Leadership Theories

For decades, leadership theories have been the source of numerous studies. In reality
as well as in practice, many have tried to define what allows authentic leaders to stand
apart from the mass! Hence, there as many theories on leadership as there are
philosophers, researchers and professors that have studied and ultimately published
their leadership theory. A great article to read before diving into the theories is the The
Philosophical Foundations of Leadership

Theories are commonly categorized by which aspect is believed to define the leader the
most. The most widespread one's are: Great Man Theory, Trait Theory, Behavioural
Theories, Contingency Theories, Transactional Theories and Transformational Theories.

leadership Theories

Great Man Theory (1840s)

The Great Man theory evolved around the mid 19th century. Even though no one was
able to identify with any scientific certainty, which human characteristic or combination
of, were responsible for identifying great leaders. Everyone recognized that just as the
name suggests; only a man could have the characteristic (s) of a great leader.

The Great Man theory assumes that the traits of leadership are intrinsic. That simply
means that great leaders are born...
they are not made. This theory sees great leaders as those who are destined by birth to
become a leader. Furthermore, the belief was that great leaders will rise when
confronted with the appropriate situation. The theory was popularized by Thomas
Carlyle, a writer and teacher. Just like him, the Great Man theory was inspired by the
study of influential heroes. In his book "On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in
History", he compared a wide array of heroes.

In 1860, Herbert Spencer, an English philosopher disputed the great man theory by
affirming that these heroes are simply the product of their times and their actions the
results of social conditions.

Trait Theory (1930's - 1940's)

The trait leadership theory believes that people are either born or are made with certain
qualities that will make them excel in leadership roles. That is, certain qualities such as
intelligence, sense of responsibility, creativity and other values puts anyone in the
shoes of a good leader. In fact, Gordon Allport, an American psychologist,"...identified
almost 18,000 English personality-relevant terms" (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman,
2003, p. 3).

The trait theory of leadership focused on analyzing mental, physical and social
characteristic in order to gain more understanding of what is the characteristic or the
combination of characteristics that are common among leaders.

There were many shortfalls with the trait leadership theory. However, from a
psychology of personalities approach, Gordon Allport's studies are among the first ones
and have brought, for the study of leadership, the behavioural approach.

 In the 1930s the field of Psychometrics was in its early years.

 Personality traits measurement weren't reliable across studies.
 Study samples were of low level managers
 Explanations weren't offered as to the relation between each characteristic and
its impact on leadership.
 The context of the leader wasn't considered.

Many studies have analyzed the traits among existing leaders in the hope of uncovering
those responsible for ones leadership abilities! In vain, the only characteristics that
were identified among these individuals were those that were slightly taller and slightly
more intelligent!
Behavioural Theories (1940's - 1950's)

In reaction to the trait leadership theory, the behavioural theories are offering a new
perspective, one that focuses on the behaviours of the leaders as opposed to their
mental, physical or social characteristics. Thus, with the evolutions in psychometrics,
notably the factor analysis, researchers were able to measure the cause an effects
relationship of specific human behaviours from leaders. From this point forward anyone
with the right conditioning could have access to the once before elite club of naturally
gifted leaders. In other words, leaders are made not born.

The behavioural theories first divided leaders in two categories. Those that were
concerned with the tasks and those concerned with the people. Throughout the
literature these are referred to as different names, but the essence are identical.

Associated Theories

 The Managerial Grid Model / Leadership Grid

 Role Theory

Contingency Theories (1960's)

The Contingency Leadership theory argues that there is no single way of leading and
that every leadership style should be based on certain situations, which signifies that
there are certain people who perform at the maximum level in certain places; but at
minimal performance when taken out of their element.

To a certain extent contingency leadership theories are an extension of the trait theory,
in the sense that human traits are related to the situation in which the leaders exercise
their leadership. It is generally accepted within the contingency theories that leader are
more likely to express their leadership when they feel that their followers will be
responsive.

Associated Theories

 Fiedler's contingency theory

 Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory
 Path-goal theory
 Vroom-Yetton-Jago decision-making model of leadership
 Cognitive Resource Theory
 Strategic Contingencies Theory

Transactional leadership Theories (1970's)

Transactional theories, also known as exchange theories of leadership, are
characterized by a transaction made between the leader and the followers. In fact, the
theory values a positive and mutually beneficial relationship.

