Leadership Theory: How Does Someone Become a Leader?

There are two streams of leadership: “born to be a leader” or “education is the mother of leadership.” Which one do you believe is right?

If you believe that someone becomes a leader because leadership is their destiny or part of their life path, then you belong to the born to be a leader stream. On the other hand, if you believe that everyone has the opportunity to become a leader and that leadership can be developed through education, then you believe that education is the mother of leadership. So, where do you stand?

Born to Be a Leader

The born to be a leader perspective is rooted in leadership traits. From this perspective, leadership cannot simply be taught or created. It is closely associated with what is often called the Great Man Theory. If you want to understand leadership through this perspective, you need to identify the qualities of those recognised as leaders by examining their traits, character, intellectual capabilities, and talents. If someone asks why Napoleon Bonaparte, George Washington, Winston Churchill, and other historical figures became great leaders, the answer would lie in the personal qualities that enabled them to lead. Each of these individuals was, in this view, born to become a leader. Yet there is an interesting challenge: their traits, characters, intellectual abilities, and talents were remarkably different. This makes it difficult to identify a common set of characteristics that explains why all of them became great leaders. Do you agree?

Education Is the Mother of Leadership

If you disagree, perhaps you are closer to the second stream: education is the mother of leadership. According to this perspective, leadership can be taught. Leadership can be developed. Anyone has the potential to become a leader, and leadership education can make that journey easier. Both formal and non-formal education play a role in developing future leaders. People can learn leadership and, over time, become leaders themselves.

This stream has identified a number of explanations for why someone can become an effective leader. These ideas have gradually developed into various leadership education modules and theories, including:

Transactional Theory: Leadership as Management

Transactional Theory emerged during the Industrial Revolution, when leadership theories were needed to increase workplace productivity. Someone entrusted with leadership was placed higher in the organisational hierarchy and given the authority to establish rules and rewards to motivate people towards higher levels of productivity.

This leadership theory is closely associated with management, positioning the leader as a manager. Its primary focus is on getting the work done. Transactional leadership and bureaucratic leadership are examples of this perspective, and both continue to be widely studied and practised by leaders today.

Theory of Transformation: Developing People First

The Theory of Transformation focuses on how leaders transform the people they lead so that those individuals develop vision, self-motivation, a desire to grow, commitment, and the willingness to create value for the organisation. Rather than beginning with the work itself, this theory begins with developing people, with the expectation that better people will ultimately contribute to better work and a stronger organisation. This theory is believed to be effective over a longer time horizon. This is the foundation of transformational leadership. The question is: are you patient enough to lead this way?

Behavioural Theory: Different Roles, Different Behaviours

Behavioural Theory focuses on the roles a leader chooses to play throughout the leadership process. Every role produces a certain pattern of behaviour. Different leadership roles therefore create different leadership behaviours.

Leadership education based on this perspective introduces leaders to a variety of roles and the behaviours associated with them. A leader taking on a parental role, for example, may behave like a parent towards the people they lead. An achiever role may produce a leader who is strongly driven by goals and ambition to turn those goals into reality. If you want to explore the range of leadership roles further, you can study Whole Mind Leadership, which emphasises the connection between “thinking and leading.” The question is no longer whether you have a leadership style, but whether you have developed a sufficiently broad range of leadership roles and behaviours to respond effectively to different situations.

Theory of Contingency: Leadership Depends on the Situation

The Theory of Contingency reminds us that leadership effectiveness depends heavily on context and situation. A single leadership style will not work in every circumstance.

When people do not know what they need to do, a telling leadership style may be required. When they know what to do but their approach differs from what the leader expects, the leader may need to adopt a more persuasive style. When people know what they are doing and the leader wants to refine their ideas through collaboration, a participative style may be the best choice. When people are highly experienced and fully understand their responsibilities, delegation becomes more appropriate.

Leaders therefore need to understand the situation before deciding how to lead. Situational leadership, autocratic leadership, democratic leadership, and laissez-faire leadership are among the approaches commonly discussed within this perspective.

Theory of Charisma: Leadership Through Trust and Example

The Theory of Charisma places greater emphasis on the personal qualities of leaders that enable them to inspire others. The way leaders live, behave, and present themselves can create a sense of charisma that strengthens their ability to lead. A leader's sincerity becomes an important source of influence. When people believe in their leader, trust grows, and the process of mobilising people becomes easier. Servant leadership and paternalistic leadership are leadership styles that fit closely with this perspective. The question is: how easy is it to put this into practice?

Theory of Business: Strategic and Entrepreneurial Leadership

The final leadership education perspective is more closely connected to business. It argues that a leader must be capable of strategic thinking while also possessing an entrepreneurial mindset. This approach emerged in response to increasingly intense business competition. However, this perspective cannot stand entirely on its own. Strategic thinking and an entrepreneurial mindset can only be embraced by others when they are combined with other leadership styles. The Theory of Business therefore complements other leadership theories that are often seen as lacking a strong emphasis on strategic thinking and an entrepreneurial mindset. Strategic leadership and entrepreneurial leadership are leadership styles that are increasingly being studied and adopted.

So, are things becoming clearer or perhaps even more confusing? Which perspective would you choose? Must every leadership style fit who you are? And does your own leadership style reflect any of the perspectives above?

Have a good day!

Greetings of Transformation