Leadership Theory X And Theory Y

Leadership is an influential factor in the success and failure. If an organization is failing, look at the leader, not the economy; not the market; look at the leader. The movements and influence of a leader determines the fate of those under her or him. The importance of leadership cannot be underestimated. The importance of leadership has constantly been debated and a part argumentative discussion. There is no one approach to leadership, however leadership theories try to make sense of various approaches to leadership. James G. Clawson is considered an authority in leadership theories. His Level III leadership theory is about managing energy, first in leader, and then in those around the leader.

There are many models of leadership that exist across a range of fields (e.g. social work, education, psychology, business, etc.). The ability to transform an organization successfully requires a different set of attitudes and skills. Transformational leadership is an approach where a leader utilizes inspiration, charisma, individualized attention, and intellectual stimulation with their employees (Iachini, Cross, & Freedman, 2015, p. 651). Transformational leadership helps to clarify organizational vision, inspires employees to attain objectives, empowers employees, encourages employees to take risks, and advocates the seeking of alternative solutions to challenges in the workplace (Transformational Leadership, 2015). It allows the leader to engage and motivate each follower identify with the organization’s values and goals.

Compare and contrast two theories of leadership. Do these theories offer practical guidance for managers?

Since the beginning of recorded history, leadership has been one of, if not the most important elements in the success or failure of an endeavor. This is whether it involved a prehistoric hunting party or ruling the Roman Empire. Today, leadership is recognized as a vital factor in an organization’s quest to be productive and profitable. For an organization to be competitive and achieve optimum success in the 21st century, it is vital that they employ effective leaders that will be able to communicate their vision and goals, motivate their employees and develop trusting and loyal relationships with its stakeholders. There is no one or best way to accomplish this mission. There have been numerous leadership theories and styles which have been developed over time which can enable leaders to choose which method would be most effective for them in establishing collaborative working relationships and a respectful team environment in a group setting (Landis, Eric A; Hill, Deborah; Harvey, Maurice R, 2014).

Leadership theories in and of themselves carry negative and positives characteristics. Within the various theories lie strengths and weaknesses that when applied to complex problems can highlight each one respectively. As I examine a few theories, I will look at the strengths and weaknesses of each and determine when and with which situation would these theories best be utilized. Collective leadership or distributive leadership, and leader-member exchange are both theories that incorporate specific team or group mentalities.

Transformational leadership theory applies four factors for leaders to influence employees to perform beyond their abilities. These factors describes leaders that promote leadership through idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration (Shresh & Rajini 2013).Transformational leaders are deem as the most effective leadership style because of their character strengths as a excellent role model who leads by example and manage people based on their strengths and weaknesses to optimizes the organization performance (Shresh, & Rajini, 2013). Transformational leaders are known to reward, encourage and mentor people based on performance through inspiration, creativity, and innovation to solve problems to exceed expectation of the organization (Smith,

There are different leadership theories developed throughout the history. Most popular ones are trait theories, behavioral theories, contingency theories, and leader-member exchange (LMX) theory. The author of the post will briefly discuss two theories, Fiedler contingency theory and Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), and compare and contrast their strengths and weakness.

Transformational leadership. Burns (1978) is recognized as one of the earliest theorist on transformational leadership, who introduced transformational leadership over 30 years ago. Transformational leaders are perceived as leaders who uplift their employee morale, subsequently uplifting the entire organizational. Transformational leaders are known by their capacity to inspire followers to forgo self-interests in achieving superior results for the organization (Clawson, 2006). Avolio and Yammarino (2002) shared Bass’s explanation of transformational leadership as leaders who act as agents of change that stimulate, and transform followers’ attitudes, beliefs, and motivate from lower to higher level of arousal.

Out of all the different leadership theories I learned about this semester I really feel that I best relate to transformational leadership and authentic leadership theories. During the development of my personal theory I found that these theories tended to list many similar traits, and values that aligned with my own. Additionally, both authentic and transformative theories place a significant amount of emphasis on the relationship between the leader and her/his followers. The success and influence of a leader comes not from herself but from her ability to create and invoke strong relationships with their followers. Given my character strengths of sociability, integrity, assertiveness, and my drive to connect to others on a deeper level, I value both the authentic and the transformative leadership theories.

The contents and assignment in this course has helped me understand the various theories of leadership and how different leadership styles can have a negative or positive effect on followers and organizations. The leadership theories helped me understand the concept of leadership better because it educates me on the different leadership options that are available. Leadership and followership is not based on specific characteristics. Leaders must draw from things and approaches to find the right style. A follower’s attitude determines the way a leader leads. According to Johnson (2011) “Being a good follower means ensuring your boss is supported, but only if he is making optimum decisions”.

Transformational leadership is a leadership style that promotes change as well as improves performance in the organization as a whole as well as on the individual employee level (Phaneuf, Boudrias, Rousseau, & Brunelle, 2016). James MacGregor Burns first introduced transformational leadership in his book titled Leadership that he authored in 1978. Burns defined transformational leadership as leadership that stems from one’s core unchanging values and beliefs. Burns believed that transformational leaders not only bring together their followers, but also positively influence their follower’s values and beliefs in a way that brings about positive change (Humphreys & Einstein, 2003).

In today’s world, leaders are not defined by age, race or gender. They can be a high school basketball coach, the shift supervisor at the local coffee shop, or even the President of the United States of America. In as many ways that leaders can vary by appearance and responsibility, there is also a variance in the ways that they lead. This case study aims to compare three of the more popular theories of leadership. These leadership theories are situational leadership, trait theory and transformational leadership.

The 1970s brought a number of emerging leadership theories, these theories focused on the importance of a leader 's charisma to leadership effectiveness. Many of these theories and models were the same. Transformational leadership theory separated itself between the transactional and the transformational leader. This leadership theory focuses on role and task requirements and utilizes rewards contingent on performance. Research shows that in contrast, transformational leadership focuses on developing mutual trust, fostering the leadership abilities of others, and setting goals that go beyond the short-term needs of the work group.

Different theories of leadership classify leadership in different ways. Based on the use of authority, leadership is classified into three types as autocratic, democratic and laissez faire leadership styles (Adeyemi, 2013). Having gone through my free flow journey has helped me explore my entire life as a process of learning and evolution of my own leadership. This mandatory part of my journal has given me the opportunity to reflect on my personal values as they are the primary influencer to my leadership development. Since our behaviours determines our values, this mandatory journaling is a powerful tool to identify which of the four waves of values (1st and 2nd Wave Values, 3rd and 4th Wave Values) influences my leadership practices.

Leadership theories are attempts to answer some of the question people have about leadership. These theories range from simple “armchair philosophies” about the personal characteristics and effect relationship between leaders and followers and situations.