DDBA 8151: Organizational Leadership: Doctoral Theory and Practice
Leadership Theory Taxonomy Template
|Leadership Theory Name||Year Introduced||Author/Theorist||Key Components of Theory|
|Path Goal||Early 1970’s||Evans House House and DresslerHouse and Mitchell||Path-Goal theory was originally introduced by Evans in 1970 and later House, 1971, House an Dessler, 1974 and house and Mitchell, 1974 (Vroom & Jaga, 2007). The five vital components of Path-Goal theory are Leader Behavior, pertaining to a wide range of leadership practices that could have been chosen to be a part of path-goal theory, this approach analyzed directive, supportive, participative and it achievement oriented leadership behaviors (Northouse, 2016). A Directive leader sets clear principles of execution a make the standards and directions clear to followers (Northouse, 2016). Supportive leadership is tied in with coordinating toward the comfort of followers needs, for example promoting caring for followers and creating a mentally supportive workplace (Northouse, 2016). Participative Leadership is support toward the follower that impacts on basic leadership and works within the divisions procedures: for example, contributing to the followers by taking their recommendations and opinions (Northouse 2016).|
|Path-Goal||Achievement-Oriented is coordinating the execution of greatness: a leader should set a testing objective, to rise change and greatness is execution and show certainty that followers will achieve enhanced models of execution (Northouse, 2016).|
|Authentic Leadership||1990’s||BassBass and SteidlmeierBurnsHowell and AvolioGeorgeGeorge and Sims||Authentic Leadership theory has been interesting to analyst: it was recognized earlier in transformational leadership studies, yet was not completely articulated (Bass, 1990, Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999; an Burns, 1978; Howell and Avolio, 1993, see Cooper, Scandura & Schriesheim, 2005). Northouse (2016), states Authentic leadership was created by George in 2003 and later George and Sims in 2007. Defenders of this authentic leadership eventually prepare and create leaders who will proactively encourage positive conditions and lead businesses in a moral and socially mindful way (Cooper et al., 2005, Zubair & Kamal, 2015). There are five dimensions of Authentic leadership, Purpose, Authentic leaders are the individuals who are profoundly mindful of how they think and behave and are seen by others as monitoring their own and others’ values /moral points of view, information, and qualities. They are mindful of the settings in which they work; and who are sure, confident, hopeful, versatile and of high moral standards (Bruce & Gardner, 2015). Self-awareness is leaders that encounter enhanced levels of self-awareness and that expanding self-awareness is the center component of the authentic leader’s creation procedure (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May & Walumbwa, 2005). Values, which serve as trans-situational and standardizing principles for conduct and assessment of all things considered, they give a premise to inspiring activities that adjust to the requirements of specific people and the whole community (Gardner et al., 2005). Relationship, Authentic leaders can be open and setup an association with others. They will impart their story to this and listen to others (Northouse, 2016). Heart, authentic leaders are very emotional about their mission, very heart felt (Northouse, 2016).|
|Leader-Member Exchange||1995||Graen & Uhl Bien||Graen & Uhl Bien has been credited with introducing Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) in 1995. LMX is based on relationships that explains the conversational relationship shared amongst workers and their direct leaders (Omilion-Hodges & Baker, 2017). At its center, LMX recommends that leaders create differential relational associations with every supporter that can go from low quality, financial and transactional relationship to one that is described by the ability to trust (Omilion-Hodges & Baker, 2017). LMX is a group-level construct. The in-group and the out-group. As a member of the in-group you are extended an invitation to take part in decision making and assigned additional duties (Lunenburg, 2010). Individuals that are part of the out group utilize formal means of communication and exchanges pertaining to the role of the follower’s position in the organization (Lunenburg, 2010).___________________________|
Bruce, J., & Gardner, W. L. (2015). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of
positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338.
Cooper, C. D., Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2005). Looking forward but learning from
our past: Potential challenges to developing authentic leadership theory and authentic
leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 475-493.
Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumbwa (2005). “Can you see the
real me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The
Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343-372.
Li, Y., Tan, C., & Teo, H. (nd). Leadership characteristics and developers’ motivation in open
source software development. Information & Management, 49(5), 257-267.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Leadership exchange theory: Another perspective on the leadership
process. International Journal of Management, Business and Administration, 13(1), 1-5.
McCleskey, J. A. 2016). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117-130.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Omilion-Hodes, L.M., & Baker, C. R. (2017). Communicating leader-member relationship
quality: The development of leader communication exchange scales to measure
relationship building and maintenance through the exchange of communication-based
goods. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(2), 115-145. doi:10.1177/2329488416687052
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (2007). The role of the situation in leadership. American
Psychologist, 61(1), 17-24.
Zubair, A., & Kamel, A. (2015). Authentic leadership and creativity: Mediating role of work-
related flow and psychological capital. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25(1), 150-171