As an Educator, I am a Leader: Theory Similarities and Differences

How can I use this content to increase my academic influence?

            Contingency and Authentic leadership are similar in their focus on the leader, with Contingency theory putting the leader in a position based on traits most beneficial to the situation (Sosik & Jung, 2010) and Authentic leader, finding and cultivating the best traits in the leader. 

 “Individualized Consideration”, as part of Transformational Leadership has similarities to LMX theory as it has laser focus on a particular individual (Power, 2013). 

Transformational Leadership can also be potentially looked at as the opposite of one of its inherent theories, “Transactional Leadership”.  Transactional Leadership, of which can become cold and “business-like”, can become a mere exchange to get attain a goal, a “carrot” per se.  It can lose its power where Transformational Leadership is constant and is not merely about “bribing” as to attain a goal but concerns all elements of the individual, mission and organization (Kessler, 2013).

Aspects of Authentic Leadership could be seen differing from aspects of All the other theories (Situational, Contingency, Transformational, ALT, LMX, Path-Goal, Team) in its heavy focus on the leader (Gardner, Avolio, & Walumbwa, 2005) vice the situation, relationships or the member.  Authentic leadership would be an excellent first step to any leadership endeavor, as it will put the best version of the leader in the position to lead using any of the other styles. 

Path-Goal and LMX theories can both tend to focus external to the leader vice focusing solely on the leader’s action for improvement.

Situational Leadership & Path-Goal are similar in that the leader chooses their action based on the follower and the situation.  Using Path-Goal theory the leader can be directive, achievement-oriented, supportive or participative toward the subordinate (Burns, Sorenson, Goethals, 2004; Dewan & Dewan, 2010) whereas in Situational Leadership the leader can also choose from four potential actions which are Directing, Coaching, Supporting, Delegating, all based on the task at hand and the confidence and competence of the member. (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977). 

Team Leadership Theory could be viewed as having a differing focus from Path-Goal, LMX, Authentic, Transformational, Contingency and Situational in that its ultimate focus is the team.  It does have similarities in that a portion of LMX does end up focusing on “groups” (in/out) (Power, 2013) of which a team is made up of a group of people (Zaccaro, Rittman, & Marks, 2002).

Self-reflection: How can I capitalize on the dichotomies above? 

References

Dewan, S., & Dewan, D. (2010).  Distance education teacher as a leader: Learning from the path goal leadership  theory.  Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 673.

Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (Eds.).  (2005). Authentic leadership theory

            and practice: Origins, effects and development (Vol. 3).  Elsevier.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977).  Situational leadership.  California American University, Center for  Leadership Studies

Kessler, E. H. (2013).  Encyclopedia of management theory.  Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE

            Publications, Inc.

Power, R. L. (2013).  Leader-member exchange theory in higher and distance education.

            International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(4), 1–9. 

Zaccaro, S., Rittman, A., & Marks, M. (2002). Team leadership.  The Leadership

            Quarterly, 12(4), 451–483.