Theories of Leadership: Evolution, Research, and Applicability

This report presents a comprehensive literature review on the evolution and applicability of leadership theories. It begins by defining leadership and its significance in organizational contexts, tracing the historical development of various leadership paradigms from the Great Man and Trait theori...Read More

Running Head: THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 1
Theories of Leadership
Name:
Institution Affiliation:

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 2
Introduction
Leadership is in most organizations is a term to be a complicated issue within the
managerial positions. The term of leadership has been in present use in different organizations
from the time of the late 1700s (Belu, 2018). Even then, technical investigation on the subject
failed to commence until the late 20th century. From that era, however, there exists an intensive
investigation on the issue. In the present society, leadership styles affect individuals in diverse
ways, and they are an essential aspect to consider when developing an individual’s skills as a
business leader. Therefore, the need to have an adequate understanding of leadership theories
and their impacts of workers is vital in operations of a different organization. The understanding
of impacts of theory may assist individuals to craft their messages in the manner that motivates
as well as inspires their team of workers. For decades, leadership theories have been the primary
source of numerous researchers. The opinions of leadership are commonly categorized by which
aspects are believed to define the leader the most (Junker & van Dick, 2014). The most general
theories of leadership comprise of Great Man hypothesis, Trait Theory, Contingency Theories,
Behavioral hypotheses, Transactional hypotheses, alongside Transformational Theories.
Therefore, the primary target of this research paperwork is to explore theories of leadership by
reviewing current research on its evolution and applicability.
Current research on the evolution of leadership theories
Several surveyors have tried to establish the precise definition of leadership that
encompasses the intricacy of this universal term. One simplified description of leadership is that
it refers to the process of impacting the organized group towards attaining its goals (Foroughi,
Gabriel, & Fotaki, 2019). The definition emphasizes the usefulness of viewing leadership as the
process directed at impacting a particular group of individuals to meet the stated goal. It has been

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 3
reported that leadership is one of the most observed as well as the least understood phenomena in
the global society. Such concern only occurs not just in knowing the operations of hypothesis but
even in its description. Mahajan (2015) stated that there exists a various definition of headship as
those individuals that have tried to describe this idea. The society continues to keep attempting to
describe the fundamental inquiry of characteristics of a valuable leader. Such inquiries have
caused considerable attention because leadership leads to the effective management of the image
of the company.
Leadership periods
While ancient evolutionary designs illustrate every period of progress is happening in the
sequential series, the form of leadership hypothesis evolution illustrated here does not firmly do
so. The primary basis is that old lines of idea on headship have happened in the moderately short
duration and several of them have arisen happen and collapsed concurrently (Mango, 2018).
Therefore, in the present form, there is no credit of the days or times when the several periods
happened, only gratitude of their comparative sequence in the advancement of headship
hypothesis. Every advanced age symbolizes the superior state of enhancement in headship
process than the previous period. The significant headship era comprises of personality era that
consists of the Period of Great Man along with Trait Era (Sanders, 2015). The other age is
Influence eras that include of power relations period and persuasion period. The different era
consists of situation, contingency, culture, transformational, anti-leadership, and transactional
age.
Personality era

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 4
The period of personality comprised of the fundamental official leadership hypotheses as
well as symbolized the creation in the understanding of the course of leadership. This type of age
is further divided into two periods that include the Period of Great Man along with Trait Era
(Leavy, 2015).
Great Man Period
In this period surveyors concentrated on great men together with some few women in the
account of the global society. The researcher further suggested that the individual who
hackneyed their traits together with behaviors would turn to be the firm manager. The pivotal
survey in this period reported that leadership is equated with an individual’s personality. Other
hypotheses have even tried to determine direction anchored in inheritance (Zhu, Zheng, Riggio,
& Zhang, 2015). Additionally, though the process was frustrating, it became clear that several
leaders considered to be effective had widely differing personalities. Moreover, characters are
really tough to emulate, thus offering little worth to practicing directors.
Trait Era
Leadership hypothesis was complex just considerably in the Trait Era when efforts were
developed to eliminate connections with particular persons as well as to create the various
characters solely. The adoption of created characters within this period had been vital in
improving the operations of managers. For instances, these characters could help in enhancing
potential along with the performance of leadership. However, failure loomed once more when
empirical surveys reported that no character of group traits connected with effective leadership
(Zhu, Zheng, Riggio, & Zhang, 2015). Additionally, in this period, outcomes provided minimum
value to practicing leaders since it is tough to learn most characters. Therefore, the hypotheses of

