Highlights of the Evolution of Leadership


       Hello and welcome to my blog! My name is Mary Beth, and I reside in Alabama. I am working towards my Master’s of Public Administration with a concentration in Public Management at Troy University. Over the next nine weeks, we will be exploring many components of leadership together as I complete my Leadership in Public Administration course. I hope that through this experience, we will all learn something that will make each of us better leaders. After all, whether we realize it or not, we are all leaders in our own right.

      It’s been a whirlwind week in the realm of graduate school, and I have been diving into leadership topics headfirst. As a self-proclaimed history nerd, one topic from this week’s materials really caught my eye—the progression of leadership theory through time. So, this week, we will briefly explore some of the most interesting historic leadership theories.

NOTE: This blog post is only a highlights post. It in no way is an exhaustive look at this topic. I encourage you to take a look at my references (found at the bottom of this post) for further readings on this topic. Also, please take the time to review the two figures below. They provide a more thorough view of leadership theory.


Source: Garrick, L. E. (2004). 500 years of leadership theory. North Shore Group. P. 2


Source: Van Wart, M. (2003). Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment. Public Administration Review 63(2): 218.
The beginnings…

            Lucy E. Garrick explains in her article “500 Years of Leadership Theory” that “most historical sources on the subject cite the earliest writing on leadership in western culture with the publication of Machiavelli’s The Prince” (Garrick, 2004, p.2). If you’re like me, your mind just went back to ninth grade world history with its stories of the powerful Medici banking family. Their money, power, and bloodshed made their names synonymous with what it meant to be leaders in the 15th and 16th centuries.
Picture source:
https://www.emaze.com/@ACQRTCWL/The-Medici-family

Niccolo Machiavelli, the author of The Prince, lived in this world of wealth and power. He took notice of the Medici and Sforza families. He even dedicated his book, The Prince, to the then patriarch of the Medici, Lorenzo de’ Medici (The Prince, 2017).  The Prince championed the idea of control leadership (Garrick, 2004, p. 2). Consider these brief quotes from the book:

“Anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved” (Machiavelli, 1532, p. 60)

“At this point, one may note that men must be either pampered or annihilated. They avenge light offenses; they cannot avenge severe ones; hence, the harm one does to a man must be such as to obviate any fear of revenge.” (Machiavelli, 1532, p. 16)

“People are by nature changeable. It is easy to persuade them about some particular matter, but it is hard to hold them to that persuasion. Hence it is necessary to provide that when they no longer believe, they can be forced to believe.” (Machiavelli, 1532, p. 35)

       As demonstrated from these quotes, control leadership had little to do with the followers in a leadership relationship. Rather, the goal of a leader was to maintain power at all costs.
It is also important to note, that through much of early history the prevailing thought was that leaders were born as leaders (Van Wart, 2003, p.222). This has a lot to do with how titles and wealth were passed through heredity.

                                                 What’s next…
George Washington was often used as evidence 
for Great Man theories.
Picture source: http://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/
george-washington/pictures/george-washington/by-gilbert-stuart

        As the world became for democratized, however, the control theory would give way to “great man,” trait, and behavior theories. These theories were prevalent from the mid-1800s to the late 1900s (Van Wart, 2003, p. 218). While each of these theories is different, they relate to each other in that each prescribes to a person’s inward abilities, characteristics, and behaviors. For example, the great man theory describes a leader that has all of the right characteristics and rises to the occasion at the right time. The trait theory describes certain traits like charisma, courage, or even good looks to make a leader. Similarly, the behavior theory describes behaviors that can be studied and learned. The trait and behavior theories also put a lot of focus on how leadership could be learned in the formal setting.

Breaking the mold…

Then leadership theory took a turn. People began to realize leadership was not necessarily something that could be determined based on traits or behaviors. Nor could merely studying it in textbooks, produce a leader. The late 1900s brought with it theories including transformational leadership and servant leadership (Garrick, 2004, p.2; Van Wart, 2003, p.222). For the first time, leadership became something other than good management. Leadership was now influence possessed by any individual despite title or wealth. It also became something that should challenge the status quo and even revolutionize lives. These theories demonstrate how leadership theory expanded to include the followers. Leadership became a process involving more than just the leader. Moral and ethical implications also came to the forefront whereas previously they had been largely ignored (Riggio, 2009).
For many people, Jesus Christ embodies both 
transformational and servant leadership.
Picture source: 
http://www.turnbacktogod.com/jesus-washing-feet-of-disciples-pictures/ 

Transformational leadership focused on individuals that became agents of change. This leadership theory focuses on people that are visionaries--those who dream big and are capable of creating something new. These people care for their followers and inspire others towards a similar cause.
Servant leadership focuses on the followers. Unlike any other theory before it, this theory zeroed in on the unlikely leader who puts their followers and their organization before themselves. These people are selfless and believe in a cause greater than their own glory.

