The Leadership Journey: From Traits to Transformation

Due No due date
Points 5
Questions 5
Time Limit None
Allowed Attempts 3

Instructions

Unit 3 The Leadership Journey: From Traits to Transformation

Instructions

Read the story about Monica Rivera and her challenge at Horizon Technologies. As you read, pay close attention to the problems she faces and how she uses different leadership ideas to fix them. Then, use the provided reflection questions to think about your own understanding of leadership.

Case Study: The Leadership Journey

Part 1: The Big Leadership Problem

Monica Rivera sat in her new office, looking at an email from the chief executive officer (CEO). She had just been made the director of operations at Horizon Technologies. Her big job was to fix the company’s product development team, which was really struggling. They had missed their goals for the last three months, morale was low, and two key team leaders had quit.

“Monica, you need to fix this,” the CEO’s email said. “Your past work shows you can do it. I believe you have what it takes to lead this team to success.”

Monica sighed. People had always called her a “natural leader”—confident, smart, quick to decide, and charming. These qualities helped her in old jobs. But this time, she felt it wasn’t just about her personal traits. The team’s problems were complex, involving both technical issues and human challenges.

Getting ready for her first team meeting, Monica thought about her leadership classes. She’d studied many leadership ideas (theories) that had changed over time. Maybe understanding these ideas could help her create a better plan. She knew she needed more than just being “naturally confident” to turn things around.

Part 2: How Ideas About Leadership Changed Over Time

Monica opened her old leadership textbook. She started reviewing the main ideas about leadership:

The “Born Leader” Idea: Trait Theory (1930s-1940s)

The first leadership studies looked for natural qualities that made leaders different. People thought great leaders were born with special traits like:

Intelligence: Being smart
Self-confidence: Believing in yourself
Determination: Not giving up easily
Integrity: Being honest
Sociability: Being friendly
Charisma: Having a charming personality

Why it was popular: It was a simple idea. We often see famous leaders and think they just had “something special” in them.

Why it wasn’t enough: Research found problems.

No agreed list: No one could agree on one list of traits all great leaders shared.
Traits don’t guarantee success: Many people have these traits but don’t lead well.
Ignores the situation: It didn’t take into account where leadership happened. It assumed a leader with the right traits would be great anywhere. This isn’t true in real life.
Doesn’t teach leadership: If leaders are born, you can’t teach it.

Monica realized this idea explained why people called her a “natural leader,” connecting to the concept of inherent leadership traits. But she knew just having these traits wouldn't solve the deeper problems; she needed to focus on leadership behaviors – the specific actions and things she had to do.

The “What Leaders Do” Idea: Behavioral Approaches (1940s-1950s)

Since Trait Theory wasn’t enough, studies shifted to what leaders do, not just who they are. This meant leadership could be learned.

What it says: Researchers found two main types of leader behaviors:

Task-oriented behaviors: Actions focused on work and goals. A leader would:

Set up work: Create plans, define roles
Set deadlines: Give clear times for tasks
Focus on goals: Push the team to reach targets
Example: A manager telling a team exactly what steps to follow for a project

Relationship-oriented behaviors: Actions focused on the team’s well-being. A leader would:

Show consideration: Care about feelings and needs
Build trust: Create a safe, connected place
Support team members: Help people when struggling
Example: A manager listening to a team member’s problem or holding team-building events

Why it was important: Research suggested effective leaders needed to balance both types of behaviors. This meant leadership could be learned and developed.

Why it wasn't enough:

No “best” style: They couldn't find one perfect balance that worked everywhere.
Ignores the situation: It still didn't fully consider how the situation might change what behaviors were needed.

Monica saw how this idea offered concrete actions. It wasn't just about being confident; it was about doing things like setting clear expectations and building better team relationships.

The “Change Your Style” Idea: Situational Leadership (1960s-1970s)

This idea recognized a key point: no single leadership style works in all situations. Good leaders change their style to fit what’s needed.

What it says: Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard’s model said leaders should adapt to the “readiness” of their followers. “Readiness” means their ability (skills) and willingness (motivation/confidence) for a task.

Based on readiness, the leader uses one of four styles:

Directing (S1): High task, low relationship. For new and eager followers with low skills. Leader gives exact instructions and watches closely.

Example: Teaching a new employee how to use a machine.

Coaching (S2): High task, high relationship. For followers who are partially skilled but losing motivation. Leader still directs, but also explains why and offers support.

Example: A team member knows how to do a task but is discouraged after mistakes. The leader guides and builds confidence.

Supporting (S3): Low task, high relationship. For followers who are skilled but hesitant. Leader gives little direction, focuses on support and involving them in decisions.

Example: An experienced designer unsure if their ideas are good. The leader encourages them and asks for their input.

Delegating (S4): Low task, low relationship. For followers who are skilled and confident. Leader gives full task and responsibility, checking in occasionally.

Example: An expert engineer working independently on a new feature.

Why it was important: This model was practical. It gave leaders a clear way to think about how to change their behavior for different people and different tasks.

Why It Wasn't Always Enough:

Oversimplification: Real life is messier than four boxes.
Leader flexibility: Assumes leaders can easily switch styles.

Monica immediately saw the value. Her team had different skills and motivations. She couldn’t lead everyone the same way.

