Are leaders born or made?

There have been various leadership theories including one named the "Great Man Theory" by Stogdill (1948) as cited by Hughes et al (2006). The theory as summarised by ChangingMinds.org (2007) suggested that "leaders are born, not made" (ChangingMinds.org 2007, Cawthon 1996: 1). Furthermore, it suggests that "leaders will arise when there is a great need". ChangingMinds.org (2007) goes on to say that because gender was not an issue when discussing leadership, the "Great Man Theory" may have made a lot of sense during this period. One would suggest that due to such a male dominant attitude, other alternative views could not have been allowed to be evaluated. During the 1900's many researchers suggested that leaders and followers had different traits (Hughes et al 2006: 158). However, Sodgill (1948) as cited by Hughes et al (2006) concluded that (1); "leaders were not qualitatively different" than followers and (2); some characteristics "were moderately related to leadership success" (p. 159).

Characteristics & Traits

The online Oxford English Dictionary (1989) defines characteristic as; "to indicate the essential qualities or nature of persons or things; displaying character; distinctive; typical". It also defines trait as "a particular feature of mind or character; a distinguishing quality; a characteristic; spec. of a culture or social group". These two definitions would suggest that they are both emotional things that make someone who they are. One would also suggest that these are things that have either been taught by parents or learnt through experiences. Whatever the method, upon reflection and positive acceptance, this learnt behaviour becomes part of one's characteristics; thus affecting how someone else would perceive one's traits. Hughes et al (2006) and Pervin (1994) both agree that the five factor model of personalities is a good tool for insight into the traits of a leader to help explain why they would consistently act in a certain manner in a given situation.

In addition Hiss (2007) describes characteristics such as height and strength as factors that were perceived as required to be considered a leader. History has many tails of this which have been turned into motion pictures such as Troy, Braveheart or The Patriot to name a few. They were all characters who showed strength in times when lethal action was required. Hiss also suggests that research showed "that almost 80% of the population expects a good leader to be over 6 foot". If this was the case, then some could argue that George Bush of the United States, John Howard of Australia would not make good leaders based purely on their heights. Yet they have been in leadership roles longer than one term. In addition, one has also often heard remarks like "woman do not or should not be in leadership positions". Yet Helen Clarke; Prime Minister of New Zealand seems to be doing a good job; even if she is a woman (joking).

The right stuff

Obviously stereotyping is expected wherever there are multiple viewpoints. Hence it is possible to believe that leaders are usually taller than followers. Society has programmed us from a young age to believe that physical traits define a person. Let's have a look at the modelling industry for example where models un-intentionally tell young girls through their actions that a size 12 is too fat. Or being fit means one needs to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. That having long hair, dreadlocks or a beard is being irresponsible. That being coloured in some countries means uneducated and so on. Fortunately for humanity, we are learning creatures. As cultures become integrated and societies become more educated, these stereotypical views are frowned upon. People and researchers are now paying more attention to traits such as humility, integrity, honesty, intelligence and responsibility etcetera to identify good leaders.

The focus appears to have shirted back to include the traditional theories. Cawthon's (1996) view is that "the right" (p. 2) "is not equally present in all people" (p. 2). Meaning that individuals are born with certain traits that will enable them to learn and develop into leaders more easily than others; a view that one would agree with. But leadership is required in different quantities hence it does not matter that these traits are not present in everyone. As noted by Hughes et al (2006) having the right characteristics does not guarantee successful leadership, but that it does improve the likelihood of being better accepted and followed by followers (p. 159).

Conclusion

As a self professed new age man, one would have to agree that individuals are in fact born with certain traits whether male of female which determine one's physical and emotional traits. These traits may in fact be further developed during time through experiences. Along the way, individuals will indeed experience, learn, and adapt to new surroundings and environments. In addition, stereotyping is a reality and we must all learn to deal with it until such time the unenlightened will be enlightened. Until then, one would have to agree with the early theorist that being tall has the perception of being a good leader. However, this is based on a view that individuals during this period did not fully understand the mechanics behind the leadership process. There are still groups of people who still identify with this viewpoint and oblivious to alternative thoughts and ideas. Until such time as when they learn to understand the human psychology in more detail, being tall may still be considered a trait of a good leader. One's personal view however, is that hight does not have anything to do with how good a leader is. However, it may help a confident person become even more confident when put on a pedestal by followers who believe that being tall is a good trait to have.

