You are on page 1of 12

TheABCofEffectiveLeadership

APracticalOverviewofEvidenceBasedLeadershipTheory

ByShaunKillian(MLead,MEd),AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentre


20052007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentre.Youmaylinktothisarticle.Youmayprintandsharethisentirearticle

for noncommercial purposes, provided you acknowledgethe author, the copyright holder and this copyright message in the

printedmaterial.Youcanquoteorparaphrasefromupto10%ofthearticle,providedyourworkcitessuchreferenceseitheras

weblinksorintraditionallyacceptedmeans(egAPAorHarvard).


With over 35,000 research papers, articles and books written on leadership it safe to say we know
quiteabitaboutwhatisinvolvedinleadingwell.However,thesheervolumeofinformationavailable,
coupled with the lack of evidence behind many popularised notions on leadership can be confusing
and unhelpful. Leadership has been studied and therefore explained from a number of different
perspectives,eachwithitsowninsightsaswellasitsownlimitations.Theseperspectivesinclude:

Leadershipaspower
Personalcharacteristicsofleaders
Leadershipbehaviours
Leadershipstyles
Situationalleadershipmodels
Transformationalleadershipmodels

Thisarticlesynthesizesthekeycontributionsofeachoftheseperspectives,afterfirstdefiningthe
essenceofwhatleadershipis.


LeadershipDefined
Academicscontinuetoargueofoveraprecisedefinitionofwhatleadershipis;yetmanagement
commentator,thelatePeterDruckerrenownedforhistothepointinsight,observedthattheonly
definitionofaleaderissomeonewhohasfollowers.

TheAustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrebuildsonthissimpleyetpowerfulinsighttodefine
leadershipas:

...anybehaviourthatinfluencetheactionsandattitudesoffollowerstoachievecertain
results.

Leadershipisneitherinherentlygoodnorbad.Thisdependsonboththeresultsbeingpursuedandthe
meansusedtoinfluenceothers.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page1

PowerasaSourceofLeadershipInfluence
Yourcapacitytoinfluenceothersisdependentonthepoweryouhave.Withoutsomeformofpower
willnotbeabletohaveanyinfluenceoverothers.
Therearefivepotentialsourcesofpower:1

1. PositionalAuthority
2. RewardPower(thecarrot)
3. CoercivePower(thestick)
4. Expertise
5. InterpersonalPower

PositionalAuthority
It is important for you as a leader to be clear about your positional authority. This includes a solid
workingknowledgeofrelevantlaws,awardsandindustrialagreements.Thisknowledgeprovidesthe
parameters within which you can exercise command and control. There is no doubt that positional
authority is a legitimate and prevalent form of influence within organisations. The evidence2 [4]
demonstratesthatpositionalauthorityisstillthemostusedformofpowerbymanagersanditalsothe
mostcommonreasonforstaffcompliance.Staffbornbetween1920and1945werequiteacceptingof
doingthingsacertainwaybecausethatiswhatthebosssaid.However,theimpactofsuchinfluence
hasbeenerodedwithchangesingenerationalattitudes.Thisiscompoundedinthosecountrieswhose
nationalcultureplaceshighemphasisonparticipatoryworkplaces.Effectiveleadersthereforeexpand
theirpowerbasebeyondthelimitsofpositionalauthority.

RewardPower
Leadersalsouserewardstoshapetheattitudesandbehavioursofstaff.Theuseoffinancialrewards
toshapebehaviourislargelytheprovinceofanorganisationsHRstaff.However,allleaderscanmake
useofnonfinancialrewardsystemstoshapethebehaviouroftheirstaff.Theuseofpositiverewards
to recognize and encourage further repeats of desired behaviours is one of the simplest yet most
powerful forms of power a leader can exert. Kouzes and Posner, when researching their book,
Encouraging the Heart, interviewed staff about the most important nonfinancial reward they could
receive at work; the answer was a simple thankyou. For those interested in doing more than just
thankingpeople,orwhowanttohowtomaximizetheimpactofthankyous,theevidencesuggests3[5]
thatrewardsaremosteffectivewhen:

