Rather than looking at implicit traits of leadership, behaviour approach focuses on the behaviours that leader engaged in. Unlike the traditional behaviour leadership which focuses on leadership styles, the studies on leadership emergence concentrate on the behaviour (patterns) that distinguish leaders from followers.
Many researchers suggest that a group member’s rate of participation is a strong predictor of that member’s emergence as the leader of the group (Bass，1949; Carter et al., 1951; Jones & Gerard, 1967). Jones and Gerard (1967) state ‘rate of participation, regardless of its quality or mode of conduction, is a prime index of leadership qualities in the eyes of other members’ (p.673).Verbal participation is a key measure of participation …show more content…
This means emergent leadership is not self-evident; it needs the interpretation of team members or observers. Many of the empirical leadership research use peer ratings and observer ratings to test the relationships between traits or behaviours and leadership emergence. The leadership is conceptual and interpreted and shows the perceivers’ encoding and reconstruction of leadership information (Lord et al., 1986). Implicit leadership theories (ILTs) hold that leadership is a process being perceived by others as a leader (Berson et al, 2006). When individual shows potential leadership behaviours, leadership is more likely to be attributed to this person (Kenney et al., 1994). Lord et al. (1984) argue that people tend to differentiate leaders and followers and evaluate leaders by using cognitive categories of behaviour and traits (termed ‘prototypes’). Kenny et al. (1994) identified four abstract categories of characteristics (taking charge, learning goals, being nervous and being nice) required for perceived leaders. Offermann et al. (1994) tested eight dimensions of traits and found dedication, charisma, intelligence, and sensitivity are typically seen as positive attributes to leadership emergence and effectiveness. Contrary to Lord (1986), Offermann et al. (1994) argued that items in cognitive categories are expected to given to different types of leaders in various contexts (like military, education and business) rather than general leaders. Besides, Berson et al. (2006) stated that individual’s prototypes differ from person to person and are based on individual’s previous leadership-related
Many researchers suggest that a group member’s rate of participation is a strong predictor of that member’s emergence as the leader of the group (Bass，1949; Carter et al., 1951; Jones & Gerard, 1967). Jones and Gerard (1967) state ‘rate of participation, regardless of its quality or mode of conduction, is a prime index of leadership qualities in the eyes of other members’ (p.673).Verbal participation is a key measure of participation …show more content…
This means emergent leadership is not self-evident; it needs the interpretation of team members or observers. Many of the empirical leadership research use peer ratings and observer ratings to test the relationships between traits or behaviours and leadership emergence. The leadership is conceptual and interpreted and shows the perceivers’ encoding and reconstruction of leadership information (Lord et al., 1986). Implicit leadership theories (ILTs) hold that leadership is a process being perceived by others as a leader (Berson et al, 2006). When individual shows potential leadership behaviours, leadership is more likely to be attributed to this person (Kenney et al., 1994). Lord et al. (1984) argue that people tend to differentiate leaders and followers and evaluate leaders by using cognitive categories of behaviour and traits (termed ‘prototypes’). Kenny et al. (1994) identified four abstract categories of characteristics (taking charge, learning goals, being nervous and being nice) required for perceived leaders. Offermann et al. (1994) tested eight dimensions of traits and found dedication, charisma, intelligence, and sensitivity are typically seen as positive attributes to leadership emergence and effectiveness. Contrary to Lord (1986), Offermann et al. (1994) argued that items in cognitive categories are expected to given to different types of leaders in various contexts (like military, education and business) rather than general leaders. Besides, Berson et al. (2006) stated that individual’s prototypes differ from person to person and are based on individual’s previous leadership-related