References

[1] ChangingMinds.org (2007) Great Man Theory [Online] Available from: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/great_man_theor... (Accessed 16 April 2007)

[2] ChangingMinds.org (2007) Traits Theory [Online] Available from: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/trait_theory.ht... (Accessed 16 April 2007)

Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., Curphy, G.J. (2006) Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. 5th ed. McGraw Hill: Singapore.

Hiss, A. (2007) HISS-A-GRAM WEEK 2 [Online] Available from Embanet (Accessed 14 April 2007)

Cawthon, D. (1996) Leadership: The great man theory revisited, Business Horizons, 39, (3), pp. 1-4. [Online] Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W45-45FPG2J-22/2/5432512c... (Accessed 16 April 2007)

Pervin, L.A (1994) A critical Analysis of Current Trait Theory. Psychological Inquiry, 5, (2)pp. 103-113 [Online] Available from: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1047-840X%281994%295%3A2%3C103%3AACAOCT... (Accessed 16 April 2007)

Team Effectiveness Leadership Model (TELM) explained

Input, process, output; these are the three fundamental components of the TELM model. These three components must work together to yield the best desired results. For without input and process, there is no output. However producing an output does not guarantee effective performance, hence monitoring and critiquing must take place to ensure the best performance is gained from members of the team. Hughes et al (2006) cite Hackman’s argument that an effective team’s output is realised when the product or service provided meets the expectation of the person using it in terms of “quality, quantity and timeliness” (p. 310). Furthermore the process that occurs while the group is carrying out the task enhances the individuals within the team allowing them to work as members of the team in the future (p. 310). In addition it also allows the experience to enhance the personal growth of the person who created the team (p.310).

Historical Example
When I first arrived at the organisation that we will call Company A, there was an after sales support team providing a support services. However this service had no focus nor was it being measured. Support was provided by two different groups; namely helpdesk and field engineering. The relationship between these two groups is one of blame and there was a definite lack of communication. Helpdesk would often comment that Field Engineering never responded to their questions and Field Engineering suggested that Helpdesk were lazy. The environment as you can image was not the ideal for providing a service worth mentioning. This however was the internal happenings; external customers were happy with the service being provided but there were obviously a few complaint every now and then about misplaced calls etcetera.

Identify the Issue
My initial approach was to understand the difference in opinions between the two teams. Although these departments were separate internally, the customer’s view of this service is singular; hence it was imperative to act as such. During conversations with Helpdesk, they were frustrated because they were constantly told that they were not available to answer phones calls. Yet they were often on the phone to a customer anywhere between five to two hours trying to solve an issue. There was no system to log calls and there was no way of knowing which customer had a service agreement and which one didn’t. They were also frustrated that when an engineer was required, the paper given to Field Engineering was misplaced; resulting in abusive calls from the customer. The Field Engineering department on the other hand also had their own share of complaints about Helpdesk. Often an engineer was sent to site only to find out that the issues could have been solved on the phone. Individuals within the same team would also blame each other for issues or cases where they had expected the other to do something for a particular client fault. To add into the mix, the accounting department were also unhappy due to parts going missing or job logs being misplaced. It was obvious that there were many issues which needed to be addressed as team members both within and cross departmental were unhappy. As a result, the service being provided to our customers was abysmal in opinion compared to other organisations that I had worked for in the past.

Business Process Improvement
It was obvious from the conversations and observations that the biggest issue contributing to this case was a lack of processes. Lack of process therefore contributed to the lack of clear communication and a culture of blame. With this information in mind, one proposed a solution. First, existing processes were to be mapped using a third party consultancy company so that they would be impartial to the internal politics. On the completion of this project we sat down and discuss how these processes could be improved and what technology could be used to automate and aid these processes. Processes were then changed to account for improvements made by the use of a customer relations management (CRM) system. I also created a customer services team to answer all incoming calls both for sales and support issues. This ensured that the Helpdesk would have time to talk on the phone while customer services would ensure that all calls were answered and logged. The process of support was explained to the customer and they were given a reference number – allowing for prioritisation. Clear service level agreements were also published and communicated. Purchase history was now available between an integrating from the CRM into the enterprice resource planning (ERP) system. Obviously during this project all members of each team were involved in the design of processes and systems. Training was provided that they all agreed to the changes proposed. Using a combination of technology enhancements and process reengineering, we were now able to operate a paperless system. Each communication that took place between team members and clients were recorded and time stamped as comments. Each visit is recorded and any details about the customer and their product can also be checked. New process maps were also drawn up and published on the CRM library facility so that they could be accessed by all those responsible for providing the after sales service. In addition I also introduced reports produced by the system on performance such as first times fixes, number of issues, re-visits and so on. With this information in hand, we were able to meet on a monthly basis as scheduled to discuss any issues or future improvements to both processes and systems. Although this group consists of the line managers responsible for these different teams, each manager had also relayed this information to their own team. In addition to the above changes, we also introduced a job swap process so that each member of each team is able to view the environment from another’s perspective.

