Download Born or Made? Exploring Leadership Theories in Education Administration and more Assignments School management&administration in PDF only on Docsity!
ZAMBIA CENTRE FOR PROFESSIONAL TRAINING & CONSULTANCY
STUDENT NAME: ENOCK SIKALONZO
LECTURER: MR RODGERS MZUMARA
COURSE: EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION
PROGRAMME: SECONDARY TEACHERS’ DIPLOMA
EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION ASSIGNMENT
QUESTION
Education administration is influenced by leadership of management in the provision of
education. Assignment of leadership is either born or made, and many theorists have
contributed to this debate. In your own opinion, are leaders born or made? Justify your
argument by citing two theories.
DUE DATE: AUGUST 14, 2020
Are leaders born or made? This is the most frequently asked question about leadership. It is a question which has been plaguing people interested in leadership for centuries. There is no one definitive answer which has successfully been proven. If leaders cannot be made, this debate should be concluded here, and we should rather be investing our time in genetic research to identify the genes which have these traits pre-programmed in DNA and try to avail the traits to as many people as can be needed as leaders.
Whether leaders are born or made should not be an issue. The question whether leaders are born or made is in fact not complicated. Why? Because we already know the answer. Studies taken using identical twins estimate that leadership is about one- third born (due to genetic factors) and two-thirds made. Yet, many leaders say the exact opposite, believing leaders are mostly born.
The belief has made many executives who believe that leaders are born not made, give less attention to leader development, both their own personal development as well the development of those they lead. They are focused on selecting leaders with the "right stuff," and expecting that those leaders' natural abilities will mean organizational success. But nothing could be further from the truth.
If they can be made, then this justifies the industry that has emerged over the last ten or so years for leadership consultants and experts in the field. In this assignment, this author will examine this question and attempt to provide an insight on different leadership theories to the born versus made debate on leadership.
Firstly, we need to have a clear picture of what is entailed by leadership. The definition of leadership which has been adopted is, “a process by which a person influences others to accomplish objectives or a goal, by guiding them to ensure a cohesive and coherent direction”. Northouse (2007, p. 3) defines leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals in a new way to achieve a common goal”.
Many theories of leadership exist, and countless definitions exist. Authors such as Sorensen (Sorensen 2000, p. 1) indicate that “human beings have been keenly interested in leaders and leadership”, inferring great philosophers and thinkers have been wrestling with this concept for eras. Sorensen provides an insight into the origin of the term “leader”, having first appeared in English language from the 1300’s, and its meaning was “to travel” or “to show the way”. So inherently, at minimum, leaders must show a new way towards a common goal.
The contrast between Plato’s The Republic (in Lee, 1955) and Machiavelli’s The Prince (in Thomson, 2001) clearly shows that historically, leaders can be moral or immoral, good or evil, fair or untrustworthy. This is an interesting point, and though preferred that a “great leader” be “good” it is not absolute, and great leaders can lead bad or immoral pursuits or organizations, though these types of leaders tend to be named other titles, as there is a tendency in modern culture to avoid praising negative or “bad” leaders. There are many examples of great leaders, where their characteristics and traits have been studied.
Trait theory in its simplest form naturally accords with the view that leaders are born not made, as it studies individuals and then attempts to cluster a core of attributes. These include, achievement, influence, responsibility (Stogdill 1974), drive, motivation, (Kirkpatrick et al. 1991), self-confidence (Stogdill 1948), cognitive ability, honesty and integrity, (Zaccaro et al. 2004), and interpersonal skills (McCall 1983). The information does provide a comprehensive list, however it shows a good sample of some of the key traits that have been identified with trait theory and which academics have discussed.
The benefit of these two theories is that they provide a general indication of a person’s leadership potential. It provides an opportunity for organizations to be able to identify people who may have some leadership skills, for which they can be further developed. Criticism levelled at these theories question why people who possess these skills are sometimes not leaders. Furthermore, why is it that in some circumstances, CEO’s perform excellently, yet in another environment they may fail abysmally? This suggests that there are other factors at play. These theories also rely on a level of subjectiveness to assess the traits in the first instance. While it is conceded that traits do play a key role in identifying leadership, it is likely that this is only an indicator and that we should be searching more deeply.
A recent study (Hannah 2013, p. 393) from Wake University found that there are neurological differences in the brains of people who had been indicated as leaders. This type of research may make it possible to identify future leadership candidates through brain scans.
An interesting statement by Lombardi, (n.d.) is “Leaders aren't born they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And that's the price we'll have to pay to achieve that goal, or any goal.”
Parallels can be drawn with music, that there are talented performers such as singers, who despite no training, are able to perform with excellence. What many may not consider and what may be discounted, is that, that person may have grown up with singers as parents, or listened to a lot of music or the like, and was surrounded by influences and had inadvertent ‘informal’ training. They may have had raw talent which as a consequence of their various experiences had molded them.