Conclusion

The history of leadership theory has been a long and turbulent one. Leadership was once considered something only you born with, then it became something that could be learned through study, and today leadership is thought of as something that can be had by everyone in some capacity. Leadership today is a process that can be experienced by followers and leaders alike (Northouse, 2016, p.10).

      Thank you for joining me on this week’s exploration of leadership theory through time! Be sure to check in next week for another discussion of leadership. You can find my blog anytime at http://exploringleadershipinpublicadmin.blogspot.com/ !

References
Bell, J. (2011). Niccolo Machiavelli. In A. Andrea, World history encyclopedia. Santa Barbera, CA: ABC-CLIO Retreived fromhttp://literati.credoreference.com.libproxy.troy.edu/content/topic/machiavelli_niccol%C3%B2_1469_1527?searchId=bd5a628e-4737-11e7-bfb4-0e58d2201a4d

Garrick, L. E. (2004). 500 years of leadership theory. North Shore Group. Retrieved from www.northshoregroup.net

Machiavelli, N. (1532) The prince.

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

The Prince (2017). Spark Notes. Retrieved from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/prince/. 

Riggio, R. E. (2009). Transformational leadership. In S. Lopez (Ed.), The encyclopedia of positive psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Retrieved from http://libproxy.troy.edu/login?url=http://literati.credoreference.com/content/entry/wileyp ospsych/transformational_leadership/0?institutionId=3456


Van Wart, M. (2003). Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment. Public Administration Review 63(2): 214-228.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture

Image
This week in Leadership we discussed two very interesting areas—gender and culture—and how they relate to leadership. For this week’s blog post I will focus on culture and how it is related to leadership. Culture Culture describes “learned beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a group of people” (Northouse, 2016, p.428). every person has their own culture. We get culture from our religions, nations, regions, states, hometowns, genders, races, and even our individual families have their own culture. Culture permeates every decision we make and almost everything we do—from how we speak, what we eat, and even how we perceive individuals. It all comes back to culture. So, it is important for leaders (and followers too) to understand differences in culture and how this will affect the workplace or any environment. “Of all the research on [the] dimensions of culture,” Hofstede’s is likely the most cited (Northouse, 2016, p. 431). Geert H. Hofstede
Read more

Eight Archetypes of Leadership

Image
This week in Leadership we discussed the adaptive and psychodynamic approaches to leadership. Adaptive leadership describes how a leader helps his followers adapt to change and solve problems. Psychodynamic leadership points out the importance of seeing beyond actions alone and understanding that humans are complex beings with many motivations and conflicts at play in any one instance. Individuals and organizations respond differently to different types of leaders. Likewise, some situations call for different kinds of leaders. Within our text for this chapter, an assessment involving the eight archetypes of leadership was presented. Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries presents these archetypes in a discussion of them in a 2013 Harvard Business Review article “The Eight Archetypes of Leadership”. You can find the article here: https://hbr.org/2013/12/the-eight-archetypes-of-leadership . According to this article, the eight archetypes of leadership are as follows: 1.        Th
Read more

The Behavioral and Situational Approaches to Leadership

Image
This week’s discussion covered two other approaches in leadership theory—the behavioral and situational approach. Each of these approaches considers the leader’s behavior across two main dimensions—task and relationship behaviors. Consider this diagram from our text that depicts the behavioral approach: Picture source: Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7 th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers. P. 76 The Behavioral Approach Figure 4.1 depicts the behavioral approach to leadership. As you can tell the two dimensions considered are the concern for people or relationship behaviors and concern for results or task behaviors. This diagram does a great job of portraying the approach. I especially like the names given to each type of leader. Beginning in the top left we have “country club management”. These types of managers are almost wholly concerned with relationship behaviors. They are interested in being the follower’s friend and likely making
Read more