Output
With the improvements made as mentioned above, the atmosphere changed considerably for the better. There was definitely more accountability! But most importantly, the communications channels had been opened and had allowed clarity of responsibility and team work. Each team is able to see the performance of the other by way of crystal reports that can be run at any time within the CRM. The introduction of the Customer Service team has also eased some of the stress and processes have brought the team together to form one virtual after sales team. In addition to all this, service level agreements are now being met and exceeded. More and more customers are choosing to renew their service agreements and word spread within the industry of our unmatched service responses and first time fix rates. Ultimately, the P&L also looks very positive as a result and we continued to reinvest into our people and the after sales area of the business as a whole.

Input
Another side affect of these activates is renewed faith in the organisation by service personnel. Of course there will always be issues to deal with and there are certain individual who need to be micromanaged. But individuals are now freely making suggestions on improvements as well as making constructive feedback on areas that we could improve on. They also showed their willingness to learn by requesting additional training in areas outside of their specialties showing signs of personal growth.

Conclusion
Often people assume that differences of opinions within a working environment occur because individuals just don’t see eye to eye. Where an environment is out of someone’s direct control it is very easy to start blaming others. Group or team processes or lack thereof; contribute to these differences of opinions and cause conflict within team. An effective team leader should be able to identify the route cause of these issues and address them so that the team’s performance is not restricted by such blockages. As stated by Hughes et al (2006) leaders must look to solve the cause of the problem which directly affects the behaviours and attitudes of team members.

References

Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., Curphy, G.J. (2006) Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. 5th ed. McGraw Hill: Singapore.

The five power bases of leadership

Power is “the ability to change the behavior of others” (Vecchio 2006: 124). How one chooses to use this power to influence others is dependant on one’s characteristics. There are five bases of power as describe by Vecchio (2006) and Hughes et al (2006). Expert power stems from an individual’s knowledge and experience of a particular subject. Referent power is born of the relationship between a leaders and followers. Legitimate power is usually appointed by way of role within a group or organization. Reward power refers to power that is gained from being able to reward followers with what they desire. Finally, coercive power is the power to punish (Vecchio 2006, Hughes et al 2006). A leader may be able to use a combination of these power bases. Others on the other hand may only be able to use one or two of these power bases. For example, an individual that has been elevated to a higher status within an organization may only use coercive power because followers may not like them personally. A good leader on the hand will be able to use any of the five bases of power to influence followers depending on the situation and attitude of the follower.

Good Leadership
As noted by Hughes et al (2006) power can be used by leaders and managers for both positive and negative changes (p. 132). Hughes et al (2006) go on to say that “the leader’s personal values may be one of the most important determinants of how power is exercised or constrained” (p. 132). Maxwell (1999) also lists 21 qualities that a leader must have in order for people to want to follow. When the subject of a leader is discussed, most would argue that personal traits, values and characteristic of a person make them a leader. One would also agree with this, and in light of the lessons learnt in the over time, one would also add that knowing the leadership process would help a leader with those traits and values increase their leadership credibility considerably.

Leadership Example
In a couple of organisations that I have worked for, there have been particular leaders who have stood out from the rest. In terms power, these leader had the ability to command all five power bases. They were also very approachable and easy to talk to whether you were the store man, middle manager or an executive within the organisation. One of them in particular had intentionally placed their office at the far end of the building so that he can say good morning to every employee when he walks into the building each morning. He often stopped and had general conversations with members of staff about their week end as so on. During management meetings, he would relay his message about creating and keeping a happy working environment. In fact he bought every manager a copy of Blanchard et al’s (1998) book Gung Ho because he wanted every manager to consider the positive implications of a good and happy working environment. Furthermore, in most meetings he would discuss particular individuals within the company that he had noticed performing well. Following this, he would ask that we ensure that there were career paths for these particular employees as well as anyone else who is showing promise. He would often speak about the importance of reflection and that we should be encouraged to have time away from the office to think strategically. Furthermore he would encourage us to take our teams to dinner every so often to show our appreciating for their hard work. These characteristics demonstrated that he had the power of influence in a positive manner. It also showed that he had reward and referent power.