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 5
personality period of leadership seem to be harsh on how managers need to operate in achieving
their daily assignments.
Influence Period
The period of Influence enhanced on the period of Personality through appreciating that
leadership form the ideal connection between individuals while recording that characteristic of
one manager cannot form an ideal connection. The age tackles features of influence together
with authority (Parr, Hunter, & Ligon, 2013). The era consists of Power Relations Period along
with the Persuasion era.
Power association’s era
In the initial era, attempts were created to discuss the efficacy of leaders about source
together with the quantity of authority they control and the manner it was used. However, the
effect of power is undoubtedly common among managers as it helps them in improving in their
operations (Parr, Hunter, & Ligon, 2013). Besides, the directional action of top-down authority
with little or no thinking for the needs of followers is inappropriate in the present trading society.
Persuasion Era
In this era, instances of oppression were detached, but the manager was recognized as the
leading aspect in the dyad of manager-member. The approach of leadership is considered to be
assertive, and it is yet being applied in current management although the emergent realization of
its limits likes the authority of inferior participants (Parr, Hunter, & Ligon, 2013).
Behavior Era

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 6
This type of leadership theory took an entirely advanced course by focusing on what managers
perform as resistant to their characters or sources of power. Headship was thus described as the
division of the behavior of man. The theory has been a significant advancement in the
philosophy of leadership not just because it received firm, experiential support (Mills &
McKimm, 2016). Some of the job achieved in these times has concentrated on usual trait models
of managers while another duty has examined different traits between poor alongside effective
leaders.
Transformational headship
As a transformational manager, an individual seeks to authorize workers to discover their
inner drive to thrive. An individual is not a micro directory, but rather the individual is concerned
section of a society that instigates around the society. Great transformational type of leadership
gets workers to surpass self-interests as well as link the corporate assignment of the organization
(Holloway, Nielsen, & Saltmarsh, 2017). Transformation leadership is effective in bringing fresh
ideas to the operations of the organization. The new ideas help in building a constructive
corporate custom in which workers benefit going to work daily. Besides, managers attract ideals,
morals, as well as the values of workers.
Current research on the applicability of leadership theories
The role of a leader has been reported by various researchers to be paramount to a team
of operations. On the past century, the examination of leadership and its theories has grown. The
studies offer many new methods together with frameworks for exploration. The exploration
focuses on explaining the meaning of a leader and how to achieve an effective form of leadership
(Bullough & de Luque, 2014). For instance, the theory of Trait focuses on ideas that deal with

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 7
identification as well as measuring the personality of individuals and their characteristics during
their operations. Trait hypothesis is always a naturally pleasing hypothesis and offers valuable
data concerning leadership. However, the behavioral theory of leadership endorses the worth of
styles of leadership with great focus on concern for collaboration as well as individuals. Such
methods concentrate on what a leader does rather than on their qualities (Hamad, 2015). Some of
the factors that make a great leader according to different leadership theories comprise of the
ability of an individual to be self-confident, tolerate stress in operations, being cooperative, being
decisive, being united, and ability to adapt to situations. From such factors, it is evident that Trait
leadership hypothesis illustrates that only intelligence or skills account for the great leader, but
the individual characters are also an important indicator for a good leader.
Transformational leadership theory is useful as it motivates followers as it defines as well
as articulates the vision of the organization. The method works by offering the link between old
and new views of leadership. Different from the theory of Trait Leadership, Behavioral
hypothesis describes the direction in terms of individual behavior rather than on their mental or
physical traits. The application of behavioral theory believes that a great leader is the result of
the useful function of practices (Balwant, 2016). Therefore, learning productive traits allow
every individual to be a great leader. For instance, situational leadership theory postulates that
leadership has the supportive as well as directive dimensions that have application in different
situations. In this situational approach to leadership within an organization, a leader must
ascertain the location as well as to adapt their style of leadership to fix in the set duties, a
consideration that the method might not essentially work in dissimilar scenarios (Mango, 2018).
The theory of emergency leadership can be applied in the examination of the requests for
improving operations. Hence, leadership style varies contingent on the competencies of

