1. Leadership or management, which do you consider as significant for organisational effectiveness. Critically analyse the leadership management debate in leadership studies using leadership theories and empirical evidence. 2. Leadership is about adapting

studentsample1.docx

Home >Education homework help >1. Leadership or management, which do you consider as significant for organisational effectiveness. Critically analyse the leadership management debate in leadership studies using leadership theories and empirical evidence. 2. Leadership is about adapting

Meindl et.al’s (1985) historical contribution has been a greater focus on followership within leadership studies. Critically analyse the importance of followers in the construction of leadership using theories and examples.

PLEASE NOTE : WE ARE EXPECTING TO SEE FEWER NUMBERS OF CASE STUDIES (IDEALLY 2). Introduction, context and statement of aims and objectives and conclusion	18	20

Structure and coherence and criticality of the argument	17	20

Understanding and application of theoretical concepts	26	30

Effective application of supporting empirical (case based) material	15	20

References	8	10

Total	84	100

General Comments
Excellent introduction; Very thorough, clear intro, aims and objectives. Conclusion sums up the points and gives an informed opinion.

Very well structured with high level of critical analysis and coherent, balanced arguments

High level of understanding and application of all theoretical concepts, precise answering of the question.

Case studies used very effectively to support and refute the theory. You use many case studies, but you have integrated them well into your arguments. A smaller number would have allowed you to develop them and make them more nuanced.
Well referenced, with high levels of further reading. Overall an excellent and well written and argued piece. Well done!!

The Guru of leadership famously protested about the endless attempts to define leadership pointing out that “there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are persons who have attempted to define the concept.” (Bass, 1981. p.4) This highlights the various conflicting theories and views about leadership and despite the prolificity, the concept ‘remains largely elusive and enigmatic” (Meindl, Ehrlich, and Dukerich, 1985. p.79). Leadership has been defined as “interpersonal influence, exercised in a situation, and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals” (Tannenbaum, Weschler & Massarik, 1961. p.24). In the words of Rost, leadership “is an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes." (Rost,1991 p102). When you compare these definitions, there are clear similarities about what leadership involves, which can be captured by :1) influence process, 2) relational dynamics within a group, and 3) change or performance enhancement and 4) the attainment of goals. What is distinct about Rost’s definition is the use of the word followers which has so frequently been the neglected component in leadership research. The choice of words and the inclusion of the term serves to highlight their role in the leaders follower dynamic through the elements of reciprocity and mutual benefits.

This view can be contrasted with the more mainstream definition like Hemphill & Coons (1957. p 57) who defined leadership as; “the behaviour of an individual when he is directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal”. This underscores the importance of the individual and how the leader drives the activities; this kind of thinking imbues the ‘leader-centric’ theories of leadership. The follower centric approaches to leadership on the other hand highlight the importance of followers in enabling leaders to achieve their goals. Such theorising is still in its infancy and needs more research as clarified by Riggio (2014: 75), “We cannot really understand leadership if we do not understand followership in all its complexity”.

This essay will evaluate the importance of followership in the construction of leadership, starting with Meindl et.al’s 1985 article ‘The Romance of Leadership’. It will examine different perspectives critically: leader as a heroic figure and follower as a placid, non-influential player, using the example of GE and its CEO Jack Welch. The essay will then look at Kelleys’ idea that each follower possesses specific traits that effected their contribution to leadership. Current Prime Minister Theresa May is used as an example of a former follower who possesses Kelleys’ outlined traits, and used them to progress her career within politics. Kelley’s traits are then contrasted against the idea of ‘Transactional Leadership’ or the approach that a leader uses incentives to prescribe a certain type of working to followers, Bill Gates is used as an example of a transactional leader. This essay will then move on to provide a thorough critique of Trait Theory, or the perspective that certain personality traits lead to the success of a leader, this contrasts with the question because it puts the individual leader on a pedestal rather than their followers. Richard Branson is used as an example of a leader who, whilst not necessarily possessing the prescribed traits, has made a huge success of his businesses and personally makes a mention of his followers when he discusses his success. Finally, this essay will explore and critique the idea of a transformational leader, a theory that focuses on the need for leaders to engage and motivate followers and thus agrees with the assumption made in the question that followers are central to the practice of leadership. Steve Jobs provides an example of a leader who used clear values and a desire for change to motivate his team onto the achievement of his specific goals and dreams.