Obviously, his position within the organization also gave him legitimate power throughout the organisation. Furthermore he had expert power when evaluating the past record of company’s performance. When he originally came into the company, the company was turning over £2 million per annum. It was also very dependant on a dealer network which appeared to have little loyalty to the brand – resulting in the channel dictating what prices it wanted to pay for products. In his first major strategic move, he revoked the licenses for all dealers, keeping only the top performers as agents and employing a direct channel to increase the company’s credability and brand. During this period, he surrounded himself with a management team to help turn the organisation around, resulting in an increase in turnover by four hunder percent and most importantly, increasing cash flow and profit. Since this time dealers have come back requesting a new relationship under the organisation’s new terms. Personally, this demonstrates that he had the expertise to successfully lead an organisation and make touch decisions when they were required.

In relation to motivation, this leader had the ability to inspire many within the organisation including your truely. He also had the ability to identify leaders and develop them into future leaders. As an example, a number of up and coming employees had been able to develop their skills further by studying towards professional qualification that had bee funded by the organisation; again demonstrating his desire to create a great working environment. A number of these individuals have since told me that when they had personally thanks him, he had replied by saying that his role was to provide an environment that people can excel in. And if this is done, performance and profit will naturally follow.

The aforementioned examples are just some of the traits that these leaders showed. In addition both leaders treated family life balance with respect and advocated this within the organisation such were their views that a balance must be made between one’s working life, family home life and personal time. They demonstrated this by arraning company weekends away with family members. With all of these qualities, everyone in the company knew where they steed and that they had the ability to demote or dismiss those who did not fit into that environment. As noted by Maxwell, “leadership is the capacity and will to rally men and woman to a common purpose and the character which inspires confidence” (p. 1).

Manager Example
On the flipside of leaders are individuals who are termed managers who have the ability to comfortably manage day to day activities such as; engineer allocation and handling customer complaints. They are good company ambassador by way of great customer service, pacifying customers or finding solutions to very technical issues. However, they do not have the vision nor the right skill set to command leadership. Obviously as managers they would have the power to reward given their positions within the organisation. In fact I have personally worked with a number of managers who were very approachable people and related well to subordinate; however they did not inspire those around them. For example, according engineer and technical staff that I have encountered, they had all mentioned that their managers failed to provide them with any sense of direction; hence they felt as if they were just going with the motions.

In one particular example a field engineering business unit was operating at a considerable deficit, even though their activity levels were high. Furthermore these staff members often commented that this manager failed to relay any of their ideas to the management group or they were dismissed without a reasonable explanation as to why their ideas had been denied. Staff acknowledged that she had the technical expertise in terms of engineering, but failed to effective lead the department. Subordinates suggest that feedback was a one way affair and they did not feel comfortable enough to provide feedback in relation to suggested changes or the way in which they were being mis-managed.

Yet in saying this, one does feel that this manager can become a leader if further education and training was offered – but most importantly accepted. In fact I had suggested that she needed to consider embarking on a business study type short course to gain more understanding of strategy. In response she said she was aware that this is an area that she lacked understanding hence she has been unable to formulate a business plan with future objectives.Lack of leadership stems from her lack of understanding of business activities such as financial implications. However, her honest evaluation of the area she lacks and the willingness to address this weakness suggests that she may be able to make the transition into a leader.

Conclusion
Great leaders inspire those they lead and ensure that followers will always see them in good light as testament to their good faith, values and charisma. Great leaders also inspire followers to become good leaders and pass on what has been demonstrated onto them. Credibility is something that comes about through trust as a result of positive actions. Managers also have the ability to become leaders if they have the capacity to realize their shortfall and are willing to do what is required to become a good leader.

References

Blanchard, K., Bowles, S. (1998) Gung Ho! How to motivate people in any organization. London: Harper Collins

Maxwell, J.C. (1998) The 21 indispensable qualities of a leader: Becoming the person others will want to follow. Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville

Vecchio, R. P. (2006) Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. 6th ed. Mason, OH: Thomas South-Western

What is the best way to train tomorrows leaders?

