Leadership Vs. Classical Leadership

Leadership is, and always has been, a vital aspect of social and economic constructs. It is essential to the survival of societies, industries, organizations, and virtually any group of individuals that come together for a common purpose. However, leadership is difficult to define in a single, definitive sense. As such, theories of leadership, what constitutes a great leader, and how leaders are made have evolved constantly throughout history, and still continue to change today in hopes of improving upon our understanding of leadership, its importance, and how it can be most effective in modern organizational cultures.

Before going through this journey of self-discovery, my view of leadership was accurately described by John C. Maxwell “ Leadership is influence.” (Maxwell, para. 25, 2012). I believed, before taking this class and Northouse’s (2013) assessments, leaders were defined by the extent to which they could influence others to achieve company goals. I thought that, when discussing leadership, the leader was the most important aspect of the leader-member dyad and that it was the leader who had the greatest influence over how successful the organization was. Leaders themselves, in my view, should have been the focus of leadership studies and it should have been up to the leader to develop his/her skills in

leader. The following definition has been chosen as it reflects the overall stance of the inquiry:

Abstract: There are numerous definitions of leadership, all of which contain elements related to people (the leader and the follower(s)), communicating in person or by the written word, actions (organizing, directing, coaching, and/or motivating), and for a purpose (meeting a goal(s) or accomplishing a task(s)) (ADP 6-22) (Fisher 2015) (Bolden 2013) (Hogan 2005). Additionally, everything done occurs within a given context. Effective leaders are poised, proficient, pertinent, and practical in the application of the art of leadership. This means leaders are ready to engage the group with effective methods and

Leadership is a term that cannot be defined or simplified with a standard definition (Bethel, 2011). The term’s complexity is a phenomenon, as it carries a different meaning for each person. During the

Every person has a different definition of what makes a leader. Some feel a leader is inspirational, while others regard leadership as someone who can give criticism and make the tough decisions. Each definition is unique, and each is vague. This is why the definitions of leadership people use aren’t always accurate. Bolman and Deal, however, do an excellent job of presenting four frames of leadership people use to successfully—or unsuccessfully—support and lead a group of people. The four frames presented by the authors are: human resource, symbolic, structural, and political. The human resource frame is used by leaders to empathize with their followers, the symbolic frame is used to inspire and unite followers around a vision, the structural frame is used to emphasize the importance of a process, and the political frame establishes competition and focuses on creating allies.

Thus, we can define leadership as a coaching model, or a framework to use as an underlying structure to build teamwork, confidence, improve performance and behavior, and in most any aspect (business, education, sports, etc.) utilize these theories as a way to actualize goals. Because humans are so unique and individualized, there are a number of theories from which to draw from and most agree that the integration of a multidisciplinary approach and field of knowledge is what allows one to become both more tactical and strategic.

Leadership has been described as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task”...

Classical organisational theorist defined leadership in terms of achieving a group’s objectives R.C Davies (1942) referred to leadership as “the principle dynamic forces that motivates and coordinates the organisation in the accomplishment of its objectives.” Similarly, Urwick (1953) stated that the leader is “the personification of common purpose not only to all who work under taking, but to everyone outside it.” K. Davies (1962) defined leadership as “the human factor which binds a group together and motivates it towards goals.” Cattell (1951) took the extreme position that leadership is whatever or whoever contributes to the group’s performance. To measure each members Leadership, Cattell noted, removed him or her from the group, one at a time, and observe what happens to the group’s performance. Calder (1977) and Pfeffer (1977) “stated that leadership is mainly influence and is even attributed to participants after the fact.

Leadership is a process of influencing activities of a particular group of people with the aim of attaining certain stipulated goals. In defining leadership there is need to consider a particular group, the common goals and the duties that are allocated to specific members of the group depending on their abilities (Fiedler 1976). Leadership therefore cannot successfully occur unless members of the group are given different considerations in terms of personality, traits and responsibilities. In considering leadership, it is important to look at the leader, the group or organization they are leading, the members as individuals and the situation; these are

Leadership has been studied extensively and many varying definitions exist. Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy (2015, p.4) review many of these definitions and consequently describe leadership as ‘the process of influencing an organised group towards its goals’. Leadership involves the interplay of a range of different factors, not least the leader themselves, the followers and the situation. For

According to Daft (2008, p.20) leadership typically reflects the larger society, and theories have evolved as norms, attitudes, and understandings in the larger world of change. Throughout the centuries leaders have adapted in response to these changes. Northouse (2007, p3) defines leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal. A person’s ability to

Leadership, according to theorist John Kotter, “…is about… coping with change” (Kotter, 1990, p. 4). By this definition, one should consider leadership to be the product of change in context and the ways in which the response to this change informs strategy. “Leadership is…a set of traits, qualities and behavior possessed by the leader that encourage the participation, development, and

Over the years, a great deal of time, and research has been dedicate to the study of leadership. Even with extensive data on the topic, many still disagree on what leadership really means. Hence, leadership is a word that has many different meanings and different researched theories associated with it. On a basic level, leadership involves having and establishing a clear vision, sharing that vision with followers, respecting followers, and leading an organization with excellence while ensuring that everyone is part of the team. Leadership is also a method by which a leader uses his or her influence towards getting a group of followers to take ownership or buy into a vision.

The word ‘leadership’ often times triggers a preconceived image of an ideal leader—typically accompanied by the aura that the effective leader should be at the top of the hierarchy, ready to produce the solutions to complex problems. However, this is not true of leadership, given that effective leadership is not achieved by position but rather through style and situational awareness. Examining leadership requires the consideration of the catalysts for different types of leaders. Popular leader development theories tend to focus on the natural servitude of the leader, his or her capability to manage, and leader behavior.