Quantum Leadership Vs. Leader Member Exchange Theory

Leadership is the elaboration of group inspiration. One person entrusted as leader can implore the aid, and support of supporters in the accomplishment of a common mission. According to Gurdjian, Halbeisen, and Lane “Becoming a more effective leader often requires changing behavior. But although most companies recognize that this also means adjusting underlying mind-sets, too often these organizations are reluctant to address the root causes of why leaders act the way they do” (Gurdjian, Halbeisen, and Lane, 2014) However, today abundant businesses engross importance on the improvement of leaders. Some of the ultimate leaders were formerly followers, such as in instructive businesses. One aspect as leaders many have to contemplate in striving

Leadership Theories

Regarding leadership or good leader, some of his opinions are similar and some of his opinions are different to opinion that the author in the text book argue. In this textbook, the authors define leadership as the process to affect other people for achieving an organization’s goals. It is similar to interviewee argument. Yet, interviewee emphasized the power in leadership. He states that it is very important to use the power fairly and ethically. He also argues that leaders need a strong relationship with lots of excellent in-group members for forming the power. It is in line with Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) that assumes leadership is formed through transacting mutual interests between leaders and followers.

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”.

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.

Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory explains the two-fold connection and the communication between a leader and subordinate. In comparison to the other leadership theories, the LMX theory is different because it focuses on the distinct relationships between the leader and each follower and the dual alliance that they share.It determines the extent to which leaders and followers have common respect for each other’s skills, personally feel a greater sense of compatible trust, and have a good sense of responsibility to each other. My questionnaire scores were in the high range for completing the questions both as a leader and a follower. My scores regarding my relationship with myleader were very high, a 35. In describing my relationship with followers, my score was in the high range, a 29. Reflecting about my scores, I wasn’t surprised about the results. I feel that in the role of leadership, I would work tirelessly to provide a positive work environment as well as positive relationships with my followers.But, there remains an area where I could improve in communicating better with followers. Being an all-inclusive leader would ensure that no followers would feel isolated. This includes to always provide a level playing field and to establish an environment where followers are not observing but instead participating. This would lead to an equitable atmosphere and would improve the major points of the leader-member theory: respect, relationships, and work ethic.

There is no leader without at least one follower. Yet the modern leadership industry, now a quarter-century old, is built on the proposition that leaders matter a great deal and followers hardly at all.

In contrast transformational leadership is the infusion of motivation and inspiration into the workers to do

The leader-member exchange theory often referred to as LMX, is a management theory which analyzes the relationship maintained between the manager or the leader and the members or subordinates within a group and organization. It further explains how this relation can either help the firm in growing or hold it back to its current position.

Leadership is about the relationship and utilization of influence in various communication forms applied in a process that allows individuals and groups to work together to achieve collaborative goals (Ziegler & Degrosky, 2008). If influence is the driver of leadership, then power, is the engine. Having influence and power alone is insufficient to create leadership much like having a driver and a vehicle do not automatically create transportation. There are other components necessary to make the car move from one place to another. Power and influence utilized in an ethical and efficient manner gains willing compliance and commitment. Contemporary leadership theories based on efficiently reengineering older theories

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.

Different types of leadership often need to be applied in a distinct manner, depending on the context and who is involved. Osborn, Hunt, & Jauch (2002) indicated leadership theory and research needs to expand to the complex levels of leadership. The authors

Leadership is an important aspect of management sciences. Over the past century, many theories have been developed to provide managers with the tools required to effectively lead their subordinates. From a simplistic theory cataloguing individual traits and characteristics, leadership has become a complex science shaped by many forces (ex: behavioural sciences, organizational culture, strategic management trends etc.) (Avolio, Walumba and Weber, 2009).

Leadership is a broadly used concept which needs to be defined narrowly. One way is to define the context in which it is used and the process within which it fits. Moreover, theories on leadership have explored and studied it from many angels. Trait Theory of leadership asks what type of person makes a good leader. Moreover, 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. In contrast behavioral theories studies what good leaders do and how they behave. For instance, do leaders dictate what needs to be done and expect cooperation? Or do they involve their teams in decision-making to

For centuries leaders have been analyzed in order to determine what the traits and characteristics of a successful leader are. Leadership, as defined by Koontz and Weihrich (2008) is “the art or a process of influencing people so that they will strive willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of group goals” (p. 311). Leadership plays an important role in employee’s participation, creativity, recruitment to an organization, their commitment to the organization, and productivity levels. Over the years, there have been a number of theories surrounding leadership such as the “Great Man” theory, which, according to Riaz and Haider (2010), “assumes that leaders are born and have innate qualities, therefore, leaders