Leadership skills are a good skill set to have, but not all leaders are successful. We often take for granted the assumption that leadership skills are somehow synonymous to eventual success. However, in reality, there is no skill set, or secret combination of characteristics that makes a leader successful. Different traits matter in different situations, and while some leaders are successful others simply fail.
The good news however is that one can certainly learn to be an effective leader. One simply needs to understand the various approaches to leadership, to best use the right approach given the existing situation.
One way of doing this is to learn about the core leadership theories that provide the backbone of our current understanding of leadership.
Modern history has been obsessed with the idea of leadership and over the previous century, four main groups of theories have emerged about the subject. The following are the four core theories of leadership.
Trait theories
Trait theories argue that effective leaders share a number of common personality characteristics, or traits. Originally the theory believed that leadership is an innate, instinctive quality that you are either born with or simply don't have. However, we have moved on from this idea as research and advances in science are helping us learn more about what we can do to develop leadership qualities within ourselves and others.
Trait theories have narrowed down traits and qualities (such as honesty, empathy, assertiveness, adaptability, amicability) that are “helpful” when leading others, but not a magic formula for effective leadership. None of these traits or any specific combination of them will guarantee success as a leader.
Traits are external behaviours that emerge from the things going on within our minds – and it is these internal beliefs and processes that are important for effective leadership.
Behavioural theories
Behavioural theories focus on how leaders behave. For example, does a good leader decree what needs to be done and expect instant cooperation? Does the good leader involve their teams in the decision making process to encourage team bonding and cohesion?
In the 1930s a German-American psychologist named Kurt Lewin developed a framework based on a leader's behaviour. He argued that there are three types of leaders. According to his theory:
Autocratic leaders: They make decisions without consulting their teams. This style of leadership is considered appropriate when decisions need to be made quickly, when there's no need for input, and when team agreement isn't necessary for a successful outcome.
Democratic leaders: They allow the team to provide input before making a decision, although the degree of input can vary from leader to leader. This style is important when team agreement matters, but it can be difficult to manage when there are lots of different perspectives and ideas.
Laissez-faire leaders: They don't interfere at all. They allow people within the team to make many of the decisions. This works well when the team is highly capable, motivated, and doesn't need close supervision. However, this behaviour can arise because the leader is lazy or distracted; and this is where this style of leadership can fail.
From this one may glean that there is no right or wrong, hard and fast method or way. An effective leader needs to be flexible enough to slip into whatever role the present situation demands.
How leaders behave affects their performance, but researchers have found that many of these leadership behaviours are appropriate at different times, based on the circumstances. The best leaders are those who can use many different behavioural styles, and choose the right style for each situation.
Contingency theories
The realisation in the latter part of the last century that there is no one correct type of leader finally led to theories that the best leadership style depends on the situation. These theories try to apply this idea to predict which style is best under which circumstance.
For example, when we need to make quick decisions, which style is best? When we need the full support of our team, is there a more effective way to lead? Should a leader be more people-oriented or task-oriented? These are all questions that contingency leadership theories have sought to address.
The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory is a popular contingency-based leadership framework, which links leadership style with the maturity of individual members of the leader's team. Other contingency-based models include House's Path-Goal Theory and Fiedler's Contingency Model.
Power and influence theories
Power and influence theories of leadership take an entirely different approach from the other established theories. Power and leadership theories are based on the different ways that leaders use power and influence to get things done, and they look at the leadership styles that emerge as a result.
Perhaps the best-known of these theories is French and Raven's Five Forms of Power. This model highlights three types of positional power – legitimate, reward, and coercive – and two sources of personal power – expert and referent (one’s personal appeal and charm).
The model suggests that using personal power is the better alternative, and that you should work on building expert power (the power that comes with being a real expert in the job) because this is the most legitimate source of personal power.
Another leadership style that uses power and influence is transactional leadership. This approach assumes that people do things for reward and for no other reason. Therefore, it focuses on designing tasks and reward structures.
While this may not be the most appealing leadership strategy in terms of building relationships and developing a highly motivating work environment, it often works, and leaders in most organisations use it on a daily basis to get things done. Similarly, leading by example is another highly effective way of influencing a team.
So what really works?
Transformational leadership is often the best leadership style to use for business. Transformational leaders show integrity, and they know how to develop a robust and inspiring vision of the future. They motivate people to achieve this vision, they manage its delivery, and they build ever stronger and more successful teams.
However, an effective leader will often need to adapt their style to fit a specific group or situation, and this is why it is useful to gain a thorough understanding of other styles.
