Why Leadership Is A Fundamental Part Of Organizational Behavior

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.

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

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

In the Leadership Challenge, 4th edition, it is Kouzes & Posner (2007) intention to present a road map for individuals to follow on their leadership journey. The authors stress that “leadership is not a gene and it’s not an inheritance.” Leadership they assert is “an identifiable set of skills and abilities that are available to all of us” (p. 23). They make clear that the “great person” theory of leadership is “plain wrong.” Leaders are our everyday heroes who do extraordinary things on a regular basis (p. 23).

Leadership is both an inherent value and is forged overtime. Inherently, some people are born good leaders and intrinsically have good values imbedded. Leadership traits can be honed and developed overtime; you never stop learning to be a good leader. Leadership is the cornerstone of all successfully run organizations and is what drives stewardship to successfully carry on the organizations mission statement. Throughout one’s life experiences, they come across some great leaders and some not-so great leaders. Those life experiences transcend one to become a better leader through experiential circumstances.

This paper will discuss the topic of Leadership and both explore, as well as explain, it’s applicability in today’s work environment. The basis for discussion will be centered on the material provided during instruction of Management 371 and the personal LSA Journal entries of John Brennan. Additionally, there are three referenced articles that further explain and highlight the topic of Leadership. Throughout this paper, Leadership and the traits that make up a great leader will be explained.

The questions regarding what makes a great leader, are they born that way, is there certain behaviors that can be taught, and can one switch from one style of leadership to another, are addressed from multiple perspectives. Three main schools of thought, trait theory, behavioral theory and contingency theory, work to explain the social phenomena of leadership. Though they pull from psychological theories, they each contribute valuable pieces that strives to solve the riddle of what makes or constitutes a great leader. However, this riddle may be far less complex, as John Quincy Adams once said, “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader” (Adams,

From Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela’s charisma, to Winston Churchill and Martin Luther King’s intelligence and Steve Jobs’ analytical nature, there can be as numerous ways to lead as there are leaders (Crossman, 2010). Leadership is a hot debate both in the business world and other areas of the society. Throughout the world's, there have been as many leadership models as there have been their commentators (Burns & Peltason, 1966). Fortunately, psychologists and businesspersons have established useful frameworks that refer to the main ways of leadership.

Leadership is a very broad topic; I never knew just how many different traits and skills that it takes to become an effective leader. Some of which I was familiar with, and others that I was not aware of, but now from taking this course, they all seem to be necessary for the role of leadership. The attached paper, will explain of some of the important theories and concepts that I thought were most important to be able to become and effective leader.

Although there are many outstanding, albeit necessary qualities of a good leader, it is the leader’s beliefs in which greatness is given its first breath, fostered by action, and spread throughout the institution. A great leader believes in encouraging, not destroying; in setting the precedence instead of yielding to prominence ; in collaboration, not division; in giving, not taking; and in having high standards and volunteering to be the first of many to be held to them. A great leader does not take advantage of the people being lead, but instead, creates an advantage for the people by giving them the opportunities to lead. Only when people take ownership of an institution will passion be cultivated, action be taken,

As a graduate student approaching her final semester in school, thoughts regarding my leadership abilities in the soon-to-be “real world” have occupied my mind lately. To further explore and develop my ideas about leadership, I decided to develop my personal leadership theory. So, I asked myself the following questions: What makes a successful leader? How do you recognize a leader when you meet one?, and lastly, what is my theory of leadership? With this last question I thought about what leadership meant to me personally and how I personified it in a role of authority. While I had given thought to how I led, I had rarely taken the time to fully understand what my personal leadership theory entailed. Throughout the length of this paper I will analyze how my leadership skills, traits, values and elements from both Authentic Transformational theories help me to shape my leadership philosophy. In doing so I hope to define the leadership values that influence the way I view and practice leadership.

The conceptualization of leadership as a leader-centric or individual level phenomenon has long been dominant in both research and practice (Friedrich et al. 2009). As organizations have taken on more complex structures in response to the speed of operational, strategic and technological change, the limitations of top-down models of leadership are increasingly apparent (Thorpe et al. 2011). In response, there has been significant advancement in research on a number of different constructs that describe those situations where leadership is a shared process rather than the role of a single individual. These include shared and distributed leadership (Carson et al., 2007; Gronn 2002; Pearce & Conger 2003; Pearce et al. 2008), team leadership (Burke et al. 2011; Day et al. 2004), and collective leadership (Friedrich et al. 2014; Friedrich et al. 2009; Mumford et al. 2012). These concepts, within this nascent area of collectivistic leadership research and practice, are at times used interchangeably and at times differentiated through various models. This ambiguity, and the limited base of empirical research support, is a key challenge for future research and practice.

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.

To comprehend the part of a leader, we should first comprehend being a leader. Through research, I 've discovered that there are a wide range of hypotheses in regards to leadership. For this specific task, I 've investigated The Great Man Theory of Leadership, The Trait Theory of Leadership and The Role Theory of Leadership.

For decade’s individuals, companies, and organizations have spent an unprecedented amount of money on researching, molding, modeling and working to define what a leader is and what characteristics make successful leaders. Despite all the research, there is not a quick answer or even full agreement as to what makes an individual an effective leader. The definition of a leader is “someone who can influence others and who has managerial authority.” (Robbins, Decenzo, Coulter, 2015. P.370)