Leadership Theories and Recent Approaches to Leadership - Literature review Example

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1.0 Introduction Leadership is meant to offer direction, purpose and meaning which guides the activities of people while undertaking their activities. Yura (1976) points out that regardless of the goals, purpose of people they all have a basic commonality; they rely on leadership. Leadership is therefore one of the most important concepts that designate the nature of interaction within the group, as it is a number of practices for affecting the employees' attitudes as well as their behaviors in relation with their efforts to achieve the goals of the organization (Ashmawi, 2000). It is accepted worldwide that leadership plays an important role in an organization and it is a key factor to the success of any organization, this is evident from the point that many about leadership practices both in education and non-education settings have been carried out. This chapter presents literatures in the following order: definition of leadership, chronological overview of leadership study where this section looked at how leadership has been dealt with in early studies up to the current studies. These section details the theories and studies about leadership and the last part will look at the Islamic leadership. 2.1.1 Definition of Leadership The term ‘leader’ according to Bass (1990), is dated in the year 1300 in the English language while the term ‘leadership’ came late in the 19th century. Bass points out that even other modern languages did not have the word leadership in early days until recent times. Theorists have been able to come up with several theories about leadership. There are many definitions of leadership what it is all about and different environment on how it’s applied ranging from, education, politics, and religion among others. Despite all this definitions there is no solid agreement on definitions of leadership practices or styles. Despite the fact that most authorities agree that leadership practices can be learned, there is no one best leadership practice. Leadership is described as “activity of influencing people to cooperate towards same goal which they come to find desirable” (Tead, 1935). This statement brings an understanding that to have leadership there must be two parties; those leading and those who are following. Slater (1995), asserts that for leaders to exist there must be followers and vice versa. In a study carried out by Stogdill and Coons while focusing on two aspects of leadership behavior; what does an individual do while he operates as a leader and how does he about what he does, they defined leadership as “… is the behavior of an individual when he is directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal” (Stogdill and Coons, 1957). Hersy and Blanchard define leadership as “the process of influencing the activities of an individual or group in efforts toward goal achievement in a given situation” (Hersey and Blanchard, 1997, p 84). The above definitions indicate that leadership entails three variables; leaders, followers and other situational variables which are agreed by Barnard (1969) in his study “The Nature of Leadership”, who affirms that leadership depends on; the individual, the followers and the conditions. The impact of numerous definition and uncertainty of leadership definition is recognized by many writers and researchers. In his literature review, Halpin (1958) stated that: Leadership has been defined in numerous ways. The definition proposed here derives its value primarily from the relation to the body of theory being developed. In some respects it is more comprehensive that other more usual definitions; in others it is more restricted. To lead is to engage in an act that initiates of structure-in-interaction or part of the process of solving problems. Stogdill who wrote a whole chapter just to define leadership acknowledges the above observations by Halpin where he noted the complexities of defining leadership. He states that there are as many definitions of leadership as there are people who have made an attempt to define it. He observes that there are similarities in their definition which can facilitate the classification of the definitions (Stogdill, 1974). Gerth and Mills (1953), after research and theory on leadership practices was developed in 1945 stated that in order to uncover leadership concept, one must pay close attention to four most important aspects; the traits and motives of the leaders as human, perception that the public holds of him, the role of that leader plays and the context in which that individual and the followers are involved. This observation is well observed in my research where the researcher is looking at the attributes and practices of leaders, the perception of the faculty members (followers), the role which this leaders play in the University in addition, the institutional context where the Islamic leadership practices is observed given that the study is in an Islamic dominant country. 2.2 Chronological overview Authoritative leadership, democratic leadership and laissezi-faire type of leadership were approaches to early leadership themes. Authoritative leadership practice was regarded as directive, democratic leader was characterized by the ability to have a group discussion and decision making while laissez faire was characterized by a leader who gives complete freedom to the group (Sealy 1985). Lippet and White (1939), did a study using this approach of leadership when they were studying the patterns of aggressive behavior in teenage adolescents boys. Their methodology forms a basis of the current approaches to leadership practices. 