“Effective leaders recognise that the ultimate test of leadership is sustained success, which demands the constant cultivation of future leaders” (Tichy 1997). “Leadership is a process, not a position” (Hughes et al 2006), therefore it is imperative that as leaders we must understand what motivates those we lead because the success of the leader and the organisation is dependant on the performance of others. If this is the case, then the lessons that we have learnt as leaders must be passed on to those we lead. Providing an environment that encourages the development of future leaders is the responsibility of organisations and those that lead them.

This can be achieved through formal training programs funded by organisations. They can also be achieved through informal training plans where the leader is directly involved – perhaps in the form of coaching. Informal training allows trainee’s to learn more about the leader because “winning leaders seem to naturally generate positive emotional energy in others” (Tichy 1997). In addition, future leaders must also show an eagerness to learn and develop themselves whether through company or personally funded training courses. By doing so, they in turn transmit an eagerness to be developed and harnessed for greater things in life.

According to Tichy (1997) “the ability to develop the leadership of others requires three things; a teachable point of view, a story for your organisation, and a well-defined methodology for teaching and coaching” (ibid). As the global arena becomes virtually smaller, leaders of organisations must consider the long term objectives for the survival of their organisations. Survival therefore depends on the talent within an organisation. As noted by Tichy talent can either be hired from outside the company or as most businesses are trying to achieve going forward; develop from within because insiders already have an understanding on the business.

To help the development process of future leaders, Tichy (1997) proposes three key factors that provide a framework that can be taught throughout the organisation. Or in order words, develop a “leadership brand” (Lawler 1999) that can be taught using a “methodology” (Tichy 1997). Tichy noted that to succeed as a leader one must be able to articulate a defining position for one’s organisation. One must also be able to talk clearly and convincingly about who you are, why you exist, and how you operate (ibid). This sounds very much like an organisation’s objective summarised into a lift statement having already been clearly defined and communicated to the workforce. In essence this ensures that the leader believes and supports the organisation’s objectives.

According to Tichy story telling allows the leader to relay a certain sense of feeling and belonging that followers can relate to. Through these stories, a follower is able to imagine themselves in this situation and connect emotionally with the situation. By doing so, they have also made a connection with their leader. Many situations can be relayed using these stories making it an excellent way of getting buy-in from followers. If fact this is one of the methods that I already use when discussing certain things with followers because in most cases, followers may question whether the leader has actually been in that situation previously. By relaying a story about a given situation, the leader is able to place him/herself in the same light as the follower to gain credibility.

A methodology therfore is a set of instructions or a plan of action on how a particular task should be carried out; or as Hughes et al (2006) describe it, “development planning”. As noted by Tichy (1997) “to be a great teacher you have to be a great learner”. This also fits in well with Hughes et al’s (2006) view that in order to build a development plan, involving the trainee in putting together the prospectus perse gets buy-in.

Conclusion
A leader’s own style will determine the method used to train and influence tomorrow’s leaders in their own organisations. Involving the learner in designing their own development plan ensures that they will learn in a way that best suits them and their mentor.

References
Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., Curphy, G.J. (2006) Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. 5th ed. McGraw Hill: country regionplaceSingapore.

Lawler, E. (2004) Leading a Vituous-Spiral Organization by Edward E. Lawler:

Leader to leader, No. 32 Spring 2004 [Online] Available from:
http://www.leadertoleader.org/knowledgecenter/L2L/spring2004/lawler.html (Accessed 27 April 2007)

Tichy, N. (1997) The mark of a Winner. [Online] Available from:
http://leadertoleader.org/leaderbooks/l2l/fall97/tichy.html (Accessed 13 May 2007)

Which leadership theory is best?

My speculation is that at one time of another you have come across the following phrases; “don’t make a bad situation into a worse situation”, “choice is the period between the situation and one’s reaction”; “you don’t put a fire out by pouring a bucket of petrol over it; “it was not my decision, he/she made me do it”. Or how often have you responded to an email by immediately responding with a heated email. In principle you would type your response, wait a day to give yourself the opportunity to calm down and read the email again before sending it if you still felt that strong about it – or deleting it? Unfortunately there are situations where heated discussions take place and one does not always have the opportunity to take this pause. It is this pause that choice actually occurs and one that effective leaders have come to learn and master; because there is always an alternative. The trick is; knowing what the best alternative is to suit the situation presented.

