Leadership Theories
Leadership is a process that a group or an individual impacts a group of individuals to reach a certain or common goal (Parent et. al., n.d.). According to Parent et. al., (n.d.) the literature concerning leadership has transformed from the trait or behavioral approach to the transformational. This change also includes the transactional and charismatic leadership approaches (Parent et. al., n.d.).
According to Kouzes & Posner (2007), on the other hand, Leadership is a chance that can occur at any place or any time. It may happen in a huge or small house, the mall, the school, or in any group. This kind of vocation does not select the time of day; it may happen at three in the morning or twelve noon. The chances of becoming a leader within us are endless. It always happens as a surprise to anyone who has experienced such an event.
Leadership now according to Northouse (2013), has many ways to be defined. In fact, in one of his written works, leadership is more like democracy and love. Leadership will always have numerous descriptions as many as the people who are trying to define the word. Despite the many ways that individuals can define leadership, Northouse (2013) views it as a system where a person has the power to influence the audience to achieve the goal of the group.
Using its definition and highlighting it as a process, this only connotes that the concept of leadership is neither a characteristic nor a trait. It is a kind of business transaction that happens between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2013). This definition puts a highlight on an interesting fact that leadership is not a one-way affair; it is, rather, a transactional affair that is open to anybody involved in the business or transaction. It is, of course, not only in business that leadership can be of use. Leadership can also affect the way a transaction happens at home, in school or sports.
Some of the theories that envelope the concept of leadership and the way leadership affects sports according to Giandonato (2011), are as follows:
• Autocratic leadership: Autocratic leadership bounds the participation of its members in decision making. The proactive use of punishments and commands are evident as statement of plans and strategies for different activities. With this kind of leadership, a trainer or a coach will conceptualize a strategy with very minute, if any, contribution from the athletes. The autocratic actions are major examples of a trainer or coach commanding the athlete on what the coach or trainer views she requires.
• Democratic leadership: This type of leadership permits the input of clients or athletes in decision making, and trainers or coaches are considerate of their privileges. Under this aspect, clients or athletes have the privilege to give their ideas about their coaching program. This type of leadership gives the athletes that they are occupied with, the feeling that they are important and needed.
• Positive feedback: This type of leadership is founded upon a behavioral approach to leadership and is also called as positive reinforcement. Trainers or coaches will reward or compliment their clients or athletes each time they achieve success, which preserves a person’s level of motivation.
• Social support: Conversely, this type finds its origin on the humanistic styles of leadership. The personal trainer or coach fulfills the relational needs of their clients by being sensitive to their needs and helping with their doubts. Having a high-level skill to comprehend the emotional character of people and to handle them in accordance to their emotional responses, will be needed to manage this type.
This idea brings us to one of the known theories of leadership; situational leadership. This type of leadership concentrates on the presence of leadership in certain situations. It was coined by Hersey and Blanchard in 1969 that is based on the three-dimensional management theory of Reddin. It has been used heavily in training and development for leadership. Since this theory focuses on situations, the premise is that different situations would call for different leadership actions (Northouse, 2013). In written article for the Prentice Hall (2000), it was said that the situational type of leadership is a type of eventuality theory that concentrates on the followers. According to this Prentice Hall study, in order to have an effective leadership approach, choosing the right method is necessary. This purpose is the key motive Hersey &Blanchard claim that situational leadership is conditional. This kind of theory puts forth on the members of the assembly as the followers have the control to follow or reject the leader. In this idea, what the leader acts on is immaterial to the achievements of the group; it is always dependent on the performance of the members.
Blank, Weitzel and Green (1990), on the other hand, add to this concept that the leader’s job is to cooperate with dependents to influence their success as leaders. Hersey and Blanchard define the situational type of leadership into four definite behaviors. They are the following:
• Telling: the leader tells people how, what, when and where to do jobs. They also provide roles. It is a kind of directive behavior.
• Selling: the leader provides supportive and directive actions.
• Participating: The members and the leader divide the decision-making tasks. The leader is viewed as the facilitator of the group.
