Multiple Theories Approach 1
A Multiple Theories Approach to Leadership
Jeremy Reece
Introduction to Educational Leadership
The University of Memphis
Multiple Theories Approach 2
Leadership is a sometimes difficult, multi-variable process by which an individual
encourages and guides others to a desired action or outcome. Northouse (2007) wisely includes
the ability of an individual to influence others in his definition of leadership. Nonetheless, an
individual through their learned experiences as well as their innate traits and characteristics
develops an effective leadership approach. While anyone can lead, an effective leader uses the
culmination of life experiences coupled with their unique abilities and trait set to continuously
monitor and adjust what is required for a specific situation or set of circumstances. It is the
ability to harness these experiences and attributes that contributes to an individual’s ability to
influence others.
Although, as any theory of leadership will suggest, there is always an ideal or most
desirable selection of traits or leadership styles promoted by each approach, and an individual
must adhere to these most desirable selections to effectively use the approach. Prospective
leaders everywhere work to improve their leadership abilities by honing their specific style or
approach, or adding a new technique to their repertoire. However, there is no one best theory to
follow in all situations, and we would be shortsighted to suggest that any one style encompasses
everything that is important for a leader to consider.
To that end, I am suggesting the development of a new practical model, the multiple
theories approach. This model would be a detour from previous overviews of multiple
approaches (Dansereau, Yammarino, & Markham, 1995), but rather an attempt to view the
benefits of multiple approaches and to encourage young leaders to view leadership in this hybrid
way. Needless to say, effective leadership is a complex process that requires an individual to
always think, and be prepared for the unexpected. To be the most effective leader possible, one
must be concerned with trait development, their leadership style, the situations they are
Multiple Theories Approach 3
presented, their interactions with their colleagues, as well as potential challenges they may face.
In the following paragraphs, I will present the most desirable selection of each segment of the
multiple theories approach.
Integrity, integrity, integrity
While an individual leader will exhibit only a specific set of traits, some traits are more
conducive to effective leadership and the ability to influence than others are. By examining the
characteristics exhibited by famous leaders like Mohandas Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr., and even Hitler, researchers hoped to locate the specific traits that contributed
to their abilities to lead and influence followers (Bowers & Seashore, 1966; Jago, 1982;
Northouse, 2007).
Researchers have attempted to identify a universally accepted set of traits since the
beginning of the twentieth century (Jago, 1982). Northouse (2007) notes that five major traits
have appeared across studies to identify a universal set, including intelligence, self-confidence,
determination, integrity, and sociability. Of these major traits, integrity seems to be the most
appealing. Northouse views integrity as a function of an individual’s honesty and
trustworthiness, two very important attributes of an effective, successful leader.
Brown and Trevino (2006) further articulate the traits of an effective leader to include
fairness and principled decision-making. To be able to influence a colleague to a collective
action or goal, that colleague must be able to believe in their leader. An individual has to have
the confidence that their leader is making decisions based on what is best for their organization
or team. Allison, Eylon, Beggan, and Bachelder (2009) argue that leaders who possess these and
similar trait sets have the ability to influence both the image and the effectiveness of their
organizations, even after they die.
Multiple Theories Approach 4
However, in recent years, the integrity of leaders in the business world to the White
House has been questioned. The failure of financial institutions and high profile companies
across the globe like WorldCom, Enron, Stanford Financial, and Lehman Brothers, and even the
decision by President George W. Bush to go war against Iraq in 2003, has drawn wide-ranging
criticism, especially after many in the public believed they were misled or provided false
information (Brown & Trevino, 2006; Cavanaugh, 2007). According to C. C. Manz, Anand,
Joshi, and K. P. Manz (2008), in any organization, it becomes increasingly difficult for
employees who are faced with ethical and moral dilemmas to make the right decision when their
immediate leadership is not modeling appropriate behavior and responses to conflict.
Does this style fit?
The style with which a leader motivates his colleagues to a collective action or goal is
important for organizational success, and effective leaders must continuously evaluate the style
with which they lead. According to Northouse (2007), “The style approach focuses exclusively
on what leaders do and how they act” (p. 69). Considering the importance of trait development,
the style approach also addresses consideration or relationship behaviors between leaders and
their colleagues, including trust and respect (Northouse).
Trust and respect are the direct result of a leader’s exhibition of integrity, principled
decision-making, and honesty. While many would argue that these two leadership styles or
approaches are divergent, I consider them linked. Having an ethical role model is beneficial to
the development of an employee’s ethical leadership principles, and an organization must be
willing to embrace an ethical culture for this leadership style to survive (Brown & Trevino,
2006). A leader who does not possess certain traits, like integrity, cannot be successful using the
style approach.
Multiple Theories Approach 5
A leader utilizing the style approach wants to strive for team management. Team
management occurs when a leader focuses completely on both goal completion and quality
employee relationships (Northouse, 2007). However, it is also the responsibility of a leader to
recognize complex problems within an organization, and the leader must be willing to offer both
flexible and adaptive solutions to be successful, even if the adaptations result in the modification
of their behavior (Yukl, 2008).
