What is leadership?
One definition, put forward by Hellriegal & Slocum, confidently asserts that it is:
“The ability to influence, motivate, and direct others in order to attain desired objectives” (as cited in Mason
& Wetherbee, 2004, p. 187).
In practice, however, Hernon & Rossiter (2006) have pointed out that more than 100 such definitions have been put forward over the years (p. 260). Similarly, a simple Google search will reveal hundreds of websites, books and training programs, all of which purport to have some unique insight into the “what leadership means and how leaders can be developed” (Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, pp. 187-188). In short, leadership is a complicated subject and, as stated by Bennis & Nanus, “There is no simple formula, no rigorous science, no cookbook that leads inexorably to successful leadership” (cited in Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, pp. 187-188).
Though clearly unsettled, leadership research to date has largely been based on several overarching theories. While it would be impossible to describe them all in detail, some of the most popular are summarized below (links to further reading on these theories can be found under the “resources” tab):
“The ability to influence, motivate, and direct others in order to attain desired objectives” (as cited in Mason
& Wetherbee, 2004, p. 187).
In practice, however, Hernon & Rossiter (2006) have pointed out that more than 100 such definitions have been put forward over the years (p. 260). Similarly, a simple Google search will reveal hundreds of websites, books and training programs, all of which purport to have some unique insight into the “what leadership means and how leaders can be developed” (Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, pp. 187-188). In short, leadership is a complicated subject and, as stated by Bennis & Nanus, “There is no simple formula, no rigorous science, no cookbook that leads inexorably to successful leadership” (cited in Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, pp. 187-188).
Though clearly unsettled, leadership research to date has largely been based on several overarching theories. While it would be impossible to describe them all in detail, some of the most popular are summarized below (links to further reading on these theories can be found under the “resources” tab):
- The Great Man theory is based on the assumption that great leaders are “born into the role” and possess some innate characteristics that inspire the imagination of followers (Sheldon, 2010, pp. 5-6). Though outdated, this view is still very much present in the popular imagination.
- The Trait theory “stresses that successful leaders have certain abilities, skills, and personality characteristics”, though there is constant disagreement over which ones predominate. Kouzes and Posner, for instance, identified 225 different values, traits, and characteristics deemed important for leaders, the most common being honesty, vision, competency and ability to inspire (cited in Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, p. 188). By contrast, the ancient Greeks valued “shrewdness”and “Cunning” (Sheldon, 2010, p. 6). The identification of leadership traits thought to be important in various professional settings remains popular. The American Library Association (ALA), for instance, identified 101 pertinent leadership traits under the headings “physical”, “emotional”, “social”, "intellectual”, “communication”, “experience” and “trustworthy”. Examples include “high energy level”, “optimistic”and “superior listener” ("Ladders to Leadership", n.d., traits section).
- The Behavioral theory of leadership posits that effective and ineffective leaders behave differently, and that effective leaders often change their approach based on the situation at hand (Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, pp. 188-190).
- Under the Transformational Leadership theory, a leader recognizes the needs of followers, but goes on to inspire them to
“…transcend their own self-interest for the good of the group or organization” (Hernon & Rossiter, 2006, p. 273). As stated by Mason & Wetherbee (2004), transformational leaders motivate others by engaging both their heads and hearts (e.g. values, empowerment, coaching) (p. 190). This approach contrasts with that taken by Transactional leaders, who are said to be “power wielders” who focus on guiding their followers to achieve set goals through the use of personal incentives (Hernon & Rossiter, 2006, p. 273). - For his part, Daniel Goleman posited that one indispensable quality of leadership is Emotional Intelligence, which he characterized as “managing the mood of the organization.” In Goleman’s view, this is achieved through a mix of self-awareness (understanding yourself and your effect on others); self-regulation (self-control and thinking before acting); motivation (persistently pursuing your goals and getting others to pursue a shared vision); empathy (understanding the emotions of others and treating them accordingly); and social skill (managing relationships and networks) (cited in Hernon & Rossiter, 2006, pp. 260, 262-263, see also Goleman, 1998).
|
As the foregoing makes clear, there is no universal view
of what exactly leadership “is”. Instead, it is largely up to individuals to review the theories and to develop their own point of view and leadership style (Sheldon, 2010, p. 9; C. Blanchard, Pers. Comm., March 22, 2013). In doing so, it is also important to bear in mind that the qualities of leadership sought in one situation may be inappropriate in another (Hernon & Rossiter, 2006, p. 268; C. Blanchard, Pers. Comm., March 22, 2013). It is also important to realize that leadership exists at all levels (not just senior management) and in many forms (Hernon & Rossiter, 2006, p. 260). To illustrate the latter point, we invite you to review this video by Derek Sivers on the "underestimated form of leadership” exhibited by the “first follower” (Sivers, 2010). |
One final assumption that lies behind much of the modern thinking on leadership development is that leadership is different from management, but managers can be turned into leaders through training and development (Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, p. 188). Mason & Wetherbee (2004) sum up the difference this way, which also highlights the importance of teamwork, networks and partnerships to effective leadership:
Management is usually understood as a skill set that includes planning, organizing, directing, and managing workers and
work activities. Leadership, on the other hand, includes the ability to create a vision of the future, engage others in the
co-creation and / or perfection of that vision, describe it in a compelling and powerful manner, and create an environment
where stakeholders inside and outside the organization work together productively and effectively to implement the vision
successfully (p. 190).
Management is usually understood as a skill set that includes planning, organizing, directing, and managing workers and
work activities. Leadership, on the other hand, includes the ability to create a vision of the future, engage others in the
co-creation and / or perfection of that vision, describe it in a compelling and powerful manner, and create an environment
where stakeholders inside and outside the organization work together productively and effectively to implement the vision
successfully (p. 190).
Can leadership be learned?
While Hernon & Rossiter’s (2006) study found some disagreement amongst library managers as to whether all leadership traits could be learned (p. 267), there is now a general consensus amongst researchers in the field that motivated individuals can improve specific leadership skills / competencies through proper training (Celine Blanchard, personal communication, March 22, 2013; Goleman, 2004, pp. 28-29; Mason & Wetherbee, 2004, p. 195).
Those interested in improving leadership skills / competencies will find no shortage of skills-training theories and programs to choose from (some common ones are listed under the "resources" tab). By and large, Mason & Wetherbee (2004, p. 205) found that these programs fit within 4 broad training approaches, as described in the table to the right. As was the case in defining leadership, however, it is really up to the individual to choose the training approach that is best for them. |
To sum up...
There is no universal definition of "Leadership", nor is there one right path to "leadership development." As such, this website is built on the assumption that everyone needs to develop their own definition of leadership; everyone needs to assess their own talents and weaknesses when it comes to leadership; and everyone needs to develop their own leadership plan to transform those insights into meaningful action.