Trait, Skills, and Situational Leadership Approaches: a Comparative Examination
TRAIT, SKILLS, AND SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP APPROACHES: A COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION
LEAD 720: Leadership Theory and Practice
Professor: Dr. David C. Greenhalgh
Submitted by:
Ronald Greilich
Eastern University
April 15, 2011
Introduction
There are many theories of leadership but three of the more formative are the trait approach, the skills approach, and the situational approach theories. This paper will compare these approaches, their foundations, and their research records as well as challenges to the theories and their position in the current examination of leadership, with discussion as to what is required to fully comprehend them and the future of research in these areas. Of all the leadership theories that are studied, the two that are the most similar are the traits and skills approaches, yet they differ in one dimension that is considerable. Conversely, the situational approach is one of several contingency based leadership theories that proceeds past the concept of leadership traits, characteristics, and skills and delves into the realm of varying leadership styles to match a situation. In this regard a comparison of the trait and skills approaches with the situational approach is appropriate to emphasize the range of approaches in the study of leadership theories.
The theories and their roots
The trait approach
The oldest of leadership theories is the Trait approach, which is defined as special identifiable, universal traits that (born) leaders possess. The theory holds that these individuals are endowed with an aura, or set of talents, which sets them apart from others and as such, are not like other people. Thomas Carlyle (1888) is most associated with the Trait theory of leadership through his famous lecture, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, in which he reflected upon history as giving the world the benefit of "heroes", giving detailed analysis of the influence of several such men, including Muhammad, Shakespeare,
LEAD 720: Leadership Theory and Practice
Professor: Dr. David C. Greenhalgh
Submitted by:
Ronald Greilich
Eastern University
April 15, 2011
Introduction
There are many theories of leadership but three of the more formative are the trait approach, the skills approach, and the situational approach theories. This paper will compare these approaches, their foundations, and their research records as well as challenges to the theories and their position in the current examination of leadership, with discussion as to what is required to fully comprehend them and the future of research in these areas. Of all the leadership theories that are studied, the two that are the most similar are the traits and skills approaches, yet they differ in one dimension that is considerable. Conversely, the situational approach is one of several contingency based leadership theories that proceeds past the concept of leadership traits, characteristics, and skills and delves into the realm of varying leadership styles to match a situation. In this regard a comparison of the trait and skills approaches with the situational approach is appropriate to emphasize the range of approaches in the study of leadership theories.
The theories and their roots
The trait approach
The oldest of leadership theories is the Trait approach, which is defined as special identifiable, universal traits that (born) leaders possess. The theory holds that these individuals are endowed with an aura, or set of talents, which sets them apart from others and as such, are not like other people. Thomas Carlyle (1888) is most associated with the Trait theory of leadership through his famous lecture, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, in which he reflected upon history as giving the world the benefit of "heroes", giving detailed analysis of the influence of several such men, including Muhammad, Shakespeare,
References: Antonakis, J., Cianciolo, A.T., Sternberg, R. J. (2004) The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press. Blank, W., Green, S. G., Weitzel, J. R. (1990). A test of situational leadership theory. Personnel Psychology, 43. 579-597. Boje, D Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. and Dennison, P. (2003) A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks. Centre for Leadership Studies University of Exeter. United Kingdom. Carlyle, T. (1966) On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1966. Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853-863. DeNeve,K.M., & Cooper, H.(1998)The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197-229. Digman, J. M.(1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 75, 231-237. Fernandez, C. F., & Vecchio, R. P. (1997). Situational leadership theory revisted: A test of across-jobs perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 8 (1), 67-84. Fielder, F Fielder, F. E. & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New approaches to effective leadership: Cognitive resources and organizational performance. New York: John Wiley. Flanagan, J. C.(1951) Defining the requirements of the executive 's job. Personnel, Vol 28, 28-35. Friedman, H Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”; The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1226. Goodson, J. R., McGee, G. W. & Cashman, J. F. (1989) Situational leadership theory: A test of leadership prescriptions. Group Organization Management 14, 446-461. Graeff, C. L. (1983). The situational leadership theory: A critical view. Academy of Management Review, 8, 285-291. Gray, T Grinin, L. ( 2010). The role of an individual in history: A reconsideration. Social Evolution & History, 9 (2), 95–136. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J. & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 12, 390-395. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Journal of Applied Psychology Vol Katz, R. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 33 (1),33-42. Kirkpatrick, S. A., Locke, E. A. (1991). Trait theory: Leadership: do traits matter? Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 5 No. 2. 765-780. Jago, A Leavett, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 46, 38-50. Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., White, R. K. (1939) Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-299. Lippitt, R. & White, R. K. (1943). The social climate of children’s groups. Child behavior and development. 485-508. Lord, R Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241-270. McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516. Middleton, G. R. (2006) The epistle to the Ephesians: Instilling values using situational leadership. Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership, 1(1), 28-48. Mujtaba, B. G., Sungkhawan, J. (2007) Situational leadership and diversity management coaching skills. Journal of Diversity Management, 4 (1), 1-11. Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D. Jacobs, T.O., Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 11-35. Mumford, T.V., Campion, M. A., Morgeson, F. P. (2007). The leadership skills strataplex: Leadership skill requirements across organizational levels. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 154-166. Mischel, W Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pervin, L. A. (1994). A critical analysis of current trait theory. Psychological Inquiry, 5, (2) 103-113. Randell, G. (2008). The core of leadership. Business Leadership Review V:III . London, England: Association of MBA’s. Scott, J. (2005). A brief history of management: A concise handbook of management 2(17). New York: Taylor & Francis, Inc. Retrieved from: http://www.swissmc.ch/Media/Dexter_Philips_working_paper_04-2009.pdf Shartle, C Smith, M. A., Canger, J. M. (2004) Effects of supervisor “big five” personality on subordinate attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology,18, (4), 465-481. Spencer, H..(1896) The Study of Sociology, Appleton, 1896, p. 34. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence. New York: Penguin Books. Stogdill, R Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press. Turman, P. D. (2001). Situational coaching styles: The impact of success and athlete maturity level on coaches’ leadership styles over time. Small group Research 32, 576-594. Torrock, J. L. (2008) Bringing the emergency to the classroom: Using Grey’s Anatomy to simplify situational leadership. Journal of Leadership Education 7, (2). 69-78. Walter, J. E., Caldwell, S. D., Marshall, J. (1980). Evidence for the validity of situational leadership theory. Educational Leadership. 618-621. Yukl, G Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.