2.2.0 Leadership Theories There has been impacting theories about leadership designed this was as a result of a need for consisted and universal definition of leadership. According to Trait approach which was established in 1940s states that leadership is inborn. Between late 1940s and late 1960s, a behavioral approach was designed which advocates that leader behavior has an impact in the effectiveness in leadership. Contingency was a popular approach in 1980s where the effectiveness of any leadership dependents. Transactional and transformational leadership concepts were introduced by Burns (cited in Deluga, 1995) 2.2.1 Behavioral Theories of Leadership Robbins (1998), states that behavioral studies of leadership is primarily meant to understand the behaviors which differentiates leaders from non-leaders. A leadership style is as a result of several given behaviors of a leader as advocated by Behavioral theories of leadership. Leadership style is a unique behavior that a leader executes while in the formal position of leadership (Campell, et al., 1996). The following are several studies carried out on behavioral theories of leadership: 2.2.1.1 The Hawthorne Studies A group of women in a workshop in US who were assembling relay switches for telephones were used to carry out the study. Hawthirne was the workshop of the Electric plant where the study was done between 1927 and 1932. The impact of changes induced to these women who were put in a room was observed and noted how it affects the production of women in their work. The study concluded that if the employee is given good working condition their productivity increases, this conclusion was arrived after seeing the increase in productivity after changing the working conditions of women. They felt that management cared for them hence increases their effort. According to Robert & Hunt (1991), sates that ‘Hawthorne effect’ resulted from the perception that one is contributing in something import hence they work harder. This study shows that leadership is very import in the perception of the employees in a given organization. If leaders encourage workers and provide conducive working environment the staff or those that he/she is leading will work harder. This study is very import to my study because it looks at how productivity is affected by the management. The researcher in this study is looking at how workers perceive their leaders. 2.2.1.2 The Lowa studies A study was conducted by scientists from the University of Lowa with an aim of identifying behaviors of leaders. Three leadership styles were defined which were used to determine how they affect the productivity and attitudes of the workers under that leader. The leadership styles established is: Democratic leader, they defined this type of leader as one who encourages discussion and seeks the input of the staff in making final decision. The staff members are given a chance to express their ideas and give suggestions. The second leadership style defined was Laissez-faire leaders, this is a leader who gives complete freedom to the staff and gives them a chance to make decisions on their own. These are leaders who do not provide directions, do not make final decisions on issues and comes up to solve a problem later. Authoritarian leaders is a style of leadership define by scientists on Lowa studies. They describe these leaders as directive and staff members do not participate in decision making process. They are leaders who are in control of all projects or tasks under their watch. Democratic leadership according to the study was the most preferred leadership style. The preference may be attributed to the fact that staff feel they are important and needed if they are allowed to make decisions or provide their ideas. Staff members preferred Laissez-faire leadership style over Authoritarian leadership style. In terms of productivity, democratic leadership was lower than authoritarian leadership while Laissez-faire leaders had a higher productivity score than authoritarian leaders (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 1996). The Lowa study was investigating the effect of leadership style to the staff productivity and attitude. From the study, leadership styles were designed and used to in the study. this study rolls out a foundation of the study that the researcher is undertaking in describing some of the leadership styles that were used. This study had only three styles of leadership behavior my study will have a full range of leadership practices in the study. This will enable the staff members to describe fully the behaviors of their leaders. The study presents findings only of three styles, this shows that there is a need for more research to be carried out on a wide range of leadership styles hence this study is important. 2.2.1.3 The Ohio state Studies This study is unique given that it had contribution from different disciplines such as researchers from psychology field , sociology and economics. Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) were used to collect data by all the studies. The LBDQ were used to investigate the leadership behavior in many fields ranging from Air force and Navy commanders, administrators and managers in civil organization, academic institutions and organization (Stodgill & Coons, 1957). The aim of these questionnaires was to capture the way leaders behave will discharging duties. The interest was on how leaders carry out their duties, do they involve the staff or not, and what their general position as leaders in accomplishing tasks. These questionnaires described the leader with the objective of establishing their leadership methods and strategies(Hemphill & Coons, 1957). The Ohio state study carried out factor analysis on the Leader Behavior Description Questions where there were two main findings on leadership behavior. The first behavior was consideration as a behavior of a leader which defined a relationship attributed by warmness and friendliness to the group members and caring of the group welfare. Another behavior which describes a leader who takes initiatives and creates new ways of solving problems is the initiating structure (Hemphil, 1957). Halpin disagrees with the leadership behavior of initiating structure which according to him it is a representation of behavior of any leader. He however agrees that consideration is a leadership behavior that establishes the communication channel and procedures in the organization (as cited in Holy & Miskel, 1991). 2.2.1.4 University of Michigan Studies This study concluded that there are two dimensions of leadership, task oriented and soci-economic dimension supportiveness. The study also point out that the style of a leader can either be defined as product-oriented or Employee-centered. Leaders who are considered to practice product-oriented style in their leadership are characterized by their desire technical aspect of the task being undertaken. Supportive environment where staff are given a chance to make decisions on their own is characterized by an employee-centered leadership style (Holy & Miskel, 1991). This study considers a leader successful if they can help the staff or followers harmoniously relate with each other at both levels. The levels of relationship in the study are personal relationship such as family relationship to organizational relationship. A successful leader should be able to guide and provide an environment that followers will grow in both dimensions. In their work Katz and Kahn (1966) states that leadership is not like computers in an organization where they comply with commands but humans that are in position and have authority. They further point out that organizational requirements and personal requirements can be achieved by a leader who encourage loyalty and care for one another. 2.2.1.5 The Managerial Grid This is a study that designed a framework that describes how leaders are concerned how tasks are accomplished and the followers. The task accomplishment concerns can be described by the involvement of the leaders in the end results, their mission in making sure that the tsk is accomplished and their concerns about the profits resulting from the task carried out. Group members and followers are the other framework component that leaders are concerned about. Leaders who are concerned more about the results of the task rather than followers are described as materialistic or opportunistic. The study characterized this leader with promoting personal gain at the expense of the followers. The grid provides values 1-9 on the x and y axis where materialistic leaders are rated as 9,1 and 1,9 along the grid continuum. The grid score of 9,9 is desirable and referred to as team management where a leader is not only concerned about the production but they are equally concerned about the followers. This brings high productivity; followers are more satisfied and become more creative in their work (DuBrin, 1997). 2.2.2 Trait Theories of Leadership There was a need to study the traits of leaders given a wide spread belief in 1950s that leadership just like other factors like intelligence was inherited (Mahçe Derel, 2003). The ability for one to lead correlates with other factors such as intelligence, status and liberal parents (Carlson, 1996). This theory claims that leadership ability is inborn. Aristole a great philosopher asserts that “form the hour of birth; some are marked out for subjection, others for rule.” (as cited in Hoy & Miskel, 1991). Trait theories of leadership however, had shortcoming one, it does not categorically state which traits are import for a successful leader. Secondly, there is no clear distinction of the traits where some overlap each other for instance stating that traits such as tact, judgment and common sense are separate which they cover each other. The third shortcoming is where the traits that help the leader are successful and those that enable the leader to maintain the success are not differentiated. Lastly most of the studies on this theory are descriptive, whereby they fail to study personality of a given individual (Gouldner, 1965). Although there were many studies on traits, they all contradicted each other whereby findings in one study do not support findings from other studies. Gibb points out that lack of comparability and proper measurement of data from several studies on traits is the root cause of failure to have an outline of leadership traits theory (cited in Campell, et al., 1996). This implies that this theory does not give consisted findings given that there is no outline for carrying out the research. Studies recently adopted an outline of primarily focusing on managers and administrators to establish their traits as leaders. On this point, Gary Yukl throws weight on leader effectiveness and rejects traits as a measure of one becoming a successful leader. He argues that traits and effectiveness of a leader are different subjects (Hoy & Miskel, 1991). 