioral approach to leadership failed to find the one right style of leadership, one of its original goals, it has contributed much to an understanding of leadership. (Montana, Charka Bibb) Contingency theory The contingency theory of leadership is credited to Fiddler(1 967-1971 ) who stated that, “leader- member relations, the task structure and the position power of the leader would determine the effectiveness of the type of leadership exercised”. Contingency theory is an attempt to deal with the complexity of the real world of leadership.
Contingency theories of leadership also called as situational theories are unified by little other than a common rejection of the notion that good leadership is a direct function of having specified and desirable leadership traits’ or a given set of leadership behaviors. Contingency theories argue that when it comes to relationship between leadership style and effectiveness in achieving a given set of goals, the proffered leadership style will vary as a function of the function of the situation.
Contingency theories examine a wide range of dimensions; seeking to develop relatively complex theories showing which type of leadership pattern is appropriate for a given cluster of situational factors. (Vass, Stewart 1998) Contingency theories of leadership suggest that, “there is no one best style of leadership. Successful and enduring leaders use different Tyler according to the nature of situation and the followers”. They know how to adopt a different style for a new situation, regardless of how effective any particular style has been in the past. The effectiveness of a particular style of leadership depends on the relationship between the characteristics of the leader, the followers and the situation”. Contingency theory is no new, the early Chinese ‘great plan’ can be interpret as advising leaders to act differently according to two kinds of contingency; the social context and the nature of the followers or subordinates. ( Carrageen 1970) New leadership (Blake 1989) The concept of transformational leadership arose from the study of rebel leadership and revolution in the early sass’s (Downtown 1973).
However it was political historian and biographer, James Mac Gregory Burns, who in a seminal book in 1978 first described’ transforming leadership and contrasted it with ‘transactional leadership'( Burns 1978) In 1980, What Barman(1996) calls ‘new leadership approaches’ appeared under the headings of: Transformational leader. Charismatic leader Visionary leader Together these labels revealed a conception of the leader as “someone who fines organizational reality through the articulation of a vision which is a reflection of how the leader defines an organization’s mission and the values which will support it”.
Thus, the new leadership approach is underpinned by a depiction of leaders as managers of meaning rather than in terms of influence process LEADERSHIP (Gilbert 2005) TRANSFORMATIONAL “Transformational leaders are those who stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the process, develop their own leadership capacity’. Transformational leaders help followers grow and develop onto leaders by responding to individual followers” needs by empowering them and by aligning the objectives and goals if individual followers, the leader, the group and the larger organization.
More evidence has accumulated to demonstrate the transformational leadership can move followers to exceed expected performance, as well as lead to high levels of followers satisfaction and commitment to the group and organization (Bass 1995). Transformational leaders motivate others to do more than they originally intended and often even more than they thought possible. They set more challenging expectations and typically achieve higher performance. Transformational leaders also tend to have more committed and satisfied followers.
Moreover, transformational leaders empower followers and pay attention to their individual needs and personal development, , helping followers to develop their own leadership potential. (Bass, Origin 2006) Transformational leaders do more than ‘transact’ with subordinates or followers, and that is what makes a significant difference people’s motivation and development. They achieve ‘performance beyond expectations’ Transformational leadership makes a positive impact on empowerment, motivation and morality.
According to the Bass and Viola model, transformational leaders tend to use one or more of four xi’s: individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and idealized influence Individualized consideration: Transformational leaders display individualized consideration: they listen actively; they identify individuals’ personal concerns, needs and abilities; they provide strong support and listen carefully to others and also encourage then to do things which they otherwise would hesitate to do. Intellectual stimulation: Transformational leaders use intellectual stimulation. Eye present new ideas to followers and challenge them to think. They encourage imagination and creativity in rethinking assumptions. They provide new ways of thinking and also for problem solving. Inspirational motivation: Transformational leaders display inspirational motivation. They communicate a clear vision of possible future; They use easy and basic language that communicates key messages; They stress on followers role in the organization. Idealized influence: Transformational leaders display idealized influence, something closely related to charisma.
They express confidence in the vision; They take personal accessibility for actions; They act as strong role models. ( Bass, Viii 1994) CONCLUSION In the present world, leadership is very complex and hard thing to do. Every country has its own different types and kinds of people. All the theories of leadership sometimes completely fail and leaders have to take a new approach according to their thinking and the need of the followers. The focus of leadership has also shifted from being more male oriented to feminine world.
