One of the three leadership styles described by Max Weber in 1947 was the traditional leadership style, with Charismatic leadership and bureaucratic leadership styles. The traditional leadership style is based on the belief that the leader is empowered to conform to past traditions.
traditional leadership Explanation
Weber was the first to distinguish between transformational leaders like business leaders, such as bureaucratic leaders and charismatic leaders. Weber also believes that most leaders display all style qualities.
Max Weber was the first to define traditional leadership. He describes three leadership styles: charismatic, bureaucratic and traditional. Traditional leadership is defined as the style in which the leader is empowered based on past traditions. The current example should be a lot of kings, dictators and business leaders today. In the past, almost all leaders seemed traditional and their power was tied to their past leaders. Many of them inherited their power from their predecessors. Today, traditional leaders increase power through large organizations.
Source of traditional leadership
The genesis of modern traditional leadership was the industrial revolution, when workers were led by a hole in total authority. Most traditional leadership borrowed its ideas from the military and formed the “top” of leadership. This kind of leadership puts workers at the top and the bottom of power. The manager decides on the work and issue order or instruction on how the work is done.
Modern examples of traditional leadership are found in many corporations. The chart organized with a hole in the head indicates that traditional leadership exists in a company. Powers are held by an executive or executive board and all decisions are made by those who command. An excellent example of today’s military traditional leadership. Officers, or leaders make decisions and execute those orders according to their expectations. Police and fire departments are also modern examples of traditional leadership.
Specific features of the traditional style include:
Leaders are seen as controlling and powering because those who hold positions in front of them had control and power
Leadership is followed by personal loyalty to the rank, not personal
Followers are promoted based on bias and office politics
Traditional Leadership Features
Some traditional leadership features are the ability to lead and use influence. Making qualification decisions and willingness to work are also important skills for the traditional leader. Followers are loyal to the position and which one represents it rather than holding a particular office. Other traditional leadership characteristics can provide the strength to take action and understand goals and objectives. All efforts are directed at achieving what is expected and the result is the most important evidence of success.
The loss of traditional leadership
Traditional leadership comes with some problems. New ideas are not always welcomed by the traditional leader as they are usually the source of all new business and ways of operating. Without input from his team, the traditional leader is often aware of changes and problems and the response to change is slow. The traditional leader has a tendency to frequent his group frequently. Employees get frustrated at not having input on their work and often leave when it comes to better opportunities.
traditional leadership theories
Traditional leadership theories include: (1) trait approaches, such as the ‘great man theory’, which emphasize the leader’s personal traits; (2) leadership style approaches, e.g., Ohio and Michigan state studies in the 1960s, which emphasizes leaders’ behavior; And, (3) consistent approaches, such as the ‘small-choice peer’ (LPC) theory, which acknowledges the importance of situational factors.
One of the main criticisms of both leadership qualities and style is that they fail to take into account accounting and organizational issues. Consider the separate functioning of adjusting theory together and consider the reason for the situational reasons.
For example, Fidler (1967), a small favorite colleague (LPC), predicts that the leadership effectiveness will depend not only in the style of leadership, but also in the contextual context: relationships between leaders and subordinates; Degree of power in the hands of the leader! And, the task structure.
Although this theory has been criticized (Gren, Arese and Alvars, 1971), there is evidence to support some aspects of the theory (Shereham, Tapper and Tetrault, 1994).
Other theories have been focused on the nature of subordinates. For example, Hersey and Blanchard’s (1988) work maturity model suggests that leadership style should differ based on subordinates’ task maturity (i.e., their knowledge of knowledge and skills) and their emotional maturity (i.e., their ability and confidence).
Where maturity is high, leader may add more participatory style when maturity is low (where more guidance style is needed). Such theories emphasize the need for leaders on the underprivileged; For example, subordinates may prefer a more participatory style, even when theory predicts that the instructional style will be most effective.
Leadership trait theories identify specific personality traits that distinguish leaders from non-leaders. They are based on the idea that leaders are not born’ (that is, leadership is innate rather than advanced through education). Early studies (Mann, 1959; Stogdill, 1948) focused on the relationship between personality and leadership, but reported little supporting evidence. However, research interest in this area continues, with Judge and Bona (2004), that 12% of all leadership research published between 1990 and 2004 include keywords ‘personality’ and ‘leadership’.
Later leadership theories recognize that leaders can be described in terms of their (their behavioral style) functionally, rather than just their characteristics. The underlying differences in the behavioral style approach include two different styles of leadership: task-orientation (where related tasks related to leader task related tasks, such as assignment of assignments and fixed deadline). And relationship orientation (where the leader is concerned with subordinates, such as friendly and approachable, communication development and encouraging participation).