2.2.3 Contingency theories of leadership Contingency is a view that resulted from theory of systems and from the impact this theory had on other theories such as organizational and administrative. This model of leadership suggested that satisfaction and follower performance are directly affected by the behaviors of a leader. Satisfaction and follower production occurs when the leaders interact with various variables such as their position, their followers, the organizational environment both internal and external and him as a leader. The variable that influence the effectiveness and leadership style of the leader according to the findings of the study are influenced by the nature of the task they are to do, the relationship between the leader and the followers. Manahana and Hengst (1982) in their study affirm that followers can either be favorable or unfavorable. Below are studies carried out on the contingency theory of leadership by several researchers. 2.2.3.1 Fiedler’s Contingency model Improvement of performance in an organization according to Fiedler (1967), comes up only if the followers are more understanding to the leadership style and the factors that affect the leaders in their performance. He further points out that a state in which the leader adapts to the situation or the situation fitting in to the leaders’ style of leadership is a key to performance improvement in an organization. On the leadership traits, Fiedler (1962), does not strongly support the idea that it exists but he makes assumption that if leadership traits exists then they interact more with the external effects. Feidler further argues that a leader is basically affected by the environment in which they operate in. It is therefore difficult to point out traits that enable on to be effective leader because this if totally different from the personality of an individual. Effectiveness of a leader according to Feidler is the consistent and measurable attributes of a leader to successfully lead his followers which sets a clear demarcation between effective and ineffective leaders. These are the traits of an effective leader although the behavior of this type of leader is not explicit until they interact with the environment. In a study carried out by Fiedler in which the study sought the opinion of the leaders in relation to the preferred co-worker. A co-work was somebody the leaders would work with in discharging their duty. The questionnaires designed were called Least Preferred Co-worker Questionnaire (LPC). Leaders who were positive and favorable to their least preferred co-workers were referred to as ‘relationship motivated’ and leaders who were negative and unfavorable to their least preferred co-workers were classified as ‘task motivated’ (Monahan & Hengst, 1982). Fiedler’s theory was updated and named Cognitive Resource Theory, this theory acknowledges that abilities and a leader’s directive or non-directive behavior is drawn from cognitive resources. Experience according to Cognitive resource theory is more important than the ability of the leader when a leader is under stress. The impact of a leader is less felt when the followers give a low support to their leader. Non-directive leaders receive more support from the followers, the ability of the followers is important to non-directive leader (Schermerhorn, Hunt & Osborn, 1994). 2.2.3.2 Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational theory This theory states that in a situation where individuals or a group are aimed at achieving a given goal, leadership is that process that encourages or influences these individuals or followers to achieve that goal. The Situational theory defines leadership as a function of three factors, the leader, follower and the situation which is represented by a formula L= f(l, f, s). This study aimed at looking at the behaviors of the leader in relation to the situation as opposed to trait of leadership theory which assesses the inborn character of the leader. This theory argues that a leader behaves in a particular manner basing on the followers and the situation in which they are leading. The leadership personality is not put into consideration while studying this theory. The study concluded that education, training and varying situations are important things that can increase the effectiveness of a leader. Hersey and Blanchard (1969) agreed to this theory where they said that a leader can be trained to adapt to different situation because the ability of a leader to adapt to a given situation is import to their success. The study points out that a theoretical model which helps leaders to adapt to situations can be developed. The model assures that effectiveness of the leadership is contingent given the support or how willing the followers are. This model defines two important components; one component describes the skills and knowledge that followers or individuals in a group can contribute when solving given problem. The second component deals with the readiness or willingness of the followers in carrying out a given task in order to achieve a given goal. DuBrin (1995) explains that situational leadership theory relies more on relationship behavior than task behavior which increases the willingness of the followers. This theory therefore states that the effectiveness of a leader is not based on their personality or inborn traits but is based on the situation, followers and the leader himself. 