Females leaders sometimes need completely different approach to a problem, as otherwise the case would have been. Leadership is very vast term and still needs o be researched upon. Many researchers have described leadership but still various doubts and demands are there. References Bass M , Viola J (1994) Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leaders(3rd Eden) peg 50, 51 , 52. Sage Bass M Bernard, Origin E (2006) TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP (2ND EDITION) PEG 3, 4. RUTLEDGE Blake W (1994) current thinking about leadership( 1st Eden. ) peg 47.
Cosmic, Inc. Gill R (2006) theory and practice of leadership ( 3rd Eden) peg 37, 38. Sage. Gilbert P (2005) Leadership: Being effective and remaining human(last Eden) peg 48, 49. Russell house publishing. Montana J, Charka H ( 2006) Management (5th Eden) peg a 261, 261 b 263, 264. Baryons educational series. Minivan S (2005) Management: practice and principles ( 2nd Eden)peg 326, 327. New age publishers. Vass L, Stewart W (1998) O. B and public management (2nd Eden) peg 106, 107. Cry press. Vintage, Crotches L (1998) Street level leadership (3rd Eden) peg 77, 78. George university press. Http://www. Leadership. Com (electronically accessed on 15th DCE 2008) TASK 3rd Introduction Mahatma Gandhi Transformational leaders stimulate and inspire followers to achieve extraordinary outcomes and in the process develop their own leadership capacity. Transformational leaders motivate others to do more than they originally intended and often even more than they thought possible. Transformational leaders are team leaders and they act as catalyst of change e. G. Barry Poster. Transformational leaders are strategic visionaries, they have good freighter’s of things.
Transformational leaders raise our level of awareness, our level of consciousness about the significance and value of designated outcome, and ways of reaching them. Transformational leaders get us transcend our own self interest for the sake of team, organization or larger purpose. Mahatma Gandhi Born in septet 1870 Short, slim, distinctive and always used to wear traditional Indian dress. Gandhi was a lawyer and deeply religious person. Gandhi strongly believed in non- violence. Sandhog’s Behavior 1) Believed in action not just words, ‘do what i do. Not what i say. 2) Lived a simple life that he wanted other people to live. ) Choose causes which were important to his organization. Followed his vision despite consequences. S Bass and Viola (1994), Transformational leadership factors. IDEALIZED INFLUENCE: Indian independence (1916-1945). Gandhi opposed tyranny, oppression, racism and injustice. In 1919 Gandhi announced Straight which attracted millions of followers. Gandhi displayed faith in his core inspiration principles, beliefs and philosophy in a situation with no defined end game. Gandhi displayed belief in non-violent disobedience. INDIVIDUALIZED CONSIDERATION: Each follower is an individual; this was the basic premise of Sandhog’s vision.
Gandhi provided coaching and mentoring to his followers at public places. Gandhi encouraged and promoted Indian nationalism within individuals. INTELLECTUAL STIMULATION: Sandhog’s assumptions would almost certainly been questioned as part of the process with his supporters. Gandhi ad ability to generate more creative solutions to problems, making their own salt, clothes etc. INSPIRATIONAL MOTIVATION: Gandhi provides hope on the face of hopeless. Gandhi had organized his veteran supporters and villagers and inspired them with his goals for re- building an independent India.
Gandhi broke down the task into stages, starting with rebuilding schools, hospitals, with both challenged and re-enforced success. CONTEXT FITTING Gandhi is a transformational leader, from being a lawyer to a great leader tells it all. Sandhog’s main weapon for his success as a leader was his simplicity and his clear vision. Gandhi always titivated his followers to follow his footsteps and live life as simple as of Gandhi himself. Gandhi always stressed on non- violence, which was his main idealized influence on people.
Gandhi acted as strong role model for all the great people of that times, even various British officers followed Sandhog’s ideas. Gandhi has always been hope for hopeless, he was an inspiration to his followers. Gandhi always offered support and care, even to British people if they asked for help. World situation and leadership requirements change day by day. Sandhog’s era of leadership was simple and there were no technologies available. Sandhog’s art and style of leadership was very effective that time but if we look in to the present world now, this style and behavior of leadership will not work.
Life is so fast and no one has time to wait for things to happen, sophisticated technologies are available now, information and other necessary news are available at the touch of a button which was not the case at Sandhog’s time. Sandhog’s style of non- violence and own production will not work as people will not remain silent if they are targeted and production etc is a time consuming process. Various other leadership traits’ and styles of Gandhi are almost useless in the present world.