Learning
Being an effective leader requires that one must be able to learn, adapt and change because we all know that the world does not stand still. Globalisation has made the world that much smaller than once perceived. We are also becoming more educated hence we have become more demanding of the level or service and duty of care we would like to receive. In addition rapid advancements in technology in the last decade alone have played a major part in the process of change and will continue to do so into the future. How quickly one can reflect and learn will determine how truly effective a leader can be. Change is good. Yet many see change as a threat – however threats should also be perceived as opportunities for improvement.

Leadership
The situational leadership theory stipulates that the leader’s “leadership capabilities” depend on the leader’s ability to adapt. There is no conclusive method of leadership, hence the number of different theories proposed and analysed. There are different styles of leadership. Some leaders provide direction to their followers while others provide emotional or social support. Leaders can use both of the aforementioned methods at once, however; there are those who choose not to use either method at all.

Environment
The environment is changing on a global basis hence the shift from traditional business activities. For example outsourcing of business activities or functions to third parties have become the norm as business try to cope with the vast changes.
Economies such as China and India to name a couple are forcing changes that are felt in the US and UK economies. With such obvious changes, organisations are also changing their own structures to guard against poor performance as well as cashing in the opportunities presented by these very changes. Buzz words such as hybrid, matrix and decentralised describe the various organisation structures as described by Vecchio (2006), Hughes et al (2006) and Robbins (2005). They all point to the inevitable; change will take place and does not wait for anyone. The rate of change appears to be occurring much quicker that most would like to admit.

So can leaders change?
Yes leaders can and should change; for if they do not change, they will not be able to keep up with developments within their organisations and the world as a whole. Furthermore, they will not be able to identify with those they lead. Most situations are different; hence leaders must learn to understand these situations when encountered. Some may come in handy when dealing with similar situations. People are different and how these people react to different situations depends on the environment created by the leader. We mimic the behaviour of those we look up and try to replicate the characteristics of those individuals. But we also have our own characteristics and experience our own situations; hence we are constantly learning as leaders. Therefore although the decisions we make are similar to those made by our mentors, an ever changing environment ensures that as leaders, we take a different approach to the same problem with different individuals.

Which theory then
The situational leadership theory allows a leader to “adopt different leadership styles depending on the situation” (Chimaera Consulting Ltd 1998). This theory allows the leader to match the maturity of subordinates based on the follower’s psychology or technical skills. As followers have different maturity levels on both these fronts, the opportunity to learn is always present. Therefore, how a situation actually turns out depends on the leader; the follower’s maturity and the situation at hand.

A leader who is able to determine the skill level of a follower using the normative decision model can also learn and change their approach on how to lead this particular subordinate or a group of subordinates. Once again, this presents the opportunity for the leader to learn and try different approaches to solving the same problem. The path-goal theory suggests that performance and the satisfaction of a group can be affected by the leader in numerous ways (House 1971) such as reward, clarification towards goals and by removing obstacles in the way. Again, by understanding and knowing the needs of the group, a leader can learn to change his/her personality and approach.

The Contingency Theory will also allow a leader to change as the groups performance is dependant on the leader's style. The Contingency Theory is described as task motivated or relationship motivated. Again a leader should be able to determine what motivates the individuals or groups they lead. Those who prefer responsibility should be given the opportunity to be delegated tasks. And those who prefer a relational approach should be provided with the environment to do so.

Conclusion
In conclusion, there is no right or wrong approach on how to lead followers because it depends on the follower’s needs and maturity as well as the situation. These two factors then allow the leader to determine what approach they will take. Obviously, this also depends on the nature of the leader too.

References

ChangingMinds.org (2007) Contingency Theory [Online] Available from: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/contingency_the... (Accessed 27 April 2007)

Chimaera Consulting Ltd (1998) [Online] Available from: http://www.chimaeraconsulting.com/sitleader.htm (Accessed 27 April 2007)

House R. (1971) A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16 (3) pp. 321-339. [Online] Available from: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-8392%28197109%2916%3A3%3C321%3A APGTOL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F (Accessed 27 September 2007)

Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., Curphy, G.J. (2006) Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. 5th ed. McGraw Hill: Singapore.

Robbins, S.P. (2005) Organisational Behavior. 11th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc

Vecchio, R. P. (2006) Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. 6th ed. Mason, OH:Thomas South-Western