• Delegating: The leader gives minimal support in using this type of action.
One of the famous theories that seem to have impacted the way that we view leadership is the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory. This theory centers on the connections happening between the members of the group and the leader. The LMX theory focuses on the two-way relationship of the members and the leader (Northouse, 2013). In the beginning, it was coined as the “Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL).” This older theory concentrates on the vertical connections befalling between the each of the members of the group and the leader. Northouse (2013), stressed that this theory and interactions between the followers and the leaders have less employee attrition, higher frequency of revenues, more positive evaluations and comments and greater loyalty to the company.
Studies also show, according to Northouse (2013) that this theory of leadership adds to the system of leadership assembly. This research highlights that a leader must widen its chances for high-quality transactions with his or her members and should attempt to have all of her or his members feel that they are in the group. Lunenburg (2010) conversely stresses that the LMX theory concentrates on the variances in the worth of connections that occur amongst each of the members and the leader and not the whole of the group.
As both the Leader-Member Exchange theory and Situational theory focus on the dealings upheld between the group or the followers and the leader, it is believed that once in the corporate setting, a leader must preserve good associations with her or his members. To progress well in the corporate stages, a leader must first develop good interacting expertise when faced with the members of his company. It is a need that this wishful leader be reasonable at all moments in decision-making affairs ascertaining him commendable of the trust of his upcoming subordinates. It is also significant to state that to develop in one’s career or personal missions; the individual should always consider the distresses of others. This matter is the major aspect of the theories mentioned at the above paragraph. It is not a question of how a leader must establish his credibility and knowledge; it is now a question of how a leader or the individual maintains good relations. If the individual eyes on the path of progressing in his or her personal and career life, a person must then concentrate on increasing better connections on each of the associations that he or she has. There is an abundant necessity for pure and healthier communication abilities in order to reduce clashes within the group. A person should always keep in mind that an organization works better because of the worth it puts on the workers. Thus, an aspiring manager must always think of having high regards for the personnel that he will supervise. Much of these types of leadership occur in Sports and its management.
Many coaches of today devote their time supporting their athletes and preparing them to be the best that they can be in their chosen sports. These coaches act as the over-all leader who becomes the athlete’s friend, planner, manager, and motivator.
Leadership and Athletics
Despite the volume of studies in leadership, like those mentioned above, leadership concepts in sports management have been considered less according to Parent et. al. (n.d.) The studies are covering sports management focus on board of directors, athletic directors, and coaches in national sports organizations and universities. These studies do not focus still on events in sports as they have been happening without receiving full attention from all the investors. Leadership and its aspects are not given attention because it is irrelevant to the committee organizing a given event.
This is supported by an article written by Giandonato (2011), that puts an emphasis on the impact of discovering one’s leadership style to coaching. It is good to note that this again does not focus on the areas of sports management but puts great weight on the wonders of discovering one’s leadership skills to coaching effectively. According to the author, a person does not need to have a head coaching position at a University or be an executive of a company to be a leader. Many of those whom we consider as leaders are parents, co-workers or students. Some of them may be teachers or personal trainers or strength coaches and athletes who participate in individual or team sports. Regardless of an individual’s job, responsibilities, interests, and background in athletics, some parts of leadership are required to succeed in sports.
Focusing on coaches, Giandonato (2011) as the main leaders for improvement in this area, coaches are also considered as friends, motivators, managers, and planners. As friends, coaches labor to build relationships with their athletes, sometimes also being friends with them. As managers on the other hand, they are seen as an important piece to the success of the team. They are sometimes given the responsibility to make decisions for the team which is considered a major role for the group. Conversely, being a coach and a planner moves strategizes to achieve the team’s goals. Motivators on the other hand, maximize an athlete’s performance. They act as supporters, motivating the athletes to use the fullest of their potentials. Second reason according to the researchers, and most importantly, the subtleties of leadership are such that only a few coaches remain constant in their relationships and demands with their concerns. The most effective coach may be especially successful when the person correctly adjusts to the needs of certain athletes and affairs. This strategy is at times supportive and at other times demanding. The ineffective coach may be the person who does not produce results or the individual who is least skillful at understanding when a transformation is needed and what the proper behavior must be.