Rewardsaregivenforspecificbehavioursthatmanagerswouldliketoseerepeated.
They are things that matter to the person being thanked (eg knowing they like the movies
hencebuyingmovietickets).
Rewardsaregivenatrandomratherthanfixedintervals.
Thenatureandscaleoftherewardvariesinresponsetothenatureandscaleofthebehaviour.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page2


CoercivePower
The use of coercive power that is negative consequences
following undesirable or unacceptable behaviour has been
shown to be effective in reducing the instances of such
behaviour.Ithasaplaceinmanagersrepertoire,yetitshould
be used withcare and judgment as it hasalsobeenshown tohavea significant negativeimpact on
subsequentrelationships.4

Expertise
Expertiseisalsoasourceofpower.Peoplewillputmoreweightonaleader'swordswhentheybelieve
theleaderknowswhatyoutheytalkingabout.Earlylevelsofleadershiptypicallyinvolveleadingstaff
whohavethesameprofessionalfunctionastheirleaderaccountantsleadingaccountants,teachers
leading teachers or engineers leading engineers etc. Therefore first level leaders typically have
significant expertise power. As leaders move to higher levels of leadership they find themselves
leading people whose functional expertise is different and superior to theirs. Expertise will not be
sufficientonitsown,howeverleaderscancontinuebuildtheirexpertisepowerbaseby:

Keepinguptodatewithandsharinginformationonstrategicinitiatives.
Takepartinallrelevantdevelopmentopportunitieswithinyourorganisation.
Readrelevantleadershipandprofessionalmagazinesforyourindustry.
Progressivelybuildingyourreputationasacompetentleader.

InterpersonalPower
Interpersonal power refers to your ability to influence others' behaviour simply because of the
relationship they have with you. A thankyou from someone who counts is more powerful than a
thankyoufromsomeonewhodoesn't.Expresseddisappointmentbysomeoneastaffmemberholdsa
leaderinhighregardismoreeffectivethanthesamestatementmadebysomeonethestaffmember
doesnotcareabout.Infact,research5showsthatinterpersonalpoweristhemosteffectiveformof
influencewithinanorganisationalsettingandwithyoungergenerationsplacingmorevalueonloyalty
torelationshipsthantheydoonloyaltytoorganisations,theimportanceofrelationalpowerissureto
increase.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page3

PersonalCharacteristicsofEffectiveLeaders
Early research on leadership sought to identify a list of personal
characteristicsthatseteffectiveleadersapartfromotherpeople.Nosingle
list has been found to hold true for every leader in every context. As a
result leadership research moved on in a different direction focusing instead on what effective
leaders do. For decades traits were largely ignored. However, despite lacking 100% generalisability,
contemporary leadership scholars have recognised that personal characteristics are important to
effective leadership particularly intelligence and aspects of personality such as dominance,
extraversion,sociability,selfconfidence,highlevelsofenergyandresilience.6Amorecomprehensive
listofpersonalitytraitsassociatedwitheffectiveleadershipisshownbelow:

Effectiveleaderstypicallyhavehigherthanaveragelevelsof intelligencespecificallyreasoningand
memory. During World War I, the armed forces used IQ tests to select potential officers and they
continueto beused asa recruitment tool inmanycontemporaryorganisationssuchasMicrosoft.A
highIQdoesnotmakeyouaneffectiveleader.TherearemanycasestudiesofleaderswithhighIQs,
who due to a lack of personal or interpersonal competence have failed as leaders. However, even
emotional intelligence advocate, Daniel Goleman7 admits that a higher than average IQ is necessary
foundationorthresholdcompetency.

The late 1990s saw an explosion of interest in emotionally intelligent


leadership. Research has clearly shown that effective leaders are also
likely to be emotionally intelligent8. Specifically effective leaders are
likelyto:

Beaccuratelyawareofthemselvestheiremotions,tendencies,

strengthsandweaknesses.
Useemotionstoenhancethinkinganddecisionmaking.
Consciouslyregulateemotionsandmoodsinintelligentways.
It has been claimed that emotional intelligence is a better
predictorofleadershipsuccessthanIQ.