For the transactional theories to be effective and as a result have motivational value,
the leader must find a means to align to adequately reward (or punish) his follower, for
performing leader-assigned task. In other words, transactional leaders are most
efficient when they develop a mutual reinforcing environment, for which the individual
and the organizational goals are in sync.

The transactional theorists state that humans in general are seeking to maximize
pleasurable experiences and to diminish un-pleasurable experiences. Thus, we are more
likely to associate ourselves with individuals that add to our strengths.

Associated Theories

 Leader-member Exchange (LMX)

Transformational Leadership Theories (1970s)

The Transformational Leadership theory states that this process is by which a person
interacts with others and is able to create a solid relationship that results in a high
percentage of trust, that will later result in an increase of motivation, both intrinsic and
extrinsic, in both leaders and followers.

The essence of transformational theories is that leaders transform their followers

through their inspirational nature and charismatic personalities. Rules and regulations
are flexible, guided by group norms. These attributes provide a sense of belonging for
the followers as they can easily identify with the leader and its purpose.

Leadership theories seek to explain how and why certain people become leaders. Such theories
often focus on the characteristics of leaders, but some attempt to identify the behaviors that
people can adopt to improve their own leadership abilities in different situations.

Early debates on the psychology of leadership often suggested that such skills were simply
abilities that people were born with. Some more recent theories propose that possessing certain
traits may help make people nature leaders, but that experience and situational variables also
play a critical role.

A Closer Look at Leadership Theories

As interest in the psychology of leadership has increased over the last 100 years, a number of
different leadership theories have been introduced to explain exactly how and why certain people
become great leaders.

What exactly makes a great leader? Do certain personality traits make people better suited to
leadership roles, or do characteristics of the situation make it more likely that certain people will
take charge? When we look at the leaders around us – be it our employer or the President – we
might find ourselves wondering exactly why these individuals excel in such positions.

People have long been interested in leadership throughout human history, but it has only been
relatively recently that a number of formal leadership theories have emerged. Interest in
leadership increased during the early part of the twentieth century. Early leadership theories
focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders and followers, while subsequent theories
looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill levels. If you'd like to know more
about your own leadership style, this quiz can help you learn more.

While many different leadership theories have emerged, most can be classified as one of eight
major types:

1. "Great Man" Theories

Have you ever heard someone described as "born to lead?" According to this point of view, great
leaders are simply born with the necessary internal characteristics such as charisma, confidence,
intelligence, and social skills that make them natural-born leaders.

Great man theories assume that the capacity for leadership is inherent – that great leaders are
born, not made. These theories often portray great leaders as heroic, mythic and destined to rise
to leadership when needed. The term "Great Man" was used because, at the time, leadership was
thought of primarily as a male quality, especially in terms of military leadership.

2. Trait Theories

Similar in some ways to Great Man theories, trait theories assume that people inherit certain
qualities and traits that make them better suited to leadership. Trait theories often identify a
particular personality or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders. For example, traits
like extroversion, self-confidence, and courage are all traits that could potentially be linked to
great leaders.

If particular traits are key features of leadership, then how do we explain people who possess
those qualities but are not leaders? This question is one of the difficulties in using trait theories to
explain leadership. There are plenty of people who possess the personality traits associated with
leadership, yet many of these people never seek out positions of leadership.

3. Contingency Theories

Contingency theories of leadership focus on particular variables related to the environment that
might determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation. According to
this theory, no leadership style is best in all situations.

Leadership researchers White and Hodgson suggest that truly effective leadership is not just
about the qualities of the leader, it is about striking the right balance between behaviors, needs,
and context. Good leaders are able to assess the needs of their followers, take stock of the
situation, and then adjust their behaviors accordingly. Success depends on a number of variables
including the leadership style, qualities of the followers and aspects of the situation.

4. Situational Theories

Situational theories propose that leaders choose the best course of action based upon situational
variables. Different styles of leadership may be more appropriate for certain types of decision-
making. For example, in a situation where the leader is the most knowledgeable and experienced
member of a group, an authoritarian style might be most appropriate. In other instances where
group members are skilled experts, a democratic style would be more effective.

5. Behavioral Theories

Behavioral theories of leadership are based upon the belief that great leaders are made, not born.
Consider it the flip-side of the Great Man theories. Rooted in behaviorism, this leadership theory
focuses on the actions of leaders, not on mental qualities or internal states. According to this
theory, people can learn to become leaders through teaching and observation.

