RUNNING HEAD: Reflection 1

Leadership Approaches: Reflection

Leadership Approaches: Reflection

Leadership is a quality that has evaded a single definition for decades. Through a

collection of theories and approaches, researches have constructed a vastly intricate

understanding of what leadership is, and how leaders and followers not only interact, but

influence one another as well. The bounty of leadership approaches, not only provides grounds

for a definition, but also explores traits, behaviors, styles, goals, and qualities that indicate

effective leadership. Together, the expanse of leadership knowledge provides a vast backdrop for

leaders to lean upon and define themselves.

Peter Northouse (2016) defines leadership in many ways through his collection of

approaches. However, he narrows it down to a general definition that states: “leadership is a

process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”

(Northouse, 2016, p.6). Though after the study of the conglomeration of styles and approaches to

leadership, one is certainly provoked to interpret their own personal definition. For me, while I

agree with the general definition, and like many others believe, leadership is a broad list of traits,

qualities and behaviors that surpass one single definition. To me, leadership is a connection built

through a leader and their followers through which motivation, inspiration and encouragement

move a group of people towards a common goal. Leadership is being an example for your

followers; it is sharing knowledge to empower others; it is lighting a fire that others did not know

was inside them. Leadership is a powerful tool that drives people to achieve goals. Through

effective leadership, people are driven through transformation, find purpose and are motivated

towards change, growth and success.

Outside of a single definition of leadership, there lies a sea of theories, existing only to

provide depth and insight to the vastness of the word. Northouse (2016) provides a

comprehensive list of approaches to leadership that include the skills approach, the traits, and

behavioral approaches, the situational approach, path-goal, leader-member exchange,

transformational, authentic, adaptive approaches, servant leadership, and the psychodynamic

theory. Each of these serves as a unique drop water in the ocean of understanding leadership. The

skills approach is a leader-centered perspective focusing on the skills and abilities people can

develop in order to become leaders (Northouse, 2016, p. 43). The traits approach focuses on the

personality characteristics a person inherently possesses that define them as a leader (Northouse,

2016). The behavioral approach “emphasizes the behavior of the leader” (Northouse, 2016, p.

71), such as task and relationship behaviors, that “influence followers in their efforts to reach a

goal” (Northouse, 2016, p. 71). The situational approach “stresses that leadership is composed of

both a directive and a supportive dimension, and that each has to be applied appropriately in a

given situation” (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). This prescriptive approach describes how leaders can

be effective in different types of situations throughout a variety of organizations (Northouse,

2016, p. 112). Similar to the situational approach, the path-goal theory focuses not only on the

leader, but the impact they can have on their followers (Northouse, 2016). It focuses on “how

leaders motivate followers to accomplish designated goals” (Northouse, 2016, p. 115) by

“directing, guiding, and coaching [followers] along the way” (Northouse, 2016, 135). The

leadership-member exchange theory, different from those before it, focuses primarily on the

interactions between leaders and followers and the dyadic relationship between the (Northouse,

2016, p. 137). This theory focuses on the idea of in-groups and out-groups, where followers are

either involved, encouraged, and noticed, or disengaged and looked over and how each group
Reflection 4

affects reaching organizational goals (Northouse, 2016, p. 157). Transformational leadership is

considered “a process that changes and transforms people...concerned with emotions, values,

ethics, standards and long-term goals” (Northouse, 2016, p. 161). This approach is primarily

“concerned with improving the performance of its followers and developing followers to their

fullest potential” (Northouse, 2016, p. 167). The authentic leadership approach, “one of the

newest areas of leadership research” (Northouse, 2016, p. 195), focuses on “the authenticity of

the leader and their leadership” (Northouse, 2016, p. 195). The importance of authenticity in

terms of leadership is that “it fulfills an expressed need for trustworthy leadership in society” and

“has an explicit moral dimension” that meets the demand for genuine, and good leadership

(Northouse, 2016, p. 206). Similar to other theories, such as the skills, traits and behavioral

approaches, the servant leadership approach is also focused on the behaviors of the leader

(Northouse, 2016, p. 225). Servant leadership emphasizes the altruistic quality of the leader who

“places the good of the followers over their own self-interests and emphasize follower

development” (Northouse, 2016, p. 226). The outcomes of a leader’s choice to serve first include

“follower performance and growth, organizational performance, and societal impact”

(Northouse, 2016, p. 253). Adaptive leadership “is about how leaders encourage people to

adapt—to face and deal with problems, challenges, and changes” (Northouse, 2016, p. 257). The

outcome of adaptive leadership is a group of followers who are empowered and can

independently problem solve (Northouse, 2016). Finally, the psychodynamic approaches focuses

on the “underlying irrational processes and dynamics governing human behavior” (Northouse,

2016, p. 324). This approach points out that “much of what we do…is guided by deep-seated

experiences and patterns that were mapped out” in our early childhood (Northouse, 2016, 324).

