Resources

Does It Matter How You Define Leadership?

Tweet

 

It matters! The experts agree…

Yes, it matters a great deal how leadership is defined. Gary Yukl, Ph.D. (2006) is widely recognized as an authority on the subject. Dr. Yukl convincingly asserts that the definition of leadership is not precisely defined. He poses this question in many of his writings and provides answers to this important question. He points out that although the term is broad by nature, viewed quite differently by academicians, and prescribed variously by practitioners, the fact remains that it is too important a phenomena to eschew definition due to the complexity of the intervening arguments. With this in mind, it is of great importance that those studying leadership consider a number of elements of leadership that can be measured through research processes. Yukl (2006) discusses roles, influence processes, behaviors, traits, and situational variables that comprise lines of research in leadership.

Accordingly, in line with the academic perspective Lord and Brown (2004) do an excellent job of discussing the need for understandings of cognitive, social, and personality psychology to understand how the results of these lines of research can be integrated in order to understand dynamics of processes of leader and follower interaction. Their thoughts take into consideration an arguably complete, if not theoretically exhaustive, perspective of matters related to a working definition of leadership.

From the perspective of the practitioner, transformational leadership theory provides useful definitions of elements of leadership that integrate a broad range of social process, while simultaneously providing useful subsets of leadership typologies that answer the oft-debated manager versus leader discussion. By describing leadership in hierarchal typologies of charismatic, transformational and transactional leadership, Bass (1985) and a host of other theorists have conceptualized a model that is inclusive of aspects of traits, influence, behaviors, and contingencies (Antonakis, Avolio & Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Yukl, 1996) that is useful as applied science in organizational environments.

With the perspective of academic research and practical application in mind the facts are clear that the definition of leadership is complex. However, complexity is no reason to avoid definition. The challenge for those that would apply scientific standards to the definition is to seek integration of theory and practice, regardless of the difficulties the definition presents.

How does this make a difference to me as a leader and my organization? The answer is not as complex as this brief article would lead us to believe.

Let me explain. First, academic and scientific leadership theories describe predictable function of leadership in organizations. Secondly, the application of this theory can make a difference in real world applications. Third, practitioners that understand these concepts have answers that can address and moderate organizational dynamics to help the implementation of effective leadership.

Moreover, effective implementation of leadership can bring positive impact to all levels of organizational hierarchy.

References

Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 261-295.

Lord, R. G., & Brown, D. J. (2004). Leadership Processes and Follower Self-Identity. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers

Yukl, G. A. (1996). Antecedents of influence outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 309-317.

Yukl, G. A. (2006). Leadership in Organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.