2.2.3.3 Leader Member Exchane model This theory also referred to as Vertical Dyad Exchange Model which disagrees with the well known assumption that leadership behavior is consistent was developed by George Graen and his Group. According to this theory, for instance inconsistence in leadership behavior occurs when a leader is friendly and considerate to one group but be unfriendly and strict to another group of his followers (DuBrin, 1997). The leader-followers relationship is evaluated as either in-group or out-group. In-group members is a group of followers that have positive attitude and hold similar opinion about values as the leader wile out-group leaders don’t have much in common with the leader and they act rebelliously towards the leader. A leader is able to get a good team work from in-group unlike the out-group (1997). 2.2.3.4 House’s Path-Goal Theory Robert House was the founder of this theory which focuses on how the expectations of the followers are influenced by their leaders. If the leaders’ behavior is satisfactory to the followers according to the model proposed by Robert House is regarded as acceptable (Kreitner & Kinicki, 1995). The model further states that if a leader is able to tackle the factors that hinder the success of task and further provide support and guidance to the followers reward followers whenever they successfully is regarded as motivational leader. House states that despite the challenges faced by a leader, one must stick to the right path to achieve goals. Contrary to Fiedler’s strong argument that a leader exhibits only one dominant leadership style, House claims that leaders can demonstrate more that leadership style. An approachable and friendly leader is referred to as supportive leader; he is concerned with the welfare of the followers and their needs. Directive leader provider directions to the followers while doing a given task. A leader who takes part in the decision making process with the followers is referred to as participative leader. A leader who is characterized by setting high standard goals which are challenging to followers and encourages them to work hard is an achievement/result-oriented leader (Kreitner & Kinicki, 1995). 2.2.4 Recent Approaches to Leadership According to Robbins (1998), recent theories on leadership have decided to go on a simple and ordinary way of analyzing the leadership behavior. These theories provide the study in a manner that is easily understood and traceable. Some of these theories include: 2.2.4.1 Charismatic Leadership Theory Charisma is simply defined as extraordinary character of a person. Sinha(1995) defined it as “magical aura”. This quality can be exhibited by few leaders. Max Weber insists that authority is based on rights, privileges and traditions and the charisma of the leader (as cited in Sinha, 1995). A charismatic leader is seen as one with extraordinary ability, above human or a super human being who can provide solutions and direction to followers whenever there is a challenging case or catastrophic situations. This type of leader becomes an inspiration and admirer to the followers (Sinha, 1995). Charismatic leader according to Robert House can greatly influence the followers in a positive way. He points out nine effects to the followers as; it draws readiness and obedience of the followers to the leader, trust of the members to their leader and in his directions offered to them, followers develop affection for the leader, they admire and want to be identified with this leader, they involve in the group mission emotionally, there is growth of belief between the group and the leader and are willing to hang on even on the most challenging missions because they belief that with their leader they will achieve(as cited in DuBrin, 1995). In his work DuBrin (1995), states that the effects of a leader that were defined by House were classified as referent power, expert power or job involvement. Referent power is where the leader impacts the followers positively through his characters and traits, expert power is where the skills and knowledge of the leader influences the followers while job involvement is where the followers are encouraged by the leader to accomplish given task. In another study conducted by Bass (1990), he classified charismatic leaders into five categorizes; Personalized charismatic, is the type of a leader who when the help will be beneficial to him he offers it and is not strict and supports to the individuals of the group to achieve that goal. Socialized charismatic; considers the interest of the followers and offer his help and support ensure that they achieve this goal. Divine charismatic; is a leader perceived to have a divine gift or grace. Personal charismatic; is one whose influence to the followers is drawn from their character and traits not basing on their position in the organization. Office holder charismatic; is a leader who gets respect from their position in the organization but not from their characters and traits. 2.2.4.2 Transformational and Transactional leadership 2.2.4.3 Visionary Leadership 2.2.4.4 Educational Leadership Theory 2.2.4.5 Attribution theory of leadership 2.2.5 Frames of leadership 2.2.5.1 Structural leadership 2.2.5.2 Human resource Leadership 2.2.5.3 Political leadership 2.2.5.4 Symbolic leadership 2.3 Islamic leadership 2.3.1 Educational Islamic leadership 2.3.2 Gender and Islamic leadership 2.3.3 Islamic leadership in business 2.3.4 Islam and Leadership 2.4 Summary Read More