The topic of leadership attracted many scholars and researchers from various educational disciplines, including the discipline of organizational behavior. Three major approaches to study leadership in organizational behavior are the trait approach, the behavior approach, and the contingency approach: 

Trait Approach

The trait approach to leadership study was the earliest approach to understand the leadership phenomenon in the organizational behavior approach. Zaccaro (2007) defined leaders’ traits as “relatively coherent and integrated patterns of personal characteristics, reflecting a range of individual differences, that foster consistent leadership effectiveness across a variety of group and organizational situations”.

The trait approach assumed that there are some common inherent qualities in leaders that distinguish them from non-leaders. As a result, many trait theories of leadership appeared that were earlier referred to as the Great Man theories of leadership. The leaders' inherent qualities that were initially studied in the trait approach were extraordinary personality attributes, abilities, skills, or physical characteristics. The earliest trait theories that focused on the leader as a person were not so successful. Leaders' traits explored in the earlier studies in the 1920s and 1930s were physical stature, appearance, social class, emotional stability, speech fluency, and social ability. However, later trait theories that focused on the leadership process rather than the person were more successful. The trait approach to leadership is still applicable.

The trait approach to leadership study was dominant in the early periods of leadership research. However, later the trait approach was disdained due to its inability to find common leadership traits and its inability to account for situational factors for leaders. Recently, there has been a re-emergence of the trait approach to leadership study driven by conceptual, methodological, and statistical sophistication in the field of research. However, it is asserted that having some desirable traits alone is not enough for effective leadership.  Traits can be considered as only a precondition for effective leadership. Other than traits, leaders need to apply appropriate behavior for their leadership effectiveness.

Behavior Approach

Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) were the pioneers of the behavior approach to leadership study, which focused on leaders’ style of action. They identified three leadership styles: 

1. Autocratic style

2. Democratic style

3. Laissez-faire style

In the autocratic style of leadership, a leader tends to dictate work methods, make unilateral decisions, and limit employee participation. In the democratic style of leadership, a leader tends to involve employees in decision-making, delegates authority, and uses feedback as an opportunity for coaching employees. In the laissez-faire style, a leader generally lets the group make decisions and complete the work in whatever way it sees fit.

Yukl, Gordon, and Taber asserted that early research on behavioral theories of leadership was mostly based on a two-factor model. These studies included Ohio State studies and University of Michigan studies on leadership behavior. Ohio State research identified two basic styles of leadership: 

1. Initiating structure 

2. Consideration 

In the initiating structure style, a leader defines and structures his or her role and the role of group members in search of goal attainment. In the consideration leadership style, a leader had job relationships characterized by mutual trust and respect for group members’ ideas and feelings.

University of Michigan research identified two leadership styles:

1. Production-oriented 

2. Employee-oriented 

In the production-oriented style of leadership, a leader tends to emphasize the technical and task aspects of the job, is concerned mainly with the group's tasks, and regards group members as the means to achieve goals. In the employee-oriented leadership style, a leader emphasizes interpersonal relationships and takes a personal interest in the needs of the followers.

With the passage of time, leadership scholars became more interested in the way leaders initiate and implement change in organizations. The recent theories of transformational and charismatic leadership included change-oriented behaviors that are relevant to leadership effectiveness.  Thus, Yukl, Gordon, and Taber developed a three-dimensional taxonomy of leadership behaviors that included the change behavior. They developed a taxonomy of three meta-categories of leaders' behavior:

1. Task behavior 

2. Relations behavior

3. Change behavior

Task behavior meta-category included planning short-term activities, clarifying task objectives and role expectations, and monitoring operations and performance. Relations behavior meta-category included providing support and encouragement, providing recognition for achievements and contributions, developing member skills and confidence, consulting with members in decision-making, and empowering members to take initiative in problem-solving. The change behavior meta-category included monitoring the external environment, proposing an innovative strategy or new vision, encouraging innovative thinking, and taking risks to promote necessary changes.

Contingency Approach

Context is important for leadership studies, as a leadership style may vary significantly depending on the context in which the leader is operating. Thus, contingency leadership theories assert that the effective leadership style varies according to the situation or the context. No one style is effective in all situations; therefore, a leader must apply a suitable behavior that is required by the situation. Thus, various contingency theories emerged with the passage of time. These contingency theories emphasized the context of the situation in terms of the favorableness of the environment for the leader, the complexity of the task, and the followers' expertise. The contingency theories of leadership have tried to recommend suitable leadership styles for various situations and contexts.

One of the well-known theories of contingency leadership is Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory. Hersey and Blanchard argued that the best leadership style depends upon the readiness of the followers. The follower’s readiness is to the extent to which they have the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task. The theory identified four kinds of followers and four types of leadership style for each. The theory then matched the four leadership styles with the four types of followers.

You can download your free Leadership Mastery Assessment Toolkit from the "Books & resources page".