Trait Leadership Theory
Trait theory is one of the early discover leadership theory found dated back to 1920s, which assume that this type of leaders are born with inherited traits and qualities that suits to be good leaders (12manage, 2009). In 1974, according to Stogdill’s review of Leadership Trait Studies, he concludes that people with the following traits could become great leader (2009). Example of these traits are adaptable to situations, alert to social environment, ambitious and achievement orientated, assertive, corporative, dependable, persistent, and tolerant of stress (2009). The skills of this type of leader should be intelligent, creative, knowledgeable, persuasive and socially skilled. The deficiencies in this theory are that many researchers reported contradictory traits and were inconsistency (2009). These has causes many issues and makes this theory unclear to the public.
Behavioral Leadership Theory
Behavioral theory is the opposite from trait theory. The concentrations and beliefs are both different. This leadership theory believes that great leaders can be made, not born and it focuses on the actions of leaders, not their mental qualities states (12management, 2009). Behavioral theory assumes that to become a great leader does not have to be inherent, it can also be through learning and observation. Everyone have the potential to become a leader. One can define his or her role by learning and training, then adapting and acting in the role they adopt from. A good leader takes education and routinely training as the culture of leaders is constantly changing. A deficiency in this theory is that when leader’s role expectations are low or mixed, it may lead to role conflicts.
Contingency Leadership Theory
Contingency theory is a leadership theory which claims that there is no best way to organize, lead or make decision for an organization (12management, 2009). In other word, there is not a universal way or best way to lead or manage an organization. This theory believes that the style of leadership, decision making, and the optimal organization depends on the internal and external constraints factors of the organization (2009). The way to lead and what it is effective in one situation may not be effective in others. Example of constraint factors in organizations that proves this leadership theory to be acceptable are the sizes of the businesses, differences between resources and operations activities, strategies, and employee and management’s relationship (2009). An organization is better satisfy when it is properly design and leadership style is fit appropriately to both tasks and the nature of work. While there are benefits to a leadership style, there is always a disadvantage. A deficiency in this theory is that leader, who is effective in one place and time, can become ineffective and unsuccessful in another situation when the constraint factors around them changes.
Leadership styles: Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-fair
These leadership styles were found by Psychologist Kurt Lewin in the early 1900s. He stated that leaders with autocratic leadership style provides and set clear expectations for what needs to be done, when needs to be done and how it should be done without the involvement of employees’ advices (Wagner, 2009). This type of leaders makes their own decisions with little or no inputs from their peers. When this style is over react by leaders, they are viewed by others as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial leaders (2009). This type of leadership is suitable for situation where small amount of time is allow for decision-making and most effective for organizations where members of the group are familiar with the leader and the leader is the most knowledgeable one of his peers.
Democratic leadership style is known as the most effective leadership style of all the others because this type of leaders offers guidance and advices to their group members and participate in group discussion as well as allowing members to give inputs and speak up (Wagner, 2009). Through studies, Lewin found that in situation, democratic groups are less productive than autocratic groups; however, their contribution was higher quality (2008). Democratic leaders always allow employees to participate in decision-making; but on the other hand, they maintain the final decision-making process. This type of style is use in situation where leaders do not have all the information they need and may need some information from employees, which allow both ends to unite their efforts. This makes employees feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative within the organization.
Laissez-Faire leadership style offers little or no guidance to its employees and very much leave decision making up to them (Wagner, 2009). Such a style is effective in situations where employees are highly qualified and knowledgeable in the areas they are performing in. This allows leaders to set prioritize and delegate certain tasks; however, this type of style usually leads to lack of motivation and poor roles within the organization.
Leadership Style that Best Fitted the New Role as Officer of Compliance
As the newly Officer of Compliance, democratic leadership style would be best fitted for this position. Being new to this position, allowing employees to participate, giving decisions and ideas should be a good start. Furthermore, this is an opportunity for employees to learn together with leaders, which in the long run will benefit all employees due to the fact that they are familiar with the different policies from participating in group discussions. At the same time, this motivates employees and makes them feel as a part of the organization. References
12management. (2009). Leadership theories. Retrieved on April 18, 2009, from
http://www.12manage.com/
Wagner, K. V. (2009). Lewin’s leadership styles. Retrieved on April 18, 2009, from
http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/a/leadstyles.htm