6. Participative Theories

Participative leadership theories suggest that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the input
of others into account. These leaders encourage participation and contributions from group
members and help group members feel more relevant and committed to the decision-making
process. In participative theories, however, the leader retains the right to allow the input of
others.

7. Management Theories

Management theories, also known as transactional theories, focus on the role of supervision,
organization and group performance. These theories base leadership on a system of rewards and
punishments. Managerial theories are often used in business; when employees are successful,
they are rewarded; when they fail, they are reprimanded or punished. Learn more about theories
of transactional leadership.
8. Relationship Theories

Relationship theories, also known as transformational theories, focus upon the connections
formed between leaders and followers. Transformational leaders motivate and inspire people by
helping group members see the importance and higher good of the task. These leaders are
focused on the performance of group members, but also want each person to fulfill his or her
potential. Leaders with this style often have high ethical and moral standards.

Five Leadership Theories and How to

Apply Them

When Kathleen Yosko, now CEO of Northwestern Medicine’s Marianjoy

Rehabilitation Center, began her first job as a hospital president, there was no
onboarding process planned, and no one to welcome her. Thinking it was a
mistake, Yosko called her headquarters for advice. They told her, “Just do
whatever a president does.”

Fortunately, Yosko was a seasoned leader and she intuited where to start. But
for many others, our first forays into leadership felt much like Yosko’s first day:
knowing how to start was not obvious. In many companies, individuals are
promoted because of their technical skill – they are gifted engineers,
accountants, or marketers – but that does not mean they are prepared for
leadership. Leadership is a skill that can be learned, but it takes intentionality.

In the past half century, the study of leadership has grown, offering many new
theories and frameworks for exploring what it means to be a leader, and how
to do leadership well. In this article, we outline five current leadership theories,
and offer resources and suggestions for integrating the theories into your own
leadership practice. We will explore:

1. Transformational Leadership
2. Leader-Member Exchange Theory
3. Adaptive Leadership
4. Strengths-Based Leadership
5. Servant Leadership

But First, A Quick Review of Leadership History

Before we begin, we need to put leadership theory and practice in the context
of history, to understand how the field of study has evolved. The earliest
theories of leadership were the Great Man Theories, which emerged in the
late 1800s. (Perhaps you can see one primary fault with these theories, just
from their name: they assumed only half the world’s population could even be
considered for leadership.) The Great Man concept evolved into trait-based
theories of leadership, which defined leadership by a leader’s characteristics,
most of which were considered innate. You were either lucky enough to be
born with them, or you weren’t. (Starting, first, with a Y chromosome.) For
many of us, our first understanding of leadership may have aligned with these
theories: leaders were often men with dominant personalities. We still see this
theory at play unconsciously today, when someone is overlooked for a
leadership role because of a quiet personality.

In the middle of the last century, the study of leadership shifted from the study
of traits to the study of behaviors: not who the leader is but what the
leader does. This allowed for an understanding that leadership could be
developed in others. The most prominent leadership theories today build on
this understanding, and begin to integrate the perspective of followers and the
contextual circumstances in which leaders and followers interact. As business,
and our understanding of human nature, grows more complex, leadership
theories and frameworks should evolve to accommodate the new contexts
and understandings.

De fi ni ng Le a de rshi p
Before we unpack contemporary theories of leadership, we need to define the
term itself. Leadership theory scholar Dr. Peter Northouse defines leadership
as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to
achieve a common goal.” This definition makes clear that leadership is not a
trait or behavior, and it is not a position. You are not made a leader by your
job title, you are made a leader by your influence.
Finally, contemporary theories of leadership wrestle with the motivations of
leaders: can you be a leader if your goal is selfish or even malicious? The
classic question is, “Was Adolf Hitler a leader?” Theories of leadership must
wrestle with the moral implications of a leader’s motivations. As you’ll see in
several of the theories below, many theories would answer the question of
Hitler with a firm no: Hitler was a dictator, but not a leader. He had positional
authority, but did not show true leadership.

To begin our exploration of leadership theories, let’s start with one of the most
researched and referenced today, transformational leadership.

Dow nl oa d our 1 -pa ge ove r vi ew of the

new E xe c uti ve M. S . i n Va l ues -Dri ve n Le a ders hi p Progra m , w he re
yo u’ l l fi nd new w a ys to a ppl y l e a de rs hi p the or y.

