The Great Man Theory
The great man theory of leadership is a 19th-century idea that states a person is either a natural-born leader or not. Some people are born with the necessary leadership attributes that help them create a great impact on society, politics, or the military. The theory focuses on identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great men.
What is Great Man Theory?
This theory is linked to the work of the historian “Thomas Carlyle” and was proposed during the 19th century (1840’s) according to which history can be largely explained by the impact of great men or heroes and that great leaders are born and not made. According to this theory capacity for leadership is inborn that is a person is either a natural born leader or not. These born leaders are highly influential individuals, gifted with divine inspiration and the right characteristics like charisma, intelligence, wisdom, political skill etc. with a capability to have a decisive historical impact. The theories that were developed were called “great man” theories because they focused on identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social, political, and military leaders.
Great Person Theory:
In earlier times leadership was considered mainly as a quality associated with the males however with the emergence of many great women leaders in future, this theory was recognized as the great person theory in place of great men theory.
Quotes on Great Man Theory:
“The history of the world is but the biography of great men” - Thomas Carlyle
"The goal of humanity lies in its highest specimens" – Nietzsche (Untimely Meditations)
Overview of Great Person Theory:
As much of the literature available on Theories of Leadership is a product of last two centuries, early research on leadership was primarily based on the study of people who were known as great leaders. Hence this theory is based on the assumption that leaders are born and not made and that the great leaders will arise when there is a great need for them, as the right man for the job seems to emerge almost magically to take control of a situation and lead a group of people into safety or success.
This theory presented a primary view of leadership as it was said that history is nothing but stories of great men. Advocates of this theory believed there were a few exceptional men in each generation who were born with qualities and characteristics that caused other individuals to follow them. These great men were believed to be born with the necessary attributes that set them apart from others and that these traits are responsible for their assuming positions of power and authority.
A leader is a hero who accomplishes goals against all odds for his followers. From an early age, these leaders could attract followers through the magnetism of their personalities and had the ability to direct the group in ways that produced significant changes to society. This theory was also supported by American scholar Frederick Adams Woods who in his work investigated 386 rulers in Western Europe from the 12th century till the French revolution in the late 18th century and their influence on the course of historical events.
One of the main reasons for evolution of this theory was that in those times people of a lesser social status had fewer opportunities to practice and achieve leadership roles, and research looked only at people who were already successful leaders. These successful heroes were either aristocratic ruler, who achieved the position through birthright or individuals with personal charisma that they emerged great against all odds. Their ability to lead others was not found in a set of skills that could be learned, but was thought to be a unique, internalized characteristic that was inherent in personality to such a degree as to be part of a leader's genetic structure. This fact contributed to the idea that leadership is an inherent ability. Leadership is believed to be provided by people possessed of special skills and/or qualities distinguishing them from other people who don’t have these.
Criticism / Arguments against - The Great Person Theory of Leadership
The great person theory was popularized in the 1840s by Thomas Carlyle, and in 1860 Herbert Spencer formulated a counter-argument that has remained influential till present. He argued that such great men are actually the products of their societies, and that their actions would be impossible without the social conditions built before their lifetimes. Leaders were the products of the society in which they lived. Spencer wrote, "You must admit that the genesis of a great man depends on the long series of complex influences which has produced the race in which he appears, and the social state into which that race has slowly grown....Before he can remake his society, his society must make him." – The Study of Sociology.
Until the last years, similar in some ways to "Great Man Theories” another theory gained popularity that assumed that people inherit certain qualities and traits that make them better suited to leadership. These theories were known as “Trait Theories of Leadership”, our next article in this section discusses these theories in detail.
Related Links
You May Also Like
-
The Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX), also called the Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory is a relationship-based approach that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship to get the best from all team members. How leaders maintain their position in groups and develop an exchange with each of their subordinates. How leaders and members develop relationships that can contribute to growth or hinder development.
-
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (SFP) Leader Theory
Pygmalion theory of Leadership is a model of SFP at work involving supervisory expectancy based on the pygmalion effect. This effect is a type of self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) in which raising leader's expectations regarding subordinate performance boosts the group's performance. Managers who are led to demand more from their team, lead the team to better performance. There is some evidence that the SFP effect does exists.
-
Reciprocal influence theory also known as reciprocal determinism is authored by Albert Bandura and states that an individual's behavior influences and is influenced by both the social world and personal characteristics. Three factors that influence behavior are the environment, the individual, and the behavior itself. Certain leader behaviors can cause subordinate behaviors and reciprocal influence on the leader by the group.
-
Strategic Contingencies Theory is a theory of intra-organizational power. The power of a subunit or individual depends on a few contingencies and that the more contingencies are controlled by a subunit, the greater is its power. The theory focuses on tasks that need to be done in the form of problems to be solved, thus de-emphasizing personality.
-
The development of teams is an ongoing process because the composition of the team may keep on changing. The new members may join and the old members may leave the team. The team members pass through several stages for the development of the team and there has been a lot of research to identify these stages. In this article, we discuss the common theories of team development.
-
Social learning theory is a theory of learning process that states that most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling. Behavior change can occur in response to leader modeling and learning occurs through the observation of rewards and punishments. The focus of this approach has been teaching leadership across formal and informal settings.
-
Five Factors Model (FFM) also known as Five-Factor Personality Model is based on five broad personality traits which are extraversion, neuroticism, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness represented by acronym OCEAN, these traits are often referred to as the “Big Five”.
-
Situational Theories of Leadership
The situational theories of leadership assume that the most effective style of leadership depends from situation to situation. Situational leadership is a leadership style in which the leader must adjust to match the development needs of the followers. They must adapt varying behaviors to strike the right balance between task & relationship based on different levels of maturity of followers and also as followers develop and cultivate their skills.
-
Rensis Likert studied the patterns and styles of managers and developed four management systems known as Likert's management systems. These styles developed by him are known as Likert management systems. System 1 - Exploitative Authoritative; System 2 - Benevolent Authoritative; System 3 - Consultative and System 4 - Participative.
-
Have you ever resonated that there seem to be as many different ways to lead people as there have been great leaders? When we recall the success of Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, Napoleon Bonaparte to Steve Jobs and Jack Welch, we also notice that they all used different approaches that were suitable to their specific situations and circumstances. Over the last century, researchers and psychologists have developed simple ways to describe the “Styles of leadership” and in this section, we will explore these commonly known leadership styles.