Pratt & Eitzen (1989) recommend that future studies must, above all, things, methodically study different coaches during a term. In other studies, the best recommendation would be to study the long-term effects of different leadership styles in group sports, to better comprehend the shades of leadership that produce the best in their athletes. The researchers deem that the study of coaches at levels where coaches are not allowed to recruit players to tailor their styles in leadership is the ideal setting for this kind of research.
San, Soyer, & Yigiter (2012) also support the notion from Pratt & Eitzen that there are other factors that could affect the success of the athletic team. These are cultural variations concerning many psychological factors could happen in different settings. An example would be; it could be viewed in some countries who are known to be collective that gratification of the need for independence is not a relevant issue. This fact is because some nations has the characteristic of doing together and not giving relevance to individual autonomy. I addition, it could be recommended that some people in more distinctive cultures do not have connection needs as much as other individuals in collectivist cultures. This variation is also true for sports trainers’ preferred leadership techniques. Some athletes might choose a more autocratic leadership approach, and some coaches could feel the need for democratic approaches. But, people should note that this would depend on the athletes’ background. In conclusion, studying the connections between sports coaches’ preferred leadership styles with the athletes’ standard psychological requirements and communication abilities is necessary in order to comprehend the cultural aspects.
In addition to these studies, Avolio (2007), considers the development of leadership practice and theories to come to a mark at which a more inclusive view from cultural-generational systems to genetics should be reflected. This event is at the outset when making theories of leadership development and theories. The endorsements of this study go beyond the situational, contingency or traditional systems. This change is to promote a more complete and more inclusive focus that is multicomponent, interdisciplinary and multilevel. Also, to include a concentration that comprehends that leadership is a purpose of both the member and the leader and the difficulty of the context. Certainly, upcoming leadership models and studies might concentrate on what Avolio (2007) stated as leaders dealing with the concerns of different organizations versus local appearances. For example, Marion and Uhl-Bien (2001) as reported by Avolio (2007) supposed that for leaders to innovate, they might have to make the circumstances that trigger advancement. This report is in contrast to the suggestion to create advancement within the person per se. In their words, “leaders are part of a dynamic rather than being the dynamic itself.” Focusing on the creation of conditions by leaders, Avolio (2007) recommends that more research is needed on the relationships made by leadership.
References
Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting More Integrative Strategies for Leadership Theory-Building. American Psychologist, 62(1), 25-33.
Blank, W., Green, S. and Weitzel, J. (1990). A test of the situational leadership theory. Personnel Psychology, 43(3), pp.579--597.
Du, S., Swaen, V., Lindgreen, A. and Sen, S. (2013). The roles of leadership styles in corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 114(1), pp.155--169.
Giandonato, J. (2011, July 15). Leadership Style Discovery in Performance Coaching. Retrieved from http://articles.elitefts.com/training-articles/sports-training/leadership-style-discovery-in-performance-coaching/
Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership. (2000). [online] Available at: http://dr-hatfield.com/Download/Leadership/blanchard.pdf [Accessed 30 Aug. 2014].
Kouzes, J. and Posner, B. (1987). The leadership challenge. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lunenburg, F. (2010). Leader-member exchange theory: Another perspective on the leadership process.International journal of management, business and administration, 13(1), pp.1-5.
Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership Theory and Practice. 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc.
Parent, M., Seguin, B., & Oliver, D. (n.d.). Leadership Theories and Large-Scale Sporting Events.
Pratt, S., & Eitzen, D. (1989). Effectiveness of Contrasting Leadership Styles in Team Spor. Social Science Quarterly, 70(2), 311-322.
San, I., Soyer, F., & Yigiter, K. (2012). The relationship among sports coaches' perceived leadership beviours, athletes' communication skills and satisfaction of the basic psychological needs: a study on athletes. International Journal of Academic Research, 4(1).