Transformational Leadership
The concepts of transformational leadership were brought to prominence by
political sociologist James MacGregor Burns, in the late 1970s. Burns
identified two types of leadership,

 Transactional: where a leader influences others by what they offer in

exchange, the transaction;
 Transformational: where a leader connects with followers in such a way
that it raises the level of motivation and morality.

Those two words – motivation and morality – are important, as it demands

that transformational leaders be committed to a collective good. This may be a
societal good, such as starting a community center or improving air quality, or
a more personalized good, such as helping direct reports reach their own
potential.

Ac ti v a ti ng tra ns forma ti ona l le a de rs hi p:

If Kathleen Yosko, the hospital CEO who was thrown into leadership with little
direction, wanted to employ transformational leadership strategies in her work,
she might start with four factors researchers find present in transformational
leaders. Northouse (2016) outlines these factors, which can serve as a
starting place for test driving transformational leadership:

1. Idealized influence, or charisma: Transformational leaders have an

uncanny ability to make you want to follow the vision they establish.
2. Inspirational motivation: Communication is a vehicle of inspiration for
transformational leaders; they use words to encourage others and inspire
action.
3. Intellectual stimulation: Transformational leaders stretch others to think
more deeply, challenge assumptions, and innovate.
4. Individualized concern: Finally, while focused on the common good,
transformational leaders show care and concern for individuals.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

The concept of individualized concern has some carry-over to our second
theory, Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX). To understand this theory,
you only need to think back to junior high: almost every student could be
divided into two categories, popular or unpopular.

LMX theory explains that in any group or organization, there are in-group
members and out-group members. In-group members work well with the
leader, have a personality that fits with the leader’s, and are often willing to
take on extra tasks or responsibilities. Out-group members are less
compatible with the leader; they may hold dissenting opinions, have clashing
personalities, or be less willing to take on extra assignments. Not surprisingly,
in-group members are more likely to earn promotions; out-group members are
more likely to leave.

Ac ti v a ti ng LMX the ory :

For followers, applying the concepts of LMX theory is easy: align yourself with
the leader, take on extra tasks, and expect positive results. For leaders, LMX
offers a greater challenge, because making your team as productive as
possible will mean finding ways to turn out-group members into in-group
members. Individualized concern, the final factor of transformational
leadership, may offer one path to converting out-group members.

Additionally, LMX theory has important implications for improving diversity and
inclusion. If minorities, women, or people with disabilities routinely identify as
out-group members, the leader should ask the question, “What is required to
be an in-group member here, and are we creating unintentional barriers for
others?”
The Four Core Theory Groups
Let's look at each of the four core groups of theory, and explore some of the
tools and models that apply with each. (Keep in mind that there are many
other theories out there.)

1. Trait Theories – What Type of Person Makes a Good

Leader?
Trait theories argue that effective leaders share a number of common
personality characteristics, or "traits."

Early trait theories said that leadership is an innate, instinctive quality that you
do or don't have. Thankfully, we've moved on from this idea, and we're
learning more about what we can do to develop leadership qualities within
ourselves and others.

Trait theories help us identify traits and qualities (for example, integrity,
empathy, assertiveness, good decision-making skills, and likability) that are
helpful when leading others.

However, none of these traits, nor any specific combination of them, will
guarantee success as a leader.

Traits are external behaviors that emerge from the things going on within our
minds – and it's these internal beliefs and processes that are important for
effective leadership.

We explore some of the traits and skills that you need to be a good leader in
our articles What a Real Leader Knows , Level 5 Leadership , and What is
Leadership?

2. Behavioral Theories – What Does a Good Leader Do?

Behavioral theories focus on how leaders behave. For instance, do leaders
dictate what needs to be done and expect cooperation? Or do they involve
their teams in decision-making to encourage acceptance and support?
In the 1930s, Kurt Lewin developed a framework based on a leader's
behavior. He argued that there are three types of leaders:

1. Autocratic leaders make decisions without consulting their teams. This style
of leadership is considered appropriate when decisions need to be made
quickly, when there's no need for input, and when team agreement isn't
necessary for a successful outcome.
2. Democratic leaders allow the team to provide input before making a
decision, although the degree of input can vary from leader to leader. This
style is important when team agreement matters, but it can be difficult to
manage when there are lots of different perspectives and ideas.
3. Laissez-faire leaders don't interfere; they allow people within the team to
make many of the decisions. This works well when the team is highly
capable, is motivated, and doesn't need close supervision. However, this
behavior can arise because the leader is lazy or distracted; and this is
where this style of leadership can fail.
Clearly, how leaders behave affects their performance. Researchers have
realized, though, that many of these leadership behaviors are appropriate at
different times. The best leaders are those who can use many different
behavioral styles, and choose the right style for each situation.

