Every material on this site is authentic and was extracted from the complete available project. GET IT NOW
MS-WORD DOC | CHAPTERS: 1-5 | PAGES: 56 | PRICE: #3,000
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP IN THE ACHIEVEMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
In chapter one, the subject matter of this research work was introduced. The important aspects of the research work treated include the study objectives, which corresponded with the content of the statement of the problem and the research hypothesis. Also very important in chapter one has been the historical background of our case study the national Board for technical Education (NBTE). In this chapter, we present a review of some of the relevant literature. This will cover the various definitions of leadership, the types of leadership, the theories of leadership, and the factors that influence effective leadership.
2.2 DEFINITIONS OF LEADERSHIP
The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, Wehmeier and Asbby (2001), gives three definitions of leadership. The first definition sees leadership as the state or position of being a leader. The second definition explains leadership as the ability to be a leader or the qualities of a good leader should have and the third definition of leadership as a group of leaders of a particular organization.
In a more conceptual firm, however, Usendia (1998), says that each write chooses a set of leadership definitions which are association with circumstances under which they were defined, under this kind of circumstance, it follows that there are so many definitions of leadership. The first concept treated by Usendia under which leadership is defined as the concept of leadership as a focus on group process. Under this concept, two definitions of leadership are given. The first is that leadership is the pre-eminence of one or a few individuals in a group in the process of social phenomenon. This definition according to the author was given by Mumford in 1902. The second definition is that leadership of the concentration of effort in one person as an expression of the power of all. This definition was given by Blackmar in 1911.
The second concept under which leadership has been defined as the concept of leadership as a personality and its effects. Under this concept, two definitions of leadership are also given. The first definition is that leadership is the creating and the setting forth or exceptional behaviour patterns in such a way that other persons respond to them. This definition was given by Boardus in 1982. The second definition is that given by Bernard in 1926. He saw leadership as "any person who is more than ordinarily efficient in carrying psychosocial stimuli to others and is thus effective in conditioning collective responses.
The third concept in the definition of leadership in the concept of leadership as an act of inducing compliance. The first definition of leadership under this concept is the definition given by Philips (1939) the defined leadership as the imposition, maintenance and direction of moral unity to out ends. The second definition was given by Bennis (1959). He defined leadership as the process by which an agent induces a subordinate to oenave in a desired manner.
The fourth concept of leadership is the concept of leadership as the exercise of influence under this concept, there are also two definitions. The first definition by Tead in 1935 stated that leadership is the activity of influencing people to co-operate towards some goal which they come to find desirable. The second definition is that leadership is the process or the act of influencing the activities of an organized group in its efforts towards goal setting and goal achievement. This definition was given by Stogdill in 1950.
Other existing concepts under which leadership can be defined include leadership as an act of behaviour, leadership as a form of persuasion, as well as leadership as a form of power relations, and leadership as an instrument of goal achievement. However, this last concept is the one most relevant to the research work. Under this concept there are equally two definitions of leadership. These definitions were given separately by Bellows (1959) and Davis (1942).
Bellows defined leadership as the process of arranging a situation so that various members of a group, including the leader, can achieve common goals with maximum economy and minimum of time and work. Davis definition explained leadership as the principal dynamic force that stimulates, motivates and coordinates the organization in the accomplishment of its objectives.
2.3 THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP
All the leadership theories have been group into six theories in some existing literature. These are:
- The Greatman Theories: According to these theories, the general perception of the leader is that of a person who is endowed with special qualities peculiar to him. These qualities can arrest the interest of the followers through endearment. As far as the Greatman theories are concerned there is no leadership by the masses. Leadership is only by some individuals in every society who posses different degrees of leadership qualities. These "superior few are those with the right qualities who always influence the masses. These few posses the personality traits or attributes and character which are often referred to as the qualities of leadership. For instance, the exercise of will- power is seen as an important leadership trait Usendia (1989), has criticized these theories because of its assumption that leaders are born and not made. The in-born leadership qualities according to the theories are initiative, courage, intelligence and honour which together predestine a man to be a leader. The major point of criticism of Greatman's theories is that by rough tutorship of experience and training, some of these qualities can be developed.
- Environmental Theories: In these theories of leadership, leadership does not reside in a person, but instead, it is the function of the occasion. According to Murphy (1941), who tried to explain some of the theories, a particular situation calls for certain types of action, therefore the leader does not inject leadership. He is only an instrument through which solutions are achieved for problems. According to Mumford (1909), a leader emerges by virtue of his abilities and the use of special skills which enable him to deal with specific situations. This is the situational approach to leadership. This approach according to Usendia (1998), is base on the assumption that a great leader emerged as a result of time, place and circumstance.
- The personal Situation Theories: The main shortcoming of the environmental theories is that they do not emphasize of the interactive effects of individuals and the elements of time, place and circumstance, although, leadership is said to be produced by theses factors. Westburghs (1931) who propounded the personal situation theories said that leadership studies must take these factors into consideration. The theories therefore focus on the personality traits of the individual, the nature and character of the group (its leaders and members) and the particular events or problem confronting the group.
- The Interaction-Expectation Theories: According to Homas (1950), the interaction expectation as action, interaction and sentiments. According to Stogdill (1974), the leadership expectation of a member of any group is defined or given by the extent to which the individual initiates and maintains structure in the interaction and expectation. For this reason, leadership in the expectation theories is seen in terms and individual originating an interaction and also seen as the act of initiating structure. With this structure, the operational effectiveness of decision making in an organization is maintained. According to Bavelos (1960), the decision making systems of an organization in this context, comprises the management of the organization.
- The Humanistic and Exchange Theories: In the humanistic theories, it is the function of leadership to modify or review the organization in order to provide freedom for the individual in the organization to realize his own motivational potentials. These potentials are for the fulfillment of his own needs and to be able at the same time to contribute towards the accomplishment of the organizational goals. The humanistic theories were put together by Stogdill in 1974. These theories suggest that if the leadership role is accomplished or is effective, the group members would be satisfied because individuals in the group would perform their assigned or perceived roles satisfactorily.
Following the humanistic theories, are the Exchange theories which tend to follow from the fact that individuals in an organization and at the same time contribute towards achieving his organization’s goals constitute a form of exchange. So individual members as a group make contributions at a cost to themselves and in return receives reward at a cost to the group find such social exchange mutually rewarding.
2.4 TYPES OF LEADERSIP
Three types of leadership have been identified. These are the authoritarian style, the laissez-fair (conniving) style and the democratic style of leadership.