CampusDownWiki CampusDown ↗
English

Leadership Theories: Trait, Behavioral and Contingency

💼 Business By CampusDown Wiki Editorial Team Last updated
Quick answer: leadership theory developed through three questions in turn: who good leaders are (traits), what they do (behaviors), and which style works in which situation (contingency). Since the 1980s, transformational and relationship-based theories have been added.
Contents
  1. 1. How leadership theory developed
  2. 2. 1. Trait theories
  3. 3. 2. Behavioral theories
  4. 4. 3. Contingency theories
  5. 5. 4. Transformational leadership and newer theories
  6. 6. Criticism
  7. 7. References

How leadership theory developed

Leadership is the process of influencing group members toward shared goals. Twentieth-century research moved from trait theories to behavioral theories to contingency theories, and later to transformational and relationship-based approaches. Exams often ask which weakness of an earlier theory each new one tried to fix.

1. Trait theories

Early research looked for personal qualities such as intelligence, self-confidence, decisiveness and sociability (the "great man" view). Ralph Stogdill's 1948 review concluded that no trait guarantees leadership across situations and that traits must be considered in relation to the situation. That conclusion opened the way to behavioral and contingency theories.

2. Behavioral theories

  • Ohio State studies: leader behavior was described on two dimensions, initiating structure (defining tasks and roles) and consideration (respect and support for members).
  • University of Michigan studies: compared job-centered and employee-centered leaders and found employee-centered leaders' groups tended to perform better.
  • Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964): concern for production and concern for people are each rated 1–9; the 9,9 "team" style, high on both, was presented as ideal.

3. Contingency theories

  • Fiedler's contingency model (1967): the LPC (least preferred co-worker) scale classifies leaders as task- or relationship-oriented, and effectiveness depends on situational favorableness (leader-member relations, task structure, position power). Task-oriented leaders did best in very favorable or very unfavorable situations, relationship-oriented leaders in moderate ones.
  • Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership: leaders should shift from telling to selling to participating to delegating as followers' readiness (ability and willingness) grows.
  • House's path-goal theory (1971): the leader's job is to clarify the path to goals and remove obstacles, raising motivation. Based on expectancy theory, it distinguishes directive, supportive, participative and achievement-oriented leadership.

4. Transformational leadership and newer theories

James MacGregor Burns (1978) distinguished transactional leadership, based on exchange and rewards, from transformational leadership, which raises followers' values and motivation to a higher level. Bernard Bass (1985) described its components as idealized influence (charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration, an idea often linked to the higher needs in Maslow's hierarchy.

Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory notes that leaders form relationships of different quality with different members, creating in-groups and out-groups. Servant, authentic and shared leadership are also active research areas. The idea that followers learn by watching leaders connects to social learning theory.

Criticism

  • Trait research produced inconsistent lists of which traits matter.
  • Behavioral theories did not explain why effective behavior varies across situations.
  • Fiedler's LPC scale has been criticized as unclear in what it measures, and the Hersey-Blanchard model as weakly supported by evidence.
  • Transformational leadership has been accused of heroizing leaders and underplaying the risks of misused charisma.

References

  1. Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35–71.
  2. Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The Managerial Grid. Houston: Gulf Publishing.
  3. Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23(5), 26–34.
  5. House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(3), 321–339.
  6. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
  7. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press.
  8. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.

Reports and materials that use this theory (Korean)

There are no materials dedicated to this theory yet, but you can search related reports in the CampusDown library (Korean).

Find more reports · Search '리더십 이론' on CampusDown →

You may also like

This article was last updated on October 15, 2026. It is based on widely recognized original works and textbooks; when citing it in a paper, please check the original sources listed in the references.