Morerecentlysocialintelligence,previouslyconsideredasubpartofemotionalintelligence,hasbeen
showntobethesinglelargestfactorimpactingonleadershipeffectiveness9.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page4

LeadershipBehaviours
Aftergivinguponfindingasingledefinitivelistofpersonalcharacteristicsheldbyalleffectiveleaders,
scholars shifted their focus to explore what effective leaders actually do. Two of the best known
examplesofbehaviouralframeworksareshowninthetablebelow:

Mintzberg's10ManagerialRoles10 Katz'sSkillsofAnEffective
Administrator11


InformationalRoles TechnicalSkills

Keepingabreastofinternal&external Professionorfunctionspecific
happenings knowledge
Keepingothersabreastofwhatis Skillinexecutingthetools&techniques
happening ofthatfunctionorprofession

InterpersonalRoles HumanSkills

Representingtheorganisationatvarious Beingattunedtothefeelings,attitudes
social&officialactivities &beliefsofself&others
Leadingotherstoinwaysthatachieve Usingthisawarenesstocommunicate
desiredresults andbehaveinintelligentways

DecisionalRoles ConceptualSkills

Makingimprovements&innovations Beingabletoseeorganisationasa
Allocatedfinances&resources wholeandhowthevariouspartsactin
Negotiatingnonroutineagreements interdependentways
Usingthisunderstandingtomakewise
decisions

This behavioural approach also underpins the leadership competency models adopted in many
organisations today, with key contemporary roles including strategic thinking, change manager,
relationshipbuilderandtalentdeveloper.12

Whilst the behavioural approach has helped to focus attention on learnable skills, the effective
execution of those skills is often grounded in who the leader is as a person and their personal
characteristics.13

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page5

LeadershipStyles
Otherbehaviouralapproachesfocusedlessonspecificrolesandmoreonleadershipstyles.

BalancingConcernforResultsWithaConcernforPeople
In the midtwentieth century, the University of Michigan, under the supervision of Rensis Likert,
identifiedwhattheyviewedastwoopposingstylesofleadershipleaderswhofocuson:14

Resultsandthetasksthatneedtobedonetoachievethoseresults
Thepeopleresponsibleforachievingthoseresults

At about the same time as the University of Michigan studies, the Ohio State University,under the
supervisionofRalphStogdill,identifiedfourleadershipstyles15,byconsideringthesametwoaspects
ofleadership,withoutassumingaleaderhadtobejustoneortheother:

Highconcernforresultsandhighconcernforpeople.
Highconcernforresultsandlowconcernforpeople.
Lowconcernforresultsandahighconcernforpeople.
Lowconcernforresultsandalowconcernforpeople.

TheLeadershipGrid
The leadership grid, formerly known as the managerial grid model, is a more recent model16 of
leadershipidentifiesfivestylesbasedonacombinationofeitherhigh,mediumorlowconsideration
forpeopleandresults.

A1,1styleshowsalowconcernforresultsandalowconcern
1,9 9,9
forpeopleimpoverisheddontcare.
A9,1styleshowsahighconcernforresultsandalowconcern
Concern for People

forpeoplecompliancemanagement. 5,5
A1,9styleshowsalowconcernforresultsandahighconcern
forpeoplethecountryclub.
A9,9styleshowsahighconcernforresultsandahighconcern 1,1 9,1
forpeopleteamapproach.
A 5,5 style shows a moderate concern for results and a Concern for Results

moderateconcernforpeoplemiddleroad.
Gridtheoryassertsthatthemosteffectiveleadersadopta99styleofleadership,showingbothahigh
concernforpeopleandahighconcernforresults.ResearchsupportstheGridtheorysassertionthat
99leadershipisalwayseffective,howeverthisimpactisnotalwayshighandtherearesomespecific
instanceswereotherleadershipstylesaremoreeffective.17
ScandinavianStudies
Scandinavian studies18 have added a third dimension to the peopletask mix development. They
show how in addition to being focused on achieving results and having good working relationships
withstaff,effectiveleadersseektodevelopanddrawthefullestpotentialoutofeverystaffmember.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page6

SituationalLeadership
Situational leadership theories highlight the importance of context in deciding the right leadership
approachinanygivensituation.

