There is no reliable research tosuggest that there are defined "leadership traits"
"Authoritarian Test" - an actual test for people to take
"The Nobal Lie - Plato"
Leadership = types of theories
- Traitbased Theory - effective leaders are simply "great men" - originated with Plato in 380BC
- Contingency Theory - effective leadership is a product of a perfect match between personality and context
- Behavioural: 0 Fleishman and Peters - 1962 - effective leaders display initiation of structure and consideration
- Transactional: 1978 - Hollander - Hollander - Hollander - Hollander - effetive leadership is a process of social exchange - its a contract of exchange between the 2
- Transformational: 1978 - Burns - effective leadership is the product of a leader's charismatic personality - but we can't quite figure out what the "charismatic personality" actualy is - hard to quantify
What do we know? - Leaders have skills... whatever skills they are - context matters - the context will change what is expected of the leader - leaders do things - the leaders who were the most effective are those who take action - followers matter - there is something about the group that you are leading
Limitations of dominant approaches
1. it depends (leaddership is rarely recognised consensually). Diffferent people will follow differnt people.
2. inflexible (leaders character is seen as fixed, inflexible and unresponsive)
3. individualistic -
4. non predictive - no theories have been reliable about who will and who wont leader
5. qualitatively lacking - - inspiring - the average person who achieves, to lallow the group to achieve
- Lao Tszu - definiton of a leader - old theeory!
What is leadership?
the process whereby one or more members of a group influence other group members in a way that motivates them to contribute to the achievement of group goals. (Haslam and Reicher, 2002)
its not about power over, byt about power through (people) (Turner 2005)
Real power is when a whole bunch of people get together to act in a certain direction.
Leadership as a social identity management.
Reflecting = crafting a sense of us - creating a brand - identity entrepreneur - successful leaders craft identity - if you have an identity, you need something to compare to to know the difference - represent us, (not me or them), and devise structures that embed, maintain and promote that sense of "us". That allows us to assume authority on tthe basis of us, in that structure. build the mission to define we are THIS sort of people, and we do it THIS way. similar to religious rituals, but they become cultural rituals (perhaps social rituals).
Representing = being one of us. you need to be a part of us in order to be one of us and have influence over us - identity management - we are influenced by our leaders (and not theirs). - make people that that you are doing it for "us"
Realising = you need to achieve the results for the group - identity champion - you need to construct a vision for the group to achieve what they want to achive in a way tht will be a benefit for all of us
Ask the question = was it leadership, or was it power, that enabled them to do XXXXX?
Cognitive / psychological need trust between each other - one of the biggest mistakes is when there is a team with individual rewards
"Evidence of leaders attempting overtly to manipulate their followers by means of either reward or punishment is an indicator not of their leaderships success but of its failure" at the end of the day, if you need to use power, you have no influence
GE = Jack