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 8
followers or members of staff. Moreover, in the current changing environment of conducting
business, team headship has achieved massive stand within the framework of the organization as
managers are filling different functions formerly held by specific managers. Therefore, a leader
is required to be eager to adjust and alter with the organization along with the task settings to
organize the team dynamic efficiently (Mahajan, 2015). The ability of every manager to interact
effectively is the primary significance of improving the team and ensuring individual as well as
the success of the group in operations.
Conclusion
It is evident that this examination of the theory of leadership discloses some essential new
orders for the prospects practice of headship. The manager must be able to use many advance
traits to do their duties properly. There is a need for every leader to focus on taking risky
decisions and remain alert to understand different factors that affect the operations of
organizations. The leader must be able to assume an advanced perspective on authority to lead
other workers to achieve the objective of an organization. The evolutionary method of
development applied enables the grouping of several people that form different theories of
leadership to be in particular and order groups. In precedent times, surveyors have explored
specific elements of leadership with less or no apparent understanding of their outcomes related
to operations in the organization. Besides, practicing managers have been uncovered only to
constrict aspects of headship. With the integrated structure will be likely to create the
synchronized effort in evolving headship hypothesis. Therefore, leadership theories have
reported that every leader needs to pay awareness to planned thinking and logical operations at
the peak of operations of the corporation.

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 9
References
Balwant, P. (2016). Transformational Instructor-Leadership in Higher Education Teaching: A
Meta-Analytic Review and Research Agenda. Journal Of Leadership Studies, 9(4), 20-
42. doi: 10.1002/jls.21423
Belu, D. (2018). Leadership – Spiritual Evolution – Intuition. Scientific Research And Education
In The Air Force, 20, 329-340. doi: 10.19062/2247-3173.2018.20.44
Bullough, A., & de Luque, M. (2014). Women’s participation in entrepreneurial and political
leadership: The importance of culturally endorsed implicit leadership theories.
Leadership, 11(1), 36-56. doi: 10.1177/1742715013504427
Foroughi, H., Gabriel, Y., & Fotaki, M. (2019). Leadership in a post-truth era: A new narrative
disorder?. Leadership, 174271501983536. doi: 10.1177/1742715019835369
Hamad, H. (2015). Transformational Leadership Theory: Why Military Leaders are More
Charismatic and Transformational?. International Journal On Leadership, 3(1). doi:
10.21863/ijl/2015.3.1.001
Holloway, J., Nielsen, A., & Saltmarsh, S. (2017). Prescribed distributed leadership in the era of
accountability. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(4), 538-555.
doi: 10.1177/1741143216688469
Junker, N., & van Dick, R. (2014). Implicit theories in organizational settings: A systematic
review and research agenda of implicit leadership and followership theories. The
Leadership Quarterly, 25(6), 1154-1173. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.09.002

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP 10
Leavy, B. (2015). Bill George: the era of self-serving leadership is over but global markets pose
the next authenticity challenge for leaders. Strategy & Leadership, 43(6), 25-32. doi:
10.1108/sl-09-2015-0071
Mahajan, S. (2015). Study on Leadership Styles and Theories. Indian Journal Of Applied
Research, 4(3), 281-282. doi: 10.15373/2249555x/mar2014/86
Mango, E. (2018). Rethinking Leadership Theories. Open Journal Of Leadership, 07(01), 57-88.
doi: 10.4236/ojl.2018.71005
Mills, J., & McKimm, J. (2016). Contingency theories of leadership: how might we use them in
clinical practice?. British Journal Of Hospital Medicine, 77(5), 268-271. doi:
10.12968/hmed.2016.77.5.268
Parr, A., Hunter, S., & Ligon, G. (2013). Questioning universal applicability of transformational
leadership: Examining employees with autism spectrum disorder. The Leadership
Quarterly, 24(4), 608-622. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.04.003
Sanders, P. (2015). The ‘strange Mr Kastner’ – Leadership ethics in Holocaust-era Hungary, in
the light of grey zones and dirty hands. Leadership, 12(1), 4-33. doi:
10.1177/1742715015614878
Zhu, W., Zheng, X., Riggio, R., & Zhang, X. (2015). A Critical Review of Theories and
Measures of Ethics-Related Leadership. New Directions For Student Leadership,
2015(146), 81-96. doi: 10.1002/yd.20137