Leadership Theories

If an individual was able to spirit some people to convince themselves in a certain way to a general or specific purposes, the individual should have demonstrated leadership qualities, and regarded as the leader.


Leadership Theory
Many authors state their views and formulate their own theories about leaders and leadership. Several theories fell briefly below for a snapshot of the literature on leadership issues.


Great Man Theory - This theory assumes that leaders are born, not made. The leaders are mostly members of the aristocracy, because they only had the opportunity to lead, so it believes that good farming contribute to the making of great leaders. The concept of a great woman androcentric bias has not been and never realized. Moreover, this theory also states that when a great need, then there was a great leader, just like Buddha, Jesus, Churchill and Eisenhower.


Feature Theory - This theory assumes that man is born with hereditary characteristics and the right combination of characters makes them leaders. Why leadership is a question of whether the properties are inherited or otherwise acquired. Stogdill (1974) indicated that certain characteristics such as adaptability, socially conscious, performance-oriented, assertive, dominant, energetic, cooperative, decisive, confident, persistent, responsible, and the ability to tolerate stress. McCall and Lombardo (1983) distinguishes four basic characteristics, namely emotional calm and stability, breadth of intellectual, highly developed interpersonal skills and ability to admit mistakes.


Participative Leadership Theory - This theory assumes that the conclusions of many better decisions than a single mind to make decisions. Therefore leaders to invite the participation of the person responsible for carrying out the work, because it makes them less competitive and more collaborative, thus increasing the level of involvement. Participants may subordinates, colleagues, superiors, or stakeholders. Level of participation may vary. The leader is able to aim or objective description and may the team Decide what can be achieved if the leader can make the joint decision to be taken in connection with the Purposes and methods or performance or the team May Propose but the final decision is always the leader. Many varieties exist, such as consultation, democratic leadership, management by objectives (MBO), the distribution of power, empowerment, and shared decision making. The negative side of this theory is that when a leader asks their opinion and find no match then it leads to cynicism, feelings of betrayal, reducing the decrease in the level of motivation and commitment.

Lewin's theory - Kurt Lewin along with others conducted experiments in the years 1939 and came with three participative leadership style, ie autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire. In the autocratic style, the leader takes decisions without consulting others. In the democratic style, the leader took the decision after consulting other people or let the majority decide what to do. In Laissez-faire style, the leader who let others decide that the decision will be taken. Lewin et al. found that the autocratic style has led to a revolution, laissez-faire style has no enthusiasm and coordination, while the democratic forces will prove most effective. Because the experiment was conducted in children, they still needed further study and research.


Likert theory - Rensis Likert (1967) theorized four pillars, namely exploitative authoritative, benevolent authoritative, consultative, and participatory. In exploitative authoritative style, the leader of its use as a threat, coercion and other methods based on fear to enforce compliance. It is always a top-down approach and attitudes, feelings, other people are not judged. In accordance with the authoritative style, the leader of a "benevolent dictator" and the award to motivate performance use. Leaders listen "seen red" than subordinates because they only tell you what to hear leaders in the hope of reward. Trivial delegation of decision made, but major decisions always center stage. In the style of consultation, dialogue leaders try but most of the upward flow of information is still red and the decision was almost taken centrally. In a participatory style in which the participation of leaders at all levels, including shop floor workers, and efforts to help employees more closely psychologically prepared. Disputes, arguments, all the feelings of betrayal occur in this style. Leaders' father figure 'and the' cult of the head, "which says in the end the final decision.


Charismatic leadership theory - This theory assumes that leaders gathering followers simply by their charm, grace, and personality. If a leader is not natural and charismatic leader that people need much effort to preserve the image and develop the necessary skills. They are usually very persuasive and use their body language is very effective. In a theatrical sense, charisma, but as exhibited by politicians, religious leaders and cult. Conger & Kanungo (1998) has identified five characteristics of charismatic leaders, namely a clear vision and his clear diction, sensitivity to the environment and the sensitivity to the needs of members, the possibility of personal risk taking their views to support , and the ability to conduct unconventional behavior. Musser (1987) noted that charismatic leaders want their followers to commit to an absolute devotion to himself. Charismatic leaders may not want anything or change something in contrast to a transformational leader to change. If a charismatic leader is well intentioned they may contribute significantly to the growth of the whole group, but if they are shameless and selfish, then by the formation of cults, they can actually raped the spirit and the body of their followers. their own self-confidence can lead them into psychotic narcissism and egocentrism they are so high that their irreplaceability, intentionally or not, can guarantee that there is no successor, so they make a permanent mark in history.


Transformational leadership theory - This theory assumes that a leader with vision and passion can achieve great things with inspiration, enthusiasm and energy injection, and thus the person or group against an individual or group achievement. Transformational leaders have a vision and sell their vision of themselves in the process of creating confidence. They lead by example and always in the middle of the action. To motivate their people, they used the ceremonies, rituals and symbolism of other cultures. They believe that success comes with a deep and sustained commitment and very people-oriented. However, transformational leaders try to change, and if companies do not have the need for change, they get frustrated.


The Quiet Leader Theory - This theory states that actions speak louder than words. Leaders lead with a quiet, his actions and give credit to others than taking all yourself. Quiet leaders do not always meet with success and is often confronted by people he's an extrovert who can not handle.


Transactional Leadership Theory - This theory states that people work for rewards and punishments. A clear command structure with loyalty as the main focus of the best work in the social system. subordinates to do what the leader says to do without trying to find justification for. Leaders create a clear structure and subordinates are obliged to follow. To successfully complete the work, they are rewarded while the settlement failed, they were punished. Leaders use management by exception, ie after the operation is defined performance expectations do not require much attention. Received rave reviews, while exceeding expectations do not meet the expectations get corrective action. The limitation of this approach is that it assumes that the individual is a "rational man" (who are very motivated by money and hence the predictable behavior), which is probably not due to emotional and social factors. In this situation, a different approach be more effective.


The Situational Leadership Theory - This theory assumes that a leader of the actions depends on a number of situational factors such as motivation and ability of followers, the relationship between leader and follower, stress, mood, etc. Yukl (1989) have six situational factors, namely the efforts of the subordinate, subordinate power and clarity of roles, work organization, cooperation and solidarity, resources and support, and external coordination.


Conclusion
Leaders are generally not a uniform approach, and they mix and match depending on the needs and requirements. In critical situations, they are more dictatorial nature, because they face the possibility of failure. Leaders in the public integrity show (harmony of words and actions with their values), dedication (of all expenditure of time and energy necessary to work to complete, rather than the time available to give), generosity (giving credit where it is needed to defeat accept friendly, and people can do their dignity preserved), humility (not lower or raise myself), openness (the ability to create new thoughts and ideas to understand) and creativity (the ability to think differently).