Leadership remains one of the most extensively researched topics in the social sciences. Our understanding of what makes an effective leader has evolved considerably over the past century. In this blog post, I will provide an overview of some of the major leadership theories that have emerged from academic research and how our thinking has progressed over time.
In the early 20th century, the “Great Man Theory” dominated leadership discourse. This theory assumed that history’s greatest leaders like Gandhi, Churchill, and Lincoln were simply born with innate leadership qualities that the average person did not possess (Carlyle, 1907). Their unique capabilities, in this view, is what enabled them to assume positions of power.
However, as research methods became more sophisticated, academics like Stogdill (1948) began to challenge this theory with evidence that situational factors and follower dynamics also play an important role in leadership effectiveness. This gave rise to contingency leadership theories that account for contextual factors. Fiedler’s (1964) contingency theory, for instance, matched leader styles to situational variables. House’s (1971) path-goal theory examined how leaders provide support and direction to followers.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the concept of transformational leadership gained prominence. Transformational leaders, according to Burns (1978), inspire followers to transcend self-interest and adopt the leader’s vision as their own. They focus on the organisation’s long-term development rather than just short-term gains. Research found transformational leadership led to higher performer motivation and satisfaction (Bass, 1985).
Most recently, the theory of authentic leadership has emerged to explain leader effectiveness. Authentic leaders demonstrate sincere self-awareness, ethical decision making, balanced information processing, and transparency in their interactions with others (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). These behaviours build credibility and trust within the organisation. Studies show that authentic leadership promotes higher levels of employee well-being, engagement, and performance (Walumbwa et al., 2008).
Academic insights into effective leadership have progressed from singular focus on the leader’s characteristics to a more nuanced understanding of contextual interactions between leaders and followers. There is now greater emphasis on ethical, transparent leadership that comes from within and promotes sustainable organisational success.
What about leadership today?
As more companies embrace remote work and globalised operations, new academic theories are emerging to explain how leaders can effectively guide geographically distributed teams and divisions.
Recent research highlights that traditional, hierarchical leadership approaches do not translate well when direct supervision and in-person contact is limited (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002). As such, newer leadership styles focus more on influencing through vision, empowerment, and building strong virtual relationships.
For example, Hoch and Kozlowski (2014) put forward a theory of “structural leadership” which entails the setting up of procedures, rules, norms and best practices that shape positive team dynamics, even from afar. Structural leaders excel at ensuring remote teams have proper goals, roles, workflows and communication channels.
Additionally, theories centred around “purpose-driven leadership” (Thrash, Elliot, Schultheiss, & Brunstein, 2007) are gaining relevance for dispersed teams. Here, leaders continually emphasise how each member’s contribution aligns with the organisational purpose. This provides direction and significance which can otherwise be lost when collaborating virtually.
Research also underscores the importance of “social leadership” (Scott, 2007). Practices like scheduling informal virtual chat sessions, sending personalised notes recognition, and role modelling work-life balance help nurture social bonds between distributed members. Such relationships form the glue that ultimately holds global organisations together.
As the workplace continues becoming more fluid and decentralised, expect academia to further develop leadership theories which rely less on top-down oversight and more on alignment, empathy and empowerment. Companies who want to attract top talent globally would do well to have such leadership competence.
References:
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. NY: Harper & Row Publishers.
Avolio, B.J., & Gardner, W.L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338.
Antonakis, J. & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: a review and a proposed theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6), 673-704.
Thrash, T.M., Elliot, A.J., Schultheiss, O.C., & Brunstein, J.C. (2007). Methodological and dispositional predictors of congruence between implicit and explicit need for achievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(7), 961-974.