In Yukl’s review of the flexible leadership theory, he argues that a leader must be more
than just transformational and charismatic (2008). A leader who uses this adapted style approach
must be efficient, flexible, and well versed in relationship development, all of which are
instrumental for organizational success (Yukl). A leader who does not consistently monitor their
behavior and interactions with their colleagues will move further away from the team
management style and is faced with the possibility of detachment from colleagues and
ultimately, failure.
Always monitor the situation.
The situational leadership approach encourages leaders to examine the specific
characteristics of each situation, including the skill or development level of each of their
colleagues associated with the task (Northouse, 2007). The development level of employees
refers to the employee’s competence and commitment to the task (Northouse). Much like Yukl
(2008) describes as the flexible leadership theory, the situational leadership approach also
requires that an effective leader be flexible and willing to adapt, depending on situational
circumstances (Northouse). An effective leader’s ability to adapt to situational influencers is
necessary to move colleagues toward a collective goal.
Multiple Theories Approach 6
As cited by Vecchio (1987), the situational approach emerged from the writings of
Reddin (1967). Hersey and Blanchard (1969) adapted these writings to develop the life-cycle
theory of leadership, which, through further research and development, has transformed into the
situational approach, as we know it today (Northouse, 2007; Vecchio). The situational approach
has three major components: supportive behaviors, directive behaviors (related to task
management), and employee development (Northouse). For application of the situational
approach to be successful, a leader must possess both the intelligence and the ability necessary to
recognize employee needs (Northouse). Like the appropriate application of the style approach,
for a leader to be effective using the situational approach, they must constantly monitor their
behaviors to ensure they match the needs of their employees and the situation, and they must
adjust their behaviors, if necessary.
When these three factors are gauged correctly, a leader is provided with the appropriate
style and behaviors with which to engage their colleagues (Northouse, 2007). Depending on the
situation, each of the four styles suggested by the situational approach, delegating, supporting,
coaching, and directing, could be successful. Although there is some confusion as to why an
employee who is in the moderate stages of development would lack the commitment or maturity
levels of their new and fully developed colleagues, the importance of the theory is in its
requirement to view each situation separately (Graeff, 1997; Northouse). It is this situational
evaluation that makes this approach invaluable to an effective leader. Should a leader attempt to
attack similar, or even dissimilar, situations with the same methods, without a complete
examination of the influencers present, a task or objective could be destined to fail.
Strive to improve the quality of interactions.
Multiple Theories Approach 7
The value of the leader-member exchange theory (LMX) is the examination of leadership
as a function of the interactions between colleagues in a hierarchical structure (Northouse, 2007).
LMX encourages leaders to examine constantly the quality of their communications with team
members and to treat each individual team member uniquely, warning against the use of an overarching style for all colleagues (Northouse). Like both the style and situational approaches, the
LMX notes the importance of relationship development for effective leadership to occur.
However, the LMX does treat the leader-team member relationship as a continuum, meaning that
a leader as well as a team member can influence the communication and relationship in equally
important ways (Northouse).
Due to the LMX’s focus on relationships, once again, the integrity of not only the leader
but also team members comes into question. According to Dansereau et al. (1995), the most
important variable affecting the quality of dyadic relationships involves, “…mutual respect,
reciprocal trust, and mutual obligation, thereby making it a relational concept” (p. 100). It is
paramount that team members feel that they can trust their leader, and that their leader is
concerned with the organization’s and their employee’s best interests, as they relate to goal
completion.
The ultimate goal of LMX is to move team members to the in-group through a series of
high-quality exchanges, which will provide the team members with more connections to the
leadership of an organization; however, a leader must always remember to work to move all
team members to the in-group (Northouse, 2007). The development of an out-group can create
problems for a work environment, especially if not all team members view the in-group as
equally attainable (Northouse). The out-group can be particularly troublesome when faced with
demographically dissimilar leader-team member relationships, and examining these types of
Multiple Theories Approach 8
relationships has become increasingly important as work environments in the United States are
becoming more and more diverse (Brouer, Duke, Treadway, & Ferris, 2009). Brouer et al. note
that only individuals with high political skill, the ability to maneuver within their work
environment to achieve collective goals, will be able to overcome this pitfall.
Thus, the leader’s relationship with their team members becomes that much more
important. Leaders must be extremely self-aware, and constantly monitor their interactions with
team members to ensure that no one is marginalized without reason, especially those who may be
demographically dissimilar. Through these self-checks, leaders also provide a positive example
of effective leadership, an example that can be modeled by team members to perpetuate the
existence of these qualities within their organization.
Look out!