The psychodynamic theory helps to explain how these deeply rooted patterns affect our
Reflection 5

leadership. While there is a vast array of leadership approaches, there are only a few that really

describe my personal style of leadership.

The leadership theories that best describe my leadership style are the transformational

and traits approaches. Northouse (2016) mentions that transformational leadership “is the process

whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation

and morality in both the leader and the follower” (p. 162). This aspect of transformational

leadership describes because I constantly look to build personal connections with my followers

in hopes that I can not only gain their trust, but work to inspire and motivate them towards the

common goal. Northouse (2016) also mentions that transformational leaders “empower followers

and nurture them in change” (p. 175). I have a strong drive to help empower my co-workers to

help them overcome obstacles at work, better themselves, and provide them with the inspiration

to believe in themselves. I love to encourage them and develop a sense of pride and capability in

them. Over the past few months I have begun to feel a real sense of purpose in being a leader.

After taking a few of my leadership courses, I have realized that I possess the qualities of a

leader…which is perhaps why it feels so natural to me. The traits that I have that Northouse

(2016) defines as traits of an effective leader are determination, integrity, persistence,

intelligence, cooperativeness, and problem solving. Apart from the styles that describe my

leadership style directly, there are also a few other approaches that resonate with me.

The three approaches that resonate the most with me are the servant-leader approach,

where others needs are put above your own (Northouse, 2016), transformational leadership,

where the leader inspires and encourages growth and positive change in his followers

(Northouse, 2016), and the adaptive approach in which a leader guides his followers through

change and challenges (Northouse, 2016). These approaches focus heavily on the leader’s
Reflection 6

actions and behaviors influencing the followers directly, and how leaders can guide positive

change in the followers and organizations. I connect with these approaches because they place

value on having a great connection with the followers and using it to drive people towards goals

and facilitate change. One of the aspects of the leadership-member exchange theory that I could

not connect with was the idea of in-groups and out-groups. I personally feel that I have spent a

lot of my life in the out-group, not because I don’t work hard or put effort in, but because I do

not fit in with the main stream, I do not conform, and I do not kiss butts. While the LMX theory

talks about how a leader can use the in-group to meet goals (Northouse, 2016), I believe that a

great leader will reach to inspire people even in the out-group to work towards achieving goals.

To me, this is contrary to the other approaches that focus on all of the followers, and not only

those in a particular group. This was really the only approach I did not connect with as I believe

the culmination of all other approaches is what makes the full definition of a leader.

One experience lately that happened in my work place was the formation of an in-group.

A very competitive barista was promoted to a shift supervisor position and quickly became good

friends with both the manager and the assistant store manager. This supervisor aimed to work her

way to the top by pushing other people below her. She would bad mouth the other supervisors to

the baristas and the manager, and became very paranoid about whether or not people were doing

the same to her. This became a problem on the shift team because myself and another supervisor

felt as though we were in the out-group, even though we more effective supervisors and had a

longer, more stable past with the manager than this new supervisor. Soon there was a lot friction

on the shift supervisor team and my manager attempted to put the fire out by having a team

meeting. My manager facilitated the conversations between all the shifts and I was able to talk

about being in the out-group. My manager and assistant manager were surprised to hear I felt this
Reflection 7

way. Since the meeting, things have been very different. I have worked to build a better, closer,

and more trustworthy relationship with my manager, and she has reciprocated with me. I’ve

worked on building a better relationship with out ASM and the results have been positive. The

management team is now taking an approach where we empower each other and have an honest,

open floor for feedback to help each other develop into better leaders, much like the

transformational leadership model. Working cohesively as a shift team has proven to be much

more effective than focusing on the development of the in-group, while ignoring the efforts and

talents of those in the out-group.

Overall, the culmination of all leadership approached helps provide a broad perspective

of leadership truly is. Each approach focuses on a unique aspect of leadership, providing in-depth

detail and an organized understanding. In the end, leadership is too big of a butterfly to be

restrained to a single definition.

References:

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.