Trait Theories and Contingency Theories of Leadership (Essay Sample)

Trait Theories and Contingency Theories of Leadership
(Student’s Name)
(Course Details)
(Instructor’s Name)
(Institution)
(Date of Submission)
The concept of leadership and it links to satisfaction and productivity constantly receive more attention in management literature than other management topics. Students of leadership often examine this topic from the angles of traits, skills, expertise, styles, functions, and situations. According to Hill (1969:33), leadership scholars have said much in regards to the roles leadership theories play in organisational transformation and success. Contingency and Trait theories, specifically, have featured in a number of leadership studies (Patterson 2012:4), with most of them focusing on their conception, application, relevance and contemporary applications. However, not much have been unearthed in regards to these topics. There is still a lot more to research about the relevance and validity of contingency and trait theories as so far as management is concerned. Testing the significance of these two theories, thus, form the basis of this paper.
There is no single definition of leadership that is unanimous to all disciplines. Meaning, the equation of leadership always varies from different perspectives. As noted in Gini and Green (2014:435), place, time, specific challenges and parties involved play significant parts in the leadership equation. Therefore, leadership has a complex but meaningful definition. According to Patterson (2012:33), a leader is someone charged with the duty to set direction in an effort and influence, people, to trail that direction. However, the criteria they use to set those directions and encourage people to follow to them often rely on a variety of factors. Evidently, this is the point of interaction and departure of the two leadership theories. The contingency and trait theories.
Contingency Theories of Leadership:
Management is a key driver for any organisation. Effective management means organisational success. Poor management, on the other hand, can mean failure to an organisation. For effective management to be fostered and integrated within an organisation, certain levels of leadership skill are necessary. Contingency theories postulate that effective leadership styles and leadership behaviours often depend on the situational factors. The underlying assumption is that leaders are not automatically formed by their leadership characteristics, behaviors or styles, but rather their leadership environment. The most important thing, then, is their ability to match leadership skills and styles to the situations they face at work (da Cruz, Nunes, & Pinheiro 2011:7). For most situational theories, including the path-goal theory, Fiedler’s contingency theory, and Vroom and Yetton’s participation theory, this is central argument.
Situational factors may include such constructs as leader-member relations, position power, and task structure. As suggested in Fiedler (1972:454), leaders who share good relationships with their clients often have more power and influence than those with negative relation with their subjects. On the other hands, tasks that are more explicit, well-organized, and highly structured favor effective leadership compared to assignments that are nebulous, and unstructured. Leaders in positions that allow them to hire, fire, punish and reward are also more powerful and influential than those in positions lacking the above capacities.
Aside from individual leadership constructs in an organisation, contingency theories also look at the aspect of team leadership. The main reason for this relies on Latham (2013:28), a conception that an organisation’s success often depends on the collective efforts of its stakeholders. As Fiedler puts it, a group’s success is highly contingent. It depends on the available situations and how they interact with authoritarian’s leadership styles. According to Yamagata, Yang, and Galaskiewicz (2013), the relationship between leadership styles and situations can present in two ways. That is task-oriented leadership style and relationship-oriented leadership style. Meaning, a leader may either decide to concentrate on team building before assignments or completion of the assignments without creating any relationship. As per the contingency theorists, either of the orientations serves as motivational priorities for the leaders. While leaders motivated towards relationships focus on building close ties with their members, those motivated towards tasks mainly concentrate on achieved the organisation’s goals. Fiedler’s contingency theory, thus, emphasises that two variables define leadership impact. Situational framework and leader styles and how they interact in setting management priorities.
Ideally, in the contemporary organisations, having a positive relationship with subordinate staffs and other employees is a very important step towards productivity and satisfaction. Leaders who are in intimate connections with their subjects are assured of first-hand information on issues pertaining to management and organisation in general. According to Patterson (2012:23), such kind of relationship provides a free-reign environment which facilitates vertically and horizontal communication, between managers and the subordinates, and among the subordinates themselves. A leader must first be informed to ensure effective and fruitful leadership.
Path-goal theory
Path-Goal theory is another example of contingency leadership theories. In its current form, the path-goal theory sets out two basic propositions. The first propositions state that a leader has a duty to enhance the mental states of subordinates as this result in their motivation to perform and work satisfactorily (Tyssen, Wald & Spieth (2013:44). In synthesis, leaders’ roles comprise a classification of goals of the subordinate staffs, charting paths to these goals, provision of valued extrinsic rewards based on performance, and provision of work satisfaction to the subordinates. The second proposition of Path-goal theory asserts that the situation at hand determines the specific types of leadership behaviours that accomplish this motivational role. Favourable situations often lead to the development of a positive perception of the initially set objectives.
Path-Goal Theory can, therefore, be best understood as a management process in which the organisation’s front-runners spot and adopt specific behaviours that auger well the needs of the workforce and the working environment. Based on the outcome, employees are then encouraged to follow the right path towards the achievement of their goals (Volpp Sierra & Banzato 2016:32). The implication of this theoretical outlay is that there must be role clarity and well-definition of work objectives since the employee’s performance and outcome depend on them.
Path-Goal Contingency Theory of Leadership is, thus, highly relevant to any management system. Although it is not a detailed process, most of the contemporary organisations’ leadership structures often put it into play by following three basic steps. As noted in Calloway and Awadzi (2008:18), these steps include (1) determination of the characteristics employees and their working environment, (2) coming up with a leadership style, and (3) focusing on motivational dynamics that are useful to the success of employees. In business planning, every organisation must have at least a vision, mission and an objective to achieve. Usually, leadership strategies often begin from these elements.
Critique
Though they have received compliments and acceptance of validity and relevance from different authors, contingent or situational approaches to leadership are challenged for various reasons. In Volpp Sierra and Banzato (2016) perspective, contingency theories interpret the notion of leadership and its associated studies devoid of any one best style of attaining effectiveness in leadership based on the situations at hand. Most of the propositions are left undefined. A leader is, thus, left in darkness, especially in the description of what to do at which situation and expect promising outcomes.
Trait Theories of Leadership
Every time people talk about politics, politicians, academicians, managers and other leaders, the themes of their discussions often revolve around personalities of such individuals. Currently, there is a growing fascination with analysing organisational leaders, political leaders, religious leaders and other forms of leaders. Consequently, biographies on current organisational, political figure and other successful personalities have become some of the bestselling headlines around the world. The main reason for this trend in the state of affairs is the constantly burning curiosity to understand the personal traits such leaders (Patterson 2012:23). That is the things in which they believe and for which they work, their priorities, and the impact of their pronouncements on the lives of the subjects. By making all these moves, people tend to apply the trait theory of leadership.
Though has deeply rooted historical origin, trait theory of leadership is still relevant to date. In the current job markets, interviews are always conducted for the applicants for they have been hired to work. Though they appear scientific, the major interest of these interviews often remains the search for the necessary leadership traits and skills. The assumption is that the right person for the job must show some high-level leadership characteristics in their area of specialisation. Certainly, this is the premise of the trait theory of leadership. The theory po...