As the world
has been advancing and changing rapidly over the last century, great
advancements have also been made in the field of leadership. Historically,
leadership was about control, dominance, and centralized power. This value for
dominance and control can easily be seen by considering the prevalence of wars
throughout history. As societies have advanced and organizations and nations have
become more interdependent, leadership theories have advanced along with them.
Leadership has become increasingly more collaborative, relational, and
empowering, and humility, authenticity, and serving others are recognized as
valuable traits.
Leadership from 1900-1929
The
central leadership themes of the early 1900’s were control, centralized power,
and domination (Northouse, 2019). As a
prime example of this, a leadership conference in 1927 defined leadership as
“the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led to induce
obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (p. 2). Since leaders were
recognized by their control and ability to dominate, followers had little to no
influence or control. The role of leaders was to tell people what to do and
role of followers was to do it. Organizations were conformed to the will of the
leader.
Leadership in the 1930’s
In the
1930’s, leadership theories shifted to focus on the traits of the leader.
Leadership shifted from control to influence (Northouse, 2019). Scholars began to recognize that not only do
the traits of the leader influence the group, but the group may also influence
the leader. Emerging interest studying leadership led to the development of
trait approach, or “great man” theories, which focused on the traits of great
leaders (p. 19). This approach later provided the foundation for visionary and
charismatic leadership styles. The trait-based mindset perpetuated the elevated
status of leaders and the subservient status of followers.
Leadership in the 1940’s
Building
on the potential interconnected influence between the leader and those being
lead, the group approach became the focus of the 1940’s (Northouse, 2019). Studies focused on the behaviors of the
leader while directing the group. Distinctions were also made between
persuasion (based on influence) and coercion (based on force). The behavioral approach to leadership, which
examines both task and relationship behaviors, began to emerge during this
time. The shift from control to influence increased the influence of followers
in organizations since the leader’s ability to succeed depended on gaining
influence with followers.
Leadership in the 1950’s
The
1950’s brought continued focus on the behaviors of leaders in groups, but added
the importance of relationship and shared goals (Northouse, 2019). The leader’s ability to influence the group’s
effectiveness came into focus. This period brought a pivotal shift to
leadership studies, as the skills approach began to shift the focus from inborn
traits to skills that could be developed. This shift paved the way for
increasingly diverse leaders since leadership was no longer limited to an elite
few who fit a standard mold. It also provided naturally gifted leaders
opportunities improve their effectiveness through intentional development.
Leadership in the 1960’s
The
dominant focus leadership of the 1960’s was a continuation of the theme of
using behaviors to influence people toward shared goals or direction
(Northouse, 2019). The situational
approach, which highlights the importance of a leader shifting from either a
directive or supportive role depending on the current need, was birthed during
this period. This requires additional skill on the leader’s end, but was a
great win towards recognizing the dignity of followers. Additionally, better
supported followers can in turn increase organizational effectiveness.
Leadership in the 1970’s
In the
1970’s the leadership focus shifted from group to organizational behavior, most
significantly defined as, “the reciprocal process of mobilizing by persons with
certain motives and values, various economic, political and other resources, in
a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently
or mutually held by both leaders and followers.” (p.3, Northouse, 2019).
Goal-path theory emerged, which highlights follower needs and motivations.
Leader-member exchange theory developed soon after, which created a significant
shift toward understanding the importance of the dynamic leader-follower
relationship.
Leadership in the 1980’s
Interest
in leadership grew rapidly in the 1980’s in both public and academic arenas,
which lead to increased diversity in perspectives on leadership (Northouse,
2019). Several dominate themes emerged. The theme of leadership as “getting
followers to do what the leader wants done” remained strong (p.4). The theme of
influence was examined in depth, with focus remaining on the importance of
remaining non-coercive. The “the leadership-as-excellence movement” revitalized
focus on leadership traits (p.4). A final important theme to note is the
emergence of the value for the transformational process of leadership by which
both leaders and followers influence one another to become greater. A major
highlight of the transformational leadership approach is that leaders connect
with the followers’ motives in order to reach goals of both the leader and the
followers. The leader seeks to help followers reach their full potential and in
turn, the leader and organization also improve.
1990’s and beyond…
A variety of
theories continue to emerge, yet the central focus has been “the process of
leadership, whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve
a common goal” (p. 4, Northouse, 2019). Emerging approaches include: authentic
leadership, spiritual leadership, servant leadership, adaptive leadership,
followership, and discursive leadership. These approaches are quite diverse,
yet share the common thread of leadership as a collaborative process.
What does this mean?
Understanding
of leadership has been advancing and becoming increasingly diverse. The diverse
and complex leadership approaches seem only fitting for today’s increasingly
complex and interconnect global environment.
Groups and individuals with incredibly different worldviews and
backgrounds must work together towards shared goals and mutually beneficial
outcomes (Hajikhameneh, & Kimbrough, 2017). With the expansive and
continually expanding availability of information sharing, “empowered
execution” or “decentralizing decision-making authority” has become practical
and even necessary (p.288, Reese, 2018). In the simpler and slower paced
environment of the early 1900’s it was practical for centralized leaders to
maintain tighter control and oversight over their organizations. Dispersing
decision-making authority is also biblical; the priest Jethro advised Moses to
equip people with values and spread out decision making authority in order to
create a sustainable model that would meet the people’s needs (Exodus
18:14-23). Today, even emergency management organizations are recognizing the
need to move away from command and control styles in favor of relational,
adaptable ones in order to respond and adapt rapidly (Owen, Scott, Adams, &
Parsons, 2015).
Conclusion
Moving
forward into the future, leaders and organizations that thrive will cultivate
networks of empowered people. This approach provides a framework for increased
innovation and adaptability, decreased response time, and multiplied impact. Leaders
must have courage to relinquish control, trust and equip their people, and pastor
their people towards greatness in the midst of inevitable crisis, mistakes, or
failures. It is not only necessary in order to keep up with the rapidly
changing global landscape, but it is also the style by which Jesus equipped
twelve guys to change the world.
