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.
Comments
Post a Comment