The “Matching Leader to Situation” Idea: Contingency Theories (1960s-1970s)

While Situational Leadership focused on the follower, “Contingency Theories” looked at broader situation factors. Fred Fiedler’s model was a key example.

What it says: Fiedler suggested a leader’s core style (task-oriented vs. relationship-oriented) is mostly fixed. The goal is to match the leader’s natural style to the right situation. Factors like:

Leader-member relations: How much team members trust the leader
Task structure: How clear the job steps are
Position power: How much formal power the leader has

For example, a task-focused leader with strong authority and a clear plan might do well leading a school event like a fundraiser, where roles are assigned, deadlines are clear, and results are easy to measure.

Other ideas, like Path-Goal Theory, said a leader’s job is to help followers reach their goals by clearing obstacles, giving direction, and offering support. The leader’s behavior should depend on the follower’s needs and the work environment.

Why it was important: These ideas strongly showed that the situation matters. Leaders need to understand the situation deeply before acting.

The “Inspire and Change” Idea: Transformational Leadership (1980s-Present)

As the world needed constant change and new ideas, Transformational Leadership became important. This was about inspiring people to achieve great things.

What it says: This idea focuses on how leaders inspire followers to go beyond their own self-interest for the good of the whole team or company. They create deep commitment and excitement through four main ways (the “Four I's”):

Idealized influence (role model): The leader is admired, respected, and trusted. They live by strong values.

Example: A CEO who always acts with honesty

Inspirational motivation (vision): The leader sets an exciting vision for the future, explaining why work matters.

Example: A leader talking about a future where their product changes lives

Intellectual stimulation (new thinking): The leader encourages creativity, new ideas, and challenging old ways.

Example: A manager asking tough questions that make their team think differently

Individualized consideration (caring for each person): The leader acts as a coach, helping each person grow and develop.

Example: A manager spending time to understand career goals and find training

This contrasts with Transactional Leadership, which is about exchanges (rewards for performance). Transformational leaders aim to transform followers, inspiring strong commitment and innovation.

Why Transformational Leadership is important: In today’s fast-changing world, inspiring change and strong commitment is key.

Monica felt excited. The division needed a new direction, a new spirit. This theory gave her a way to inspire that change.

Newer Ideas: Contemporary Perspectives (Present)

Monica’s textbook also mentioned newer ideas:

Authentic leadership: Leaders are true to themselves, honest, and ethical.
Servant leadership: The leader’s main goal is to serve their followers, helping them grow.
Adaptive leadership: Helps organizations deal with complex challenges where there are no easy answers.

Monica closed her textbook. She now had a rich toolkit. She knew she had to use the right tool for the right problem and the right person.

Part 3: Using Ideas to Fix Things

The next morning, Monica came to the office early to observe the team. She saw:

Senior engineers worked alone: They didn’t talk much with newer team members.
Marketing was frustrated: They felt engineers didn’t understand customer needs.
Junior members were quiet: They seemed scared to share ideas.
Everyone needed something different.

During the meeting, Monica introduced herself and asked everyone to share their problems. People were careful at first. But Monica used active listening: she really focused, nodded, and asked thoughtful questions. Slowly, people opened up.

“The old director just told us what to do without understanding our technical problems,” said Dean, a senior engineer.

“We never get clear instructions on what’s most important,” added Sophia from marketing. “Everything is urgent, so nothing gets done well.”

“I have ideas for improving our processes,” said Jamal, a junior developer, “but no one seems interested in hearing them.”

Monica realized different team members had different needs. Senior engineers needed independence. Marketing needed better communication. Junior members needed encouragement.

Over the next six months, Monica used many leadership approaches:

Clear expectations (task-oriented behavior): She set very clear goals and ways to measure success. For example, specific targets like “Complete user login module by March 15.”
Teamwork (relationship-oriented behavior): She created cross-functional teams with engineers and marketers working together from the start. She encouraged team lunches to build connections.
Changing style for each person (Situational Leadership):

For new juniors like Jamal (low skills, high eagerness), she used a Directing (S1) style, giving step-by-step instructions.
For struggling mid-level developers (some skill, losing motivation), she used Coaching (S2), guiding them and offering encouragement.
For experienced but hesitant team members like Sophia (skilled, but lacking confidence), she used Supporting (S3), involving them in decisions and building their confidence.
For senior engineers like Dean (highly skilled and confident), she used Delegating (S4), giving them big goals and letting them figure out the best way to achieve them.

Inspiring a big vision (Transformational Leadership): She painted an exciting picture of the division’s future: “Imagine us, the leaders in innovative software ... where our products truly delight customers.” She connected daily work to this vision.
Being real and open (Authentic Leadership): She admitted her own limits (“I’m not a coding expert”) and asked for input, which built trust.
Removing roadblocks (Servant Leadership): She fought for more budget, simplified old processes, and helped solve team conflicts, making the team’s work easier.

By the end of the year, the division had not just stopped failing; they had exceeded their goals for the first time in 18 months! Team morale was much better, and fewer people were quitting.

In her year-end review, Monica thought about her journey. “I used to think leadership was about having the right traits or using one method. Now I understand it’s about combining many ideas and changing to fit people and situations. The theories gave me a guide, but the real learning came from using them carefully.”

The CEO smiled. “That’s why I chose you, Monica. Not just for your traits or skills, but because you learn and adapt. That’s what great leadership is.”

Select Next to Continue

Take the Quiz