Fielder'sContingencyTheory
OneofthemostwellvalidatedsituationaltheoriesisFielderscontingencymodel19.WhilstGridtheory
advocates adopting a high relationship high task approach in all situations, contingency theory
suggeststhatleadersshouldconsiderthreecontextualfactorsbeforedecidingonthebestpeopletask
mixtoanysituation.
1. Leadermemberrelationsthesecanbeeithergoodorpoor.
2. Task structure how prescribed and systematized is the action the leader is wanting staff to
take.
3. Leaderpositionalpowerthedegreeofpositionalauthoritytheleaderhasoverstaffinrelation
tothespecifictaskathand.

Themodelhasbeenshowntoworkbest20whensituationsareclassifiedintooneofthreecategories:
1. Favorable
2. Moderatelyfavourable
3. Unfavourable

When the situation is moderately favourable, (either good leader member relations, with low task
structureandalowlevelofpositionalauthority;ORwhenleadermemberrelationsarepoor,thetask
structureis high,andpositional authority ishigh)a taskorientatedapproachhasbeenshown to be
moreeffective.Inallothersituationsarelationshiporientatedapproachworksbest.
Fielder asserted that leaders have a dominant fixedstyle, and that leaders should therefore be
matchedtothespecificsituationathandinagiven organisationalunit,whenselectingleaders.This
echoesPeterDrucker's [21]claimthatisfareasiertoturnanaverageperformerintoastarperformer
byfindingroleswheretheirnaturalstrengthsarecalledforthanitisbytryingtodeveloptheirweaker
areas.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page7

Vroom'sNormativeParticipationModelHowParticipatoryShouldYouBe
Vroomsparticipativemodelprovidesasetofrulesornorms(hencenormative)thatdeterminehow
participatoryaleadershouldbewhenmakingdecisions.Afteraweighingupvariouscontingenciesa
leadercanchooseto:
Decideontheirown,andifnecessaryselltheirdecision.
Consult some staff members individually, gathering some informal ideas and then make the
decisionthemselves.
Consult the staff as a group, gathering their suggestions but still making the decision
themselves.
Facilitateameetingwheretheydefinetheproblemandsetthelimitswithinwhichadecision
needstobemade,andthenusesaconsensusapproachtomakeadecision.
Delegatethedecisionmakingprocesseithertotheteamorindividualresponsibleforenacting
thedecision.
The following leadership decision making table21 can be used to identify the most effective and
efficientmeansofmakingadecision,whentimeisshort.Vroomalsoproducedasecondtablethatcan
beusedwhentimeisnotshort,andaleaderwantstotaketheopportunitytodeveloptheirstaff.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page8

of

Staffsupportfor
Importance of

Teamdynamics
Staffexpertise

DecisionStyle
taskobjective
commitment

commitment
Significance

Likelihood
expertise
Decision

Leader
staff
H Decide

H Delegate
H
H H L
L
Group
L
consultation
L

H Facilitate
H
H H L
H
Individual
L
Consultation
L
H L
H Facilitate
TheTaskAtHand

H
H L
L
Group
L
Consultation
L

H Decide

H Facilitate
H
L H L
L
Individual
L
Consultation
L

H Decide

H H Delegate
L L
L Facilitate

L Decide

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page9

TransformationalLeadershipModels
TransformationalleadershiptheoryemergedfromthepoliticalsociologywritingsofJamesMacGregor
Burns.22
Transformational leadership models have a dual focus on who a leader is as well as what a leader
does,mergingboththepersonalcharacteristicandbehaviouraltheoriesofleadership.Yet,themodels
gofurther.Earlytheoriesofleadershipfocusedoninfluencingotherstoachievegoodresults,yetthe
results being sought were readily achievable and the means of achieving them were known.
Transformational leadership by contrast involves rallying people behind a dream or vision of
somethingthatasyethasbeenoutofreach.23

PersonalCharacteristicsofTransformationalLeaders
Transformationalleadersarelikelytohavemanyofthefollowingpersonalcharacteristics:24

