Kirkpatick and Locke (1991) refers to great man leadership theory as the principle that great men are born, not made. Moreover, Northouse (2015) holds a similar view which emphasize that leaders are born, not made. Meanwhile, Barnlund (1962) emphasizes that leadership depends on situational variables rather than on individual traits. In the study by Mostovicz, Kakabadse N. & Kakabadse A. (as cited by Lawler, 2005) the great man theory assumes that certain individuals will naturally possess the necessary skills and talents required by a great leader. These skills and talents are identified and other individuals, through the use of replicated versions of leadership are able to match them. This theory holds the belief that individuals who gains
…show more content…
The leadership style will cover how an individual narrate to other individuals, this includes both external and internal individuals of an organization. The leadership style will enable the user to see how they view themselves and their position. These both combined will decide to a large extent whether or not an individual can be successful as a leader. One leadership style cannot cover all circumstances and predict all outcomes. This is why adopting a multitude of proposed leadership styles into one unique leadership style is important and this skill is not something that all individuals can develop (Rabinowitz, n.d.). In the late 1930’s Kurt Lewin, a psychologist by profession developed his own framework of leadership styles though a series of leadership decision experiments. Lewin’s work paved a solid foundation that gave birth to many other leadership styles afterwards (Scheidlinger, 1994). His research suggested that there are three major styles of leadership: Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-faire (Lewin, Lippitt. & White, 1939; Bass, 1990; Vroom & Yetton, 1973; Yukl, …show more content…
The employees feel a sense of ownership, a higher responsibility and commitment towards achieving the final goals when they are involved in the decision making process (Harrison and Freeman, 2004). Furthermore, encouragement of employee participation may contribute to an increase in performance through higher motivation (Sashkin, 1976) as well as promote job satisfaction (Bhatti et al., 2012). On the contrary, Harrison and Freeman (2004) argue that lower level employees may engage in decisions that would not benefit the organization. This could be due to lack of education, training or experience. Furthermore, participation may be slow and time consuming so may not be a suitable fit for every situation however it is believed that often the end result is better (Bhatti et al., 2012). Therefore, Harrison and Freeman (2004) go on to say no matter how much risk involves in this process, the benefits from an economic aspect are far more beyond the path where subordinates are not involved in the decision making
The leadership style will cover how an individual narrate to other individuals, this includes both external and internal individuals of an organization. The leadership style will enable the user to see how they view themselves and their position. These both combined will decide to a large extent whether or not an individual can be successful as a leader. One leadership style cannot cover all circumstances and predict all outcomes. This is why adopting a multitude of proposed leadership styles into one unique leadership style is important and this skill is not something that all individuals can develop (Rabinowitz, n.d.). In the late 1930’s Kurt Lewin, a psychologist by profession developed his own framework of leadership styles though a series of leadership decision experiments. Lewin’s work paved a solid foundation that gave birth to many other leadership styles afterwards (Scheidlinger, 1994). His research suggested that there are three major styles of leadership: Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-faire (Lewin, Lippitt. & White, 1939; Bass, 1990; Vroom & Yetton, 1973; Yukl, …show more content…
The employees feel a sense of ownership, a higher responsibility and commitment towards achieving the final goals when they are involved in the decision making process (Harrison and Freeman, 2004). Furthermore, encouragement of employee participation may contribute to an increase in performance through higher motivation (Sashkin, 1976) as well as promote job satisfaction (Bhatti et al., 2012). On the contrary, Harrison and Freeman (2004) argue that lower level employees may engage in decisions that would not benefit the organization. This could be due to lack of education, training or experience. Furthermore, participation may be slow and time consuming so may not be a suitable fit for every situation however it is believed that often the end result is better (Bhatti et al., 2012). Therefore, Harrison and Freeman (2004) go on to say no matter how much risk involves in this process, the benefits from an economic aspect are far more beyond the path where subordinates are not involved in the decision making