PES6250 Chap.6 Leadership Theories, Styles and Development
Leadership Theories, Styles and Development
Four generations of answer to one question
The theories are easier to use when they are read as a sequence rather than as a catalogue. Trait theory located leadership in the person, in innate qualities such as honesty and charisma. Behavioural approaches located it in what a person does, in styles that can be learned. Contingency and situational theories located it in the fit between leader and situation.
The relational theories located it in what happens between leader and follower.
Each generation responds to what the previous one could not explain, and later answers narrow rather than delete the earlier ones.
Traits, and why a criticised theory is still taught
Trait theories focus on innate qualities that supposedly define effective leaders, and the course states the standard critique alongside them: empirical evidence for innate leadership traits is limited, which challenges the assumptions of great man theory.
The reason to teach it anyway is that sport organisations continue to recruit as though it were true. Appointing a former elite athlete on the strength of presence and competitive character is a trait judgement, and it is a hypothesis rather than a credential.
Behaviours that can be taught
Two named models sit here.
McGregor's Theory X describes an authoritarian and repressive style with tight control and no development, producing a limited and depressed culture, while Theory Y describes a liberating and developmental style that achieves control, achievement and continuous improvement by enabling, empowering and giving responsibility. Blake and Mouton's Grid describes styles in terms of attention to people and to production.
Theory X and Y are best read as assumptions rather than personality types, because each belief produces the evidence that confirms it.
Contingency, and a disagreement worth using
Contingency theory makes effectiveness depend on situational variables such as task structure and leader-member relations.
Fiedler's model classifies leaders as task-oriented or person-oriented using the Least Preferred Co-worker measure. Situational Leadership asks the leader to adapt behaviour to the team's maturity and readiness. Path-Goal has the leader choose directive, supportive, participative or achievement-oriented behaviour according to subordinate needs and the environment.
Fiedler treats orientation as stable and therefore implies placement; Path-Goal treats behaviour as selectable and therefore implies development.
Noticing that tension is the critical examination the course asks for.
Transformational, transactional and servant
Transformational leaders inspire followers through charisma, vision and attention to personal growth, with four named components: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and, fourth, individualized consideration.
Transactional leaders emphasise structured exchanges with rewards and corrective action to maintain the status quo. Servant leadership centres on prioritising the needs and growth of team members, promoting empowerment and inclusivity and aligning with ethical and participative values.
Transactional mechanisms are not a deficiency: contracts, selection and sanctions are how a squad functions, and they maintain what transformational components are needed to change.
How leaders are actually built
The development section is the practical reply to the trait critique.
The named programmes teach communication, emotional intelligence and change management to women in sport leadership, and strategic planning and, separately, personal development to athletes, coaches and administrators, with stated aims of building capacity, promoting diversity and supporting sustainable growth. Not one item on those curricula is a trait.
The sector has adopted the behavioural and relational answer in its development practice while much of its recruitment language remains trait based, and that gap is a productive observation for a case study.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Trait, behavioural, contingency and relational as four locations for leadership
- 02
The trait critique, and why recruitment still runs on trait reasoning
- 03
Theory X and Theory Y as self-confirming assumptions
- 04
Blake and Mouton's Grid: attention to people against attention to production
- 05
Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker measure and what follows from a stable orientation
- 06
Situational Leadership and readiness
- 07
Path-Goal as a selector: supply the deficit the situation actually has
- 08
Four components of transformational leadership, each with an observable
- 09
Transactional exchange as maintenance rather than failure
- 10
Servant leadership, empowerment and inclusivity
- 11
Development programmes, and the curricula that answer the trait critique
Reject the obvious leadership style and justify the two that fit
- 3State the Path-Goal selection rule and diagnose what the situation lacks.
- 2Explain why the directive style is the wrong response here.
- 3Name the two styles that fit and say what each addresses.
Key terms
- Trait Theory
- The view that effective leadership follows from innate qualities such as honesty and charisma, for which the course notes the empirical support is limited.
- Theory X
- McGregor's authoritarian and repressive assumption set, characterised by tight control and no development, and associated with a limited and depressed culture.
- Theory Y
- McGregor's liberating and developmental assumption set, achieving control, achievement and continuous improvement by enabling, empowering and giving responsibility.
- Contingency Theory
- The position that leadership effectiveness depends on situational variables such as task structure and leader-member relations rather than on the leader alone.
- Least Preferred Co-worker
- The measure in Fiedler's model that classifies a leader as task-oriented or person-oriented, treating that orientation as relatively stable.
- Situational Leadership
- The approach requiring a leader to adapt behaviour to the maturity and readiness of the team rather than to personal preference.
- Path-Goal Theory
- The model in which a leader selects directive, supportive, participative or achievement-oriented behaviour according to subordinate needs and the environment.
- Idealized Influence
- The transformational component in which the leader functions as the standard, and is watched and imitated accordingly.
- Individualized Consideration
- The transformational component in which each follower is developed as an individual rather than addressed as part of a group.
- Transactional Leadership
- Leadership through structured exchange, using rewards and corrective action, which maintains the status quo effectively and cannot by itself produce change.
- Servant Leadership
- An approach centred on prioritising followers' needs and growth, promoting empowerment and inclusivity, and building trust through ethical and participative practice.
Leadership Theories, Styles and Development FAQ
Is transformational leadership better than transactional?
The course does not say so, and treating the transactional style as a deficiency misreads both. Exchange relationships do necessary work in a sport organisation: contracts, selection, bonuses and sanctions are transactional instruments and they are how a squad functions day to day.
The defensible position is that transactional mechanisms maintain the status quo, which is what you want when the status quo works, and cannot produce change, which is when the transformational components become relevant.
Fiedler and Path-Goal seem to contradict each other. Which one applies?
Both are on the syllabus and the contradiction is the useful part. If orientation is stable, as Fiedler treats it, the organisational lever is placement: move the leader to a situation that suits them. If behaviour is selectable, as Path-Goal treats it, the lever is development: train the leader to read the situation and switch.
Using that tension, rather than listing both models as though they agreed, is the critical examination the second learning outcome asks for.
What does the development material tell us about the theories?
That the sector has already chosen. The programmes named teach communication, emotional intelligence, change management, strategic planning and personal development, and none of those is a trait. Development practice therefore rests on the behavioural and relational generations, even where recruitment language still describes leaders in terms of innate presence and character.
An organisation that runs both a development programme and a traditionally trait-based appointment process is carrying two incompatible theories, which is worth saying in a report.
How do I use a leadership style in a written answer without just naming it?
Diagnose first and say what you are not doing. Establish what the situation is short of, choose the behaviour that supplies it, and then name the style you rejected and the reason. That structure makes the claim falsifiable, which is what separates an application from a label, and it works with any of the contingency models rather than only with Path-Goal.
Assessment move
Build the four-generation timeline from memory first, because the individual theories are much easier to hold once you know which question each generation was answering. Then take three situations you have seen, one where the task was unclear, one where morale was the problem and one where an experienced group had gone flat, and select a style for each with a written reason for the style you rejected.
Finally, look at any sport organisation's published leadership development material and ask which generation of theory it implicitly accepts.
Working through Leadership Theories, Styles and Development in PES6250? Sia is AskSia’s AI Management tutor — ask any PES6250 Leadership Theories, Styles and Development question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how PES6250 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