Our article "Laissez Faire" versus Micromanagement looks at how you can
find the right balance between autocratic and laissez-faire styles of leadership,
while our article on the Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid helps you decide how
to behave as a leader, depending on your concerns for people and for
production.

3. Contingency Theories – How Does the Situation

Influence Good Leadership?
The realization that there is no one correct type of leader led to theories that
the best leadership style depends on the situation. These theories try to
predict which style is best in which circumstance.

How to Coach Toolkit Offer

FREE when you join the Mind Tools Club before midnight, PST June 21.
Find Out More

For instance, when you need to make quick decisions, which style is best?
When you need the full support of your team, is there a more effective way to
lead? Should a leader be more people-oriented or task-oriented? These are
all questions that contingency leadership theories try to address.
Popular contingency-based models include House's Path-Goal
Theory and Fiedler's Contingency Model .
You can also use the Leadership Process Model to understand how your
situation affects other factors that are important for effective leadership, and
how, in turn, these affect your leadership.

4. Power and Influence Theories – What Is the Source of

the Leader's Power?
Power and influence theories of leadership take an entirely different approach
– these are based on the different ways that leaders use power and influence
to get things done, and they look at the leadership styles that emerge as a
result.

Perhaps the best-known of these theories is French and Raven's Five Forms of
Power . This model highlights three types of positional power – legitimate,
reward, and coercive – and two sources of personal power – expert and
referent (your personal appeal and charm). The model suggests that using
personal power is the better alternative, and that you should work on
building expert power (the power that comes with being a real expert in the
job) because this is the most legitimate source of personal power.
Another leadership style that uses power and influence is transactional
leadership . This approach assumes that people do things for reward and for
no other reason. Therefore, it focuses on designing tasks and reward
structures. While this may not be the most appealing leadership strategy in
terms of building relationships and developing a highly motivating work
environment, it often works, and leaders in most organizations use it on a
daily basis to get things done.
Similarly, leading by example is another highly effective way of influencing
your team.

Effective Leadership Styles

As we mentioned above, transformational leadership is often the best
leadership style to use in business.
Transformational leaders show integrity, and they know how to develop a
robust and inspiring vision of the future. They motivate people to achieve this
vision, they manage its delivery, and they build ever stronger and more
successful teams.
However, you'll often need to adapt your style to fit a specific group or
situation, and this is why it's useful to gain a thorough understanding of other
styles. Our article on Leadership Styles takes a deeper look at the different
styles that you can use.

Key Points
Over time, several core theories about leadership have emerged. These
theories fall into four main categories:

1. Trait theories.
2. Behavioral theories.
3. Contingency theories.
4. Power and influence theories.
"Transformational leadership," is the most effective style to use in most
business situations. However, you can become a more effective leader by
learning about these core leadership theories, and understanding the tools
and models associated with each one.

Leadership Theories
By Steve Wolinski on April 21, 2010
There is a wide and ever growing variety of theories to explain the concept and practice of
leadership. I will provide a brief overview of the more dominant or better known theories. I
hope that others will share their thoughts on whether this list neglects any theories of
note. In the future we can discuss some of the emerging leadership theories/approaches
such as adaptive, authentic, and appreciative. It is important to note that this submission
attempts to provide an overview of leadership theories versus models. I view models as
attempts to functionalize the more theoretical aspects of leadership and make them easier
to put into play by organizations and consultants. This is, in and of itself, an important
activity.
Most theories view leadership as grounded in one or more of the following three
perspectives: leadership as a process or relationship, leadership as a combination of traits
or personality characteristics, or leadership as certain behaviors or, as they are more
commonly referred to, leadership skills. In virtually all of the more dominant theories there
exist the notions that, at least to some degree, leadership is a process that
involves influence with a group of people toward the realization of goals. I will say on the
front end that, in my opinion, leadership is a dynamic and complex process, and that much
of what is written these days tends to over-simplify this process. My goal here is to provide
an overview that keeps things simple, without crossing into over-simplification, and for the
most part refraining from any critiquing of the various theories. I will leave that to my
fellow bloggers for now.
Trait Theory
This theory postulates that people are either born or not born with the qualities that
predispose them to success in leadership roles. That is, that certain inherited qualities,
such as personality and cognitive ability, are what underlie effective leadership. There have
been hundreds of studies to determine the most important leadership traits, and while there
is always going to be some disagreement, intelligence, sociability, and drive (aka
determination) are consistently cited as key qualities.
Skills Theory
This theory states that learned knowledge and acquired skills/abilities are significant factors
in the practice of effective leadership. Skills theory by no means disavows the connection
between inherited traits and the capacity to be an effective leader – it simply argues that
learned skills, a developed style, and acquired knowledge, are the real keys to leadership
performance. It is of course the belief that skills theory is true that warrants all the effort
and resources devoted to leadership training and development