Adeepsenseofpersonalpurposecoupledwithanunshakableselfconfidenceintheabilityto
realisethispurpose.
Astrongdesiretotakechargeandmakethingshappen,withoutbeingoverlybossy.
Astrongsocialpresenceandsuperboralcommunicationskills,oftencoupledwithareputation
ofunconventionalbehaviour.
Asensitivitytohowpeoplearefeelingandanabilitytoconnectwellwithpeopleatapersonal
oneononelevel.
Awillingnesstotakepersonalrisksandmakesacrificesinorderrealisetheirvision
Aninternallocusofcontrol,witha'whatcanIdowithwhatIhavenow'attitude
These characteristics emerge in different ways with different people as illustrated by such notable
figuresasBobHawke,SirRichardBranson,MahatmaGandhi,MartinLutherKing,Jr.andAungSanSuu
Kyi.

BehaviouralComponentsofTransformationalLeadership
Behaviouralelementsoftransformationalleadershipcommonacrossvariousmodelsinclude:25

Beingabletocommunicateaclearvisionofthefuturealongwiththegapbetweenthatvision
andcurrentrealities,incompellingways.
Helpingpeopletofindpurposeandmeaningintheirlifethroughpursuitofthisvision.
Overtlymodelingthevaluesandattitudesneededinyourownbehaviour.
Communicatingclearandhighstandardsregardingwhatyouexpectfromthosearoundyou.
Empowering staff with the authority create innovative ways of realising the vision, whilst
helpingstaffaligntheirideaswiththebroaderorganisationalsolutions.
Engagingothersinstrategicandcreativethinkingaroundtherealisationofthevision.
Using a caring and coaching style of leadership in oneonone settings, empathising with the
situationofstaffwhilstdrawingforthcreativesolutionsfromthestaffthemselves.
Recognisingstaffachievementsanddesiredbehavioursinpersonallymeaningfulways.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page10


Transformational&TransactionalLeadership
Transformational leadership does not replace more daytoday leadership practices advocated by
earliertheories.Intransformationalleadershiptheory,thesearereferredastransactionalleadership
behaviours.Rathertransformational leadershipaddsa new,morefuturesorientatedandlargescale
dimensiontotransactionalbehaviours.
Further,itaddsthecoachingstyleofleadership,toaleadersoneononeleadershiprepertoire.

ResearchSupportforTransformationalLeadership
The research support for transformational leadership is overwhelmingly impressive.26 However,
transformationalleadershipisnotalwaysneededandisnotalwaysbeneficial,workingbestwhen:

Whatyouwantstafftodohasavaluesandattitudinalcomponent.
Theorganisationanditsstaffareexperiencingtimesofhardship,stressoruncertainty.
The charismatic nature of transformational leaders can breed devotion and dependency. When the
leader leaves, everything falls apart. This has led leadership researchers27 to move beyond
transformationalmodelstomoreselfeffacingandcollectiveleadershipapproaches.

