There have been numerous leadership theories over the years. As such, the ones that are dominant during a certain time period also show a glimpse on how the general public viewed leadership at the time and what they wanted out of their leaders.
“Great Man” Theories have been “focused on identifying innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social, political, and military leaders,” (Northouse, 2019). Great Man theories assume that people are born leaders, and therefore born with specific traits that make them great leaders (Northouse, 2019). These theories were worked on mainly during the 19th century, with much of the work being done by Thomas Carlyle (Juneja). Like other trait theories, this theory states that traits are stable over time (Juneja). However, the criticisms for this theory lay in the fact that the traits are those typically associated with masculinity (Juneja).
In addition, it is very hard to disprove the theory. The theory could better be defined as a maxim. A maxim is “an opinion based on a single case study,” (Hamel, 2021). While the great men that were used to develop the theory were not a single case study, the men looked at were from history (Northouse, 2019). For example, Napoleon Bonaparte, Indira Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, and Joan of Arc (Northouse, 2019). These individuals were not directly observed during the development of the theory, and therefore it would be impossible to disprove whether or not the traits stated were actually exhibited. In addition, it is impossible to disprove whether it was the traits that led to their historic leadership or if it was other confounding variables.
The theory is also hard to apply to an organizational setting. As the theory says that leaders are born with these traits, it suggests organizations should hire only those that display the great man traits. The implication though, that only some of us are born with these traits, it that not everyone can be a leader. This causes serious implications when we try to apply the theory to an organizational setting, which needs numerous leaders throughout the hierarchy.
One example is the military. The theory would suggest to find a way to assess whether or not a person has the great man traits, if they do, they would be officers, if not they would be enlisted personnel. However, General Krulak in 1999 brought out the idea of The Strategic Corporal (Krulak, 1999). This concept states that a corporal makes decisions that lead to real strategic consequences (Krulak). Corporals are enlisted personnel at the rank of E-5 and have only been in the military for about 2-3 years. Corporals are leaders in their own regard as they make strategic decisions and are in charge of a small team (Krulak). That leads to the problem of how to apply the Great Man Theory. If only some individuals are born with the traits, yet everyone in the military can be considered a leader due to their decisions having strategic importance, it would be hard to apply the Great Man Theory in the situation of military personnel recruiting.
One thing that can be understand from the Great Man Theories is that at the time of the theory leaders were viewed as deity like figures, as the name “Great Man” would indicate. This is further indicated by the assumption that a person had to be born with the traits, and they could not be developed over time. A lot of the traits are very masculine too. Which makes since that at the time period women could not be in positions of power.
If trait theories were to make a resurfacing again in 10-20 years, an interesting analysis would be comparing the Great Man Theories to the new version. One reason for this, is that very slowly woman are slowly entering into positions of power. As it is seen from Pew Research Center’s graphic demonstrating the slow climb to recently reaching congress being 20% women (Pew Research Center, 2020).
Overall, the Great Man Theories can be seen as important historical step in the study of leadership theories. The theory led to different versions of trait theories that we see today. While the theory may not be actively used today, it can also show us a glimpse of what leadership was viewed as during the development of the theory.
References:
Florida Tech. (n.d.). Great Man Theory. Retrieved January 26, 2021, from https://www.floridatechonline.com/blog/psychology/top-8-leadership-theories/
Juneja, P. (n.d.). Great Man Theory of Leadership. Retrieved January 26, 2021, from https://www.managementstudyguide.com/great-man-theory.htm
Krulak, G. C. (1999, January). The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War: Operation Absolute Agility. Marine Corps Gazette.
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Pew Research Center. (2020, August 07). Women in Leadership Positions. Retrieved from https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/01/14/chapter-1-women-in-leadership/
The Great Man Theory is a great application of what we have been learning in class. I find it very interesting that you were able to find this theory that discusses traits necessary to be a good leader that was talked about in this week’s reading like intelligence and sociability. You found great facts that relate to the theory, I found the facts when you related the theory to gender particularly interesting. Since women were not really seen in leadership positions in history and women are just starting to get the recognition they deserve, like Kamala Harris being elected Vice President, it makes sense why most traits in this theory are very masculine. Sometimes there seems to be a stereotype that some of the best leaders are men and only men could be good leaders, but there is no evidence for that. For example, in an article that looks at dimensions of effective leader behavior, it is discussed that “Research has consistently found that effective leadership is perceived as characterized by traits similar to those associated with masculine gender roles. These perceptions would appear to be at odds with extensive research indicating that effective leadership requires “consideration” and “structuring” behaviors—behaviors that seem to represent both masculine and feminine styles” (Cann, Siegfried). I do not find it surprising that sometimes there are gender stereotypes about leadership when there are theories that have the word man in them. Lastly, I agree it would be an interesting analysis would be comparing the older Great Man theory to a newer version.
Reference:
Cann, A., Siegfried, W.D. Gender stereotypes and dimensions of effective leader behavior. Sex Roles 23, 413–419 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289229