Many believe that nurturing skills and growing them is the key to successful leadership. Basketball superstar Jordon, M. (n.d.) is quoted as saying “Everybody has talent, but ability takes hard work.” This suggests that everyone has ability, and that anyone can grow and develop into someone who is competent and possibly even very good.
The role of a person’s preferences may influence how fast they develop themselves and in what areas that they may develop. If they have natural interests which favor what is considered leadership traits they may be more interested in further building and developing these skills, and hence, one day become effective leaders.
Behavioral leadership theories assume leaders can be developed and that leadership and leadership skills can be learned. One of the more famous theories was Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid (1964) which sought to define behavioral traits and map them against two axis, concern for people and concern for production. This attempted to define different leadership styles based on these dimensions. Research solely on behaviors eventually lost steam, as there was inconsistencies in the research’s situations in which they were applied.
More recent research has focused on the importance of “context or the larger system in which a leader and followers work” (Allen et al, 2012). Two models of “Emotional Intelligence” (EI) currently exist, these are namely the ability model (Mayer & Salovey,
- and a mixed model (Bar-On, 2006; Goleman, 1995).
Goleman (1995) focused his research on four basic competencies. These four competency areas included self-awareness, social awareness, self-management and social skills. People who displayed higher levels of ability in these areas were considered to have higher emotional intelligence.
Increasingly research suggests that Emotional Intelligence plays a very important role in determining leadership success in life. Furthermore, after extensive research, Bar-On (2006) developed a measure to determine how effective leaders may be by determining their emotional intelligence quotient (E.Q.). People with higher E.Q. scores, are considered to have high levels of emotional intelligence and hence perform better in the work environment in settings where empathy and soft-skills are required. Ealias (2012) indicates employees with higher E.Q.’s have higher employee satisfaction scores.
As a consequence of this research, other fields of study have emerged. An interesting theory called “Emotionally intelligent leadership” (Allen, 2012) has emerged and combines research in emotional intelligence and leadership theory in an integrated fashion in an attempt to understand and define how these two areas of study work together.
So, can emotional intelligence be learned, or is innate in the person? Goldsmith (2009) undertook a review of research by Delphine (2009, p. 36) that it can be achieved. Goldsmith (2009) states “Delphine and her colleagues found that members of the group that received the training showed a significant improvement in their ability to identify their feelings and the feelings of others, as well as to manage and control their emotions. What's more, these improvements were apparent not only right after the training but also six months later.”
There are many differing views on whether leaders are born or made. This assignment has examined some of the theories and has provided some additional perspectives on this topic. These perspectives include whether leadership is a trait of individuals, whether leaders are born with neurological differences, or whether emotional intelligence can be developed. Similar to other types of talents, this author contends that leadership itself, just like any other skill, can be learned by anyone.
REFERENCES
Allen, S. J. et al 2012, ‘Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: An Integrative, Process- Oriented Theory of Student Leadership’, Journal of Leadership Education, vol.11, ed. 1.
Bar-On, R. 2006, ‘The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI)’, Psichothema, vol. 18 (Suppl), ed. pp.13-25.
Burns, James M, (n.d.), Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration, Sage Publications, viewed 27 June 2013, http://www.sagepub.com/northouse6e/study/materials/reference/reference9.1.pdf
Delphine N., 2009, ‘Increasing emotional intelligence: (How) is it possible?’ Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 47, pp. 36–41.
Goldsmith, K 2009, ‘Can Emotional Intelligence Be Taught?’, The Greater Good, Berkeley University, Berkeley, California, USA, viewed on 10 July 2013, http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/can_emotional_intelligence_be_taught
Hannah, S 2013, ‘The Psychological and Neurological Bases of Leader Self- Complexity and Effects on Adaptive Decision-Making’, Journal of Applied Psychology - American Psychological Association, Vol. 98, No. 3, pp. 393 – 411, viewed 10 July 2013, http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/apl- 98 - 3 - 393.pdf
Lombardi, V (n.d.) , Quotations, Brainyquote, viewed 27 June 2013, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vincelomba130743.html#6jCkAshrGk f4dTbg.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. 1997, What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey, & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3–34), Basic Books, New York.
Northouse, G 2007, Leadership theory and practice. (3rd ed.), Thousand Oak, London, New Delhi.
Ruvolo, C. et al., 2004, ‘Leaders Are Made, Not Born The Critical Role of a Developmental Framework to Facilitate an Organizational Culture of Development’, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 10-19.
Sorenson, Georgia 2000, ‘An intellectual history of leadership studies: The role of James MacGregor Burns.’ Annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington DC.
Stogdill, R. M. 1974, Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research, Free Press, New York.