Situational Theory
This theory suggests that different situations require different styles of leadership. That is,
to be effective in leadership requires the ability to adapt or adjust one’s style to the
circumstances of the situation. The primary factors that determine how to adapt are an
assessment of the competence and commitment of a leader’s followers. The assessment of
these factors determines if a leader should use a more directive or supportive style.
Contingency Theory
This theory states that a leader’s effectiveness is contingent on how well the leader’s style
matches a specific setting or situation. And how, you may ask, is this different from
situational theory? In situational the focus is on adapting to the situation, whereas
contingency states that effective leadership depends on the degree of fit between a leader’s
qualities and style and that of a specific situation or context.
Path-Goal Theory
This theory is about how leaders motivate followers to accomplish identified objectives. It
postulates that effective leaders have the ability to improve the motivation of followers
by clarifying the paths and removing obstacles to high performance and desired
objectives. The underlying beliefs of path-goal theory (grounded in expectancy theory) are
that people will be more focused and motivated if they believe they are capable of high
performance, believe their effort will result in desired outcomes, and believe their work
is worthwhile.
Transformational Theory
This theory states that leadership is the process by which a person engages with others and
is able to create a connection that results in increased motivation and morality in both
followers and leaders. It is often likened to the theory of charismatic leadership that
espouses that leaders with certain qualities, such as confidence, extroversion, and clearly
stated values, are best able to motivate followers. The key in transformational leadership is
for the leader to be attentive to the needs and motives of followers in an attempt to help
them reach their maximum potential. In addition, transformational leadership typically
describes how leaders can initiate, develop, and implement important changes in an
organization. This theory is often discussed in contrast with transactional leadership.
Transactional Theory
This is a theory that focuses on the exchanges that take place between leaders and
followers. It is based in the notion that a leader’s job is to create structures that make it
abundantly clear what is expected of his/her followers and also the consequences (i.e.
rewards and punishments) for meeting or not meeting these expectations. This theory is
often likened to the concept and practice of management and continues to be an extremely
common component of many leadership models and organizational structures.
Servant Leadership Theory
This conceptualization of leadership reflects a philosophy that leaders should be servants
first. It suggests that leaders must place the needs of followers, customers, and the
community ahead of their own interests in order to be effective. The idea of servant
leadership has a significant amount of popularity within leadership circles – but it is difficult
to describe it as a theory inasmuch as a set of beliefs and values that leaders are
encouraged to embrace.

Closing Comments and Questions

I have a bias toward trait, skills, and transformational theories. I am a psychologist and
there is no doubt in my mind that people are born with certain qualities. But I am equally
sure innate traits inevitably become fully interwoven with a person’s acquired knowledge
and skills. And I lean toward transformational theory because of how it views the practice
of leadership as, more than anything else, relational interaction.

So how can these theories apply to one’s work? Well, in my work, if I am hired to help an
organization select a leader via an assessment process, some of the theories become readily
apparent. To start, it is important that the first step in the assessment is a meeting in
which the client clarifies the qualities needed for the specific role and paint a picture for me
of the organizational culture. By doing this I am able to be look for those qualities, skills,
knowledge, to assure finding someone that is a good fit for the job and the culture
(Contingency Theory). The assessment process includes tools to measure personality,
cognitive abilities, and drive (Trait Theory), adaptability (Situational Theory), and sociability
(Transformational Theory). It also involves, through interviews and work simulations, an
evaluation of a person’s work-related skills and knowledge of the business (Skills Theory).

So what are your biases? Does theory inform any of your work — knowingly or
unkowingly? Maybe you have your own theory of leadership. Let’s hear it.