Behavioral theory assumes that leaders are made, not born (Behavioral, 2004). Behavioral theories of leadership do not look for inborn traits or capabilities in an individual, but rather they look for what leaders actually do. If the success of leaders can be defined in terms of the describable actions of a person, then it should not be difficult for other people to act in the same way. This gives something concrete to teach and learn, rather than relying on ephemeral notions of 'traitsÆ and 'capabilitiesÆ which are only vaguely defined. The fact that leadership can be learned rather than simply being inherent in a person opens a floodgate to leadership development compared to Trait Theory, which relies on psychometric assessment which divides people into those with leadership potential and those who will never become leaders.
A behavioral theory is relatively easy to develop by simply assessing leadership success and the actions of leaders (Behavioral, 2004). Using a large study sample, it is possible to correlate statistically significant behaviors with success. Behaviors can be identified which contribute to failure, which adds a second layer to understanding leadership success, and helps define what makes a good leader. Once the profile of a good leader has been defined, then it is possible to develop a program which can produce successful leaders by teaching the winning components of leadership, i.e. those activities which are engaged in by successful leaders.
Behavioral theory is based on classical conditioning (Behavioral theory, Part 1, 2004). In classical conditioning, behaviors are increased by repeated practice linked to positive reinforcement, which can require drill and practice as well as positive reinforcement. Once leadership skills have been identified, these can be taught using classical conditioning, which is the basis of most classroom learning. Inappropriate responses are 'deconditionedÆ by th...