References

1
AdaptedfromFrench,R.P.,Jr.,&Raven,B.(1959).Thebasesofsocialpower.InD.Cartwright(Ed.),Studiesinsocialpower.
AnnArbor,MI:InstituteforSocialResearch.
2
SeereviewofresearchinR.Lussier&C.Achua(2004),Leadership:Theory,Application&SkillDevelopment,Thomson.
3
SeeStephenRobbins,BruceMillet&TerryWatersMarsh(2004),OrganisationalBehaviour,4thed,by,publishedbyPrentice
Hall.
4
Seenote2.
5
Northouse,P.(2004).Leadership:Theoryandpractice.ThousandOaks,CA;ANDLussier,R.&Achua,C.(2004)Leadership:
Theory,Application&SkillDevelopment
6
SeeBrianJ.HoffmanandBrianC.Frost(2006)Multipleintelligencesoftransformationalleaders:anempiricalexamination,
InternationalJournalofManagement,vol27,no.1;.ANDR.Lord,S.DeVader,&G.Alliger(1986),AMetaAnalysisofthe
RelationBetweenPersonalityTraits&LeadershipPerception,JournalofAppliedPsychology,71,402410;ANDB.Bass(1990),A
HandbookofLeadership,FreePress,NewYork.;ANDR.House&M.Baetz(1979),Leadership:SomeEmpiricGeneralisations,
inB.Staw(ed)ResearchinOrganisationalBehaviour,JAIPress.
7
D.Goleman(1998),WhatMakesALeader,HarvardBusinessReview,HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.
8
Researchshowsalinkbetweenallthreemajormodelsofemotionalintelligence(Mayer&Salovey;Goleman;andBarOn)and
leadershipeffectiveness.SeeR.Kerr,J.Garvin,N.HeatonandEmilyBoyle(2006),
Emotionalintelligenceandleadershipeffectiveness,Leadership&OrganizationDevelopmentJournal,Vol.27No.4,;AND
Cavallo,K.&Brienza,D.(2002).EmotionalcompetenceandleadershipexcellenceatJohnsonandJohnson:theemotional
intelligenceleadershipstudy.Website:http://www.eiconsortium.org.;ANDBarling,J.,Slater,F.,&Kelloway,E.K.(2000).
Transformationalleadershipandemotionalintelligence:Anexploratorystudy.LeadershipandOrganizationDevelopment
Journal,21,157161;respectively.
9
SeeBrianJ.HoffmanandBrianC.Frost(2006),Multipleintelligencesof
transformationalleaders:anempiricalexamination,InternationalJournalofManpower,Vol.27No.1,2006,pp.3751;ANDT.
BradberryandL.Su(2006),Abilityversusskillbasedassessmentofemotionalintelligence,Psicothema,.Vol.18,supl.,pp.59
66
10
AdaptedfromHenryMintzberg,(1973),TheNatureofManagerialWork,Harper&Row.
11
AdaptedfromRobertKatz(1974)TheSkillsofAnEffectiveAdministrator,HarvardBusinessReview,HarvardBusinessSchool
Press.
12
SeeA.Barrett&JBeeson(2002)DevelopingBusinessLeadersfor2010,ConferenceBoard

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page11


13
SeeJ.Antonakis,A.T.Cianciolo,&R.J.Sternberg(2004),Thenatureofleadership.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage;ANDKatz's
retrospective(1994)commentaryonhisownrepublishedarticle
14
SeeR.Lickert(1961),NewPatternsofManagement,MGrawHill:NY.
15
SeeR.Stogdill&A.Coons(Eds)(1957),LeadershipBehaviour,UniversityBureauofBusinessResearch
16
R.Blake&J.Mouton(1978),TheNewManagerialGrid.
17
B.Fisher&J.Edwards(1988)"ConsiderationandInitiatingStructureandTheirRelationshipWithLeadershipEffectiveness:A
MetaAnalysis,ProceedingoftheAcademyofManagement,pp20105''
18
SeeG.Ekvall&J.Arvonen(1991),ChangeCenteredLeadership:AnExtensionoftheTwoDimensionalModel,''Scandinavian
JournalofManagement'';andM.Lindell&G.Rosenqvist(1992),IsThereAThirdManagementStyle?''TheFinnishJournalof
BusinessEconomics''
19
SeeforexampleR.House&R.Aditya(1997),TheSocialScientificStudyofLeadership,p.422.
20
Seenote19.
21
AdaptedfromV.Vroom(2000),Leadership&theDecisionMakingProcess,OrganisationalDynamics,28,p.87.
22
P.Northouse(2004),Leadership:Theoryandpractice.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Northouse,2004
23
Seenotes2,3and22..
24
SeeB.Hoffman&B.Frost(2006),Multipleintelligencesoftransformationalleaders:anempiricalexamination;ANDS.
Robbins,B.Millet,T.WatersMarsh(2004),OrganisationalBehaviour,PrenticeHall;ANDR.Lussier&C.Achua(2004),
Leadership:Theory,Application&SkillDevelopment,Thomson
25
SeeforexampleB.Bass&R.Riggio(2006),TransformationalLeadership,Routledge;ANDJ.Conger(1989),TheCharismatic
Leader,JosseyBass;ANDJ.Kouzes&B.Posner(1990),TheLeadershipChallenge,JosseyBass;ANDJ.Kotter(1999)What
LeadersReallyDo,HarvardBusinessSchoolPress
26
Seenote3.
27
Seenote3.

2007AustralianLeadershipDevelopmentCentrehttp://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au Page12