Both old and modern literature contains concepts of leadership, and there are vast differences in them. Thomas Carlyle saw leaders as heroes, saying that ôSociety is founded on Hero-worship,ö and that people are ranked in a ôHeroarchy,ö or ôGovernment of Heroesö (13). James McGregor Burns, the developer of transformational leadership, saw leaders as teachers (Burke, 66). David McClelland developed the competency model of leadership, asserting that education and book knowledge do not make a leader; competency does (Kohlberg & Weiss, 101). Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard developed the situational leadership model, which is based on the concept that ôthe functioning maturity of the team members is a major determinant of the æstyleÆ of leadershipö that the leader needs to adopt to be effective (Williams, 34). Kurt Lewin, on the other hand, was a champion of participative leadership (Burke, 66).
These definitions can be examined from a number of vantage points. For example, the Biblical hero Abraham is considered by some to be the greatest transformational leader in history; he had vision, charisma, confidence, courage, and a strong sense of justice, along with a willingness to make sacrifices for others (Friedman & Langbert, 88). In practical terms, David McClellandÆs competency model works; a leaderÆs competency is arguably what makes him an effective leader. Theoretically, Thomas CarlyleÆs ôHeroarchyö is an apt model of the way society makes those it looks up to its leaders. All of these definitions of leadership can be defended from some standpoint; the key in utilizing them effectively is to choose the correct one for the organization at hand.
Burke, W.W. (2002). ôThe Cycle of Leadership: How Great Leaders Teach Their Companies to Win.ö T&D, 56(11). Retrieved on January 7, 2006 from: http://www.questia.com
Carlyle, T. Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History. New
...