By constantly monitoring their environment and their leadership style, effective leaders
must be aware of possible issues within their both their self and their organization. Considering
the trait approach and leadership as it is defined in this article, charismatic leaders who are very
influential and persuasive can also be very evil and ill intentioned. For example, during the
beginnings of trait analysis, both Hitler and Napoleon were studied for their leadership traits and
in particular, how those traits would expand our understanding of the most dominant leadership
traits (Bowers & Seashore, 1966; Jago, 1982; Northouse, 2007).
Effective leaders must also avoid opportunism, when possible. As cited in Williamson
(2008), Plato suggests that not all leaders are in their positions to benefit the whole of society,
but rather, they are involved in furthering their individual interests and pursuits. Using the
opportunities made available to a leader for personal advancement can affect the morale of team
members, unless the leader’s success is a function of their team’s performance and achievement
Multiple Theories Approach 9
(Northouse, 2007). Employees model the behavior exhibited by their leadership, and the absence
of appropriate leader behavior will ultimately affect the efficiency of both employees and their
organizations (Brown & Trevino, 2006; Manz et al., 2008).
When applying the situational leadership approach, a leader must avoid overlooking
demographic differences including age, sex, and education level (Northouse, 2007). Each of
these factors could influence the development level assigned to a team member, which could
ultimately affect the team’s effectiveness and ability to achieve goal completion. Vecchio (1987)
reported findings contradictory to those prescribed by the situational leadership approach, also
surrounding the appropriate application of development levels to team members. Leaders must
be keenly aware of their employees when examining the situational factors presented by a task to
avoid misusing this piece of the model.
With respect to the LMX, leaders must ensure that they do not purposely marginalize
team members without reason. The development of an out-group in work environments is
inevitable; however, employees must always know what is necessary to move from the out-group
to the in-group. It is the responsibility of the leader to ensure that quality interactions are
occurring within each of their unique dyad exchanges. Moreover, the out-group should not
consist of employees who are demographically dissimilar to their leader just because they are
different (Brouer et al., 2009). In an increasingly diverse work environment, leaders must ensure
that their in-group is equally diverse. Diverse work environments have been shown to promote
organizational effectiveness and innovation (Northouse, 2007).
Future directions and concluding thoughts
Leadership is an extremely complex process that requires a practitioner to be extremely
nimble and self-aware. No approach or style is widely accepted as the one true, most effective
Multiple Theories Approach 10
approach. As a result, the multiple theories approach is a practical solution to effective
leadership. Understanding that effective leadership is different for different people, and not
everyone can be an effective leader in all situations, it becomes incumbent on a leader to ensure
they are constantly monitoring their style, situational influencers, and team member
relationships. Just because the style and approach combination presented above matches what I
believe to be the best and most effective components of a successful leadership dynamic, does
not mean that another’s multiple theories approach would not include transformational
leadership, path-goal theory, or some other approach to leadership.
What is most important is that researchers begin to move away from single theories of
leadership and begin to analyze combined theories. We trust hybrid technology in our vehicles,
why not in our leadership theory? Many of the approaches presented in the last one hundred
years lack sufficient empirical evidence to support their effectiveness (Northouse, 2007).
Whether a multiple theories approach or a hybrid model of leadership can be sufficiently
operationalized is not significant. What is significant is that we recognize what we do know and
what we can prove and encourage young leaders everywhere to put it in practice, whether these
concepts come from one, two, or five different leadership theories.
Multiple Theories Approach 11
References
Allison, S. T., Eylon, D., Beggan, J. K., & Bachelder, J. (2009). The demise of leadership:
Positivity and negativity biases in evaluations of dead leaders. The Leadership Quarterly,
20(2), 115-129.
Bowers, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a fourfactor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11, 238-263.
Brouer, R. L., Duke, A., Treadway, D. C., & Ferris, G. R. (2009). The moderating effect of
political skill on the demographic dissimilarity – Leader-member exchange quality
relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 61-69.
Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.
Cavanaugh, J. M. (2007). From the “Red Juggernaut” to Iraqi WMD: Treat inflation and how it
succeeds in the United States. Political Science Quarterly, 122(4), 555-584.
Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Markham, S. E. (1995). Leadership: The multi-level
approaches. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 97-109.
Graeff, C. L. (1997). Evolution of situational leadership theory: A critical review. The
Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 153-170.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life-cycle theory of leadership. Training and
Development Journal, 23, 26-34.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3),
315-336.
Multiple Theories Approach 12
Manz, C. C., Anand, V., Joshi, M., & Manz, K. P. (2008). Emerging paradoxes in executive
leadership: A theoretical interpretation of the tensions between corruption and virtuous
values. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 385-392.
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Reddin, W. J. (1967). The 3-D management style theory. Training and Development Journal, 21,
8-17.
Vecchio, R. P. (1987). Situational Leadership Theory: an evaluation of a prescriptive theory.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 444-451.
Williamson, T. (2008). The good society and the good soul: Plato’s Republic on leadership. The
Leadership Quarterly, 19(4), 397-408.
Yukl, G. (2008). How leaders influence organizational effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly,
19(6), 708-722.