Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Implicit leadership theory (ILT) is a cognitive theory of leadership developed by Robert Lord and colleagues. [1] It is based on the idea that individuals create cognitive representations of the world, and use these preconceived notions to interpret their surroundings and control their behaviors . [ 2 ]
Some examples of action-oriented leadership include extinguishing a rural fire, locating a missing person, leading a team on an outdoor expedition, or rescuing a person from a potentially hazardous environment. [183] Leadership of small groups is often created to respond to a situation or critical incident.
Research has found that this leadership style is one of the most effective and creates higher productivity, better contributions from group members, and increased group morale. Democratic leadership can lead to better ideas and more creative solutions to problems because group members are encouraged to share their thoughts and ideas.
For example, clear policies on promotions or disciplinary actions reduce perceptions of favoritism. Scalability: As the company grows, addressing issues on a case-by-case basis becomes unmanageable.
The leader–member exchange (LMX) theory is a relationship-based approach to leadership that focuses on the two-way relationship between leaders and followers. [1]The latest version (2016) of leader–member exchange theory of leadership development explains the growth of vertical dyadic workplace influence and team performance in terms of selection and self-selection of informal ...
The path–goal theory, also known as the path–goal theory of leader effectiveness or the path–goal model, is a leadership theory developed by Robert House, an Ohio State University graduate, in 1971 and revised in 1996. The theory states that a leader's behavior is contingent to the satisfaction, motivation and performance of his or her ...
Cultural fit and leadership value can be determined by evaluating an individual's own behavior, perceptions of their employees and peers, and the direct objective results of their organization, and then comparing these findings against the needs of the company. [27]
A study conducted by Hulpia et al. focused on the impact of the distribution of leadership and leadership support among teachers and how that affected job satisfaction and commitment. The study found that there was a strong relationship between organizational commitment and the cohesion of the leadership team and the amount of leadership support.