In his 1985 article; ‘The Romance of Leadership’ Meindl et al argued that for too long, leadership had been seen as “a central organizational process and the premier force in the scheme of organizational events and activities.” (Meindl, Ehrlich, and Dukerich, 1985. p79). Meindl argued that the romanticised and heroic view of leadership that is spoken about in the mainstream influences follower behaviour and had led to the overlooking of the importance of followers. This view of the follower as an almost placid and inferior figure in the shadow of a heroic leader has been roundly criticised (Bligh and Kohles, 2012). In a tribute article after the death of Meindl, Uhl-Bien and Pillai criticised the idea that a traditional followership involved followers who had reduced responsibility, reduced initiative and increasingly relied on the leader for motivation (Uhl-Bien et al., 2007). Collinson (2006) goes one step further and argues that rather than being ‘sheep’ who blindly follow their leader, followers are active, powerful and influential players in the leadership process. On the other hand, Meindl’s article has also received its share of criticism, that it trivialises the role of leaders, the article has been described as ‘Doom and Gloom’ as well as being accused of being a product of Meindl’s disillusionment with Leadership research (Hunt, 1999). In fact, House et.al (1991) argues that in a time of increased complexity within business and ever larger organisations than there were in 1985, leadership plays a more important role than ever (House, Spangler, and Woycke, 1991). One example of a so-called heroic leader is Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric from 1981 to 2001. In his tenure as CEO, Welch grew the value of General Electric by over 4000% (Ro, 2015). His leadership style has been described as brutal but inspirational (Brady, 2012). In an interview with the Harvard Business Review early on in his time as CEO Jack Welch outlined what he thought made for a successful leader; “Good business leaders create a vision, articulate the vision, passionately own the vision, and relentlessly drive it to completion” (Tichy and Charan, 1989. p.112). This view of a leader as an inspirational figurehead represents the leadership view that Meindl was trying to disprove. The emphasis on a visionary leader leading from the front with less emphasis on followers extended itself into all aspects of Jack Welch’s time at General Electric. At the end of each year he famously ranked all of his employees and fired the bottom 10% (Brady, 2012). This is the kind of action that gained him an almost mythical status as a brutal but hugely financially successful leader.

Writing in the Harvard Business Review, Robert Kelley (1988) agreed with Meindl’s view that a follower’s importance was often overlooked by leadership theorists, saying; “But in searching so zealously for better leaders we tend to lose sight of the people these leaders will lead. Without his armies, after all, Napoleon was just a man with grandiose ambitions,” (Kelley, 1988. p.142). Kelley identified four qualities that made for an effective follower; “they manage themselves well, they are committed to the organisation, they build their competence and focus their efforts for maximum impact and they are courageous, honest and credible” (Kelley, 1988. p.142). By outlining the importance of the attributes of followers Kelly reinforces the assumption made within the question about the importance of followers in the construction of the leadership process. An example of a follower who fits with Kelleys’ model of qualities is career politician Theresa May, before she was made Prime Minister in 2016. She started working for the conservative party in 1986 through her local conservative party association (Parker and Warrell, 2017). Over the years since she joined the party, she has proved time and again her commitment to the values of the party. This commitment to the party is one of Kelley’s key attributes of a good follower, as is the way she has built up her political competencies over the years, which has helped her to get to the position of Prime Minister. One explanation of May’s success within the party is that she “…seems to represent a more decent, less personality-focused approach. She comes across as straightforward, shrewd and reassuringly staid,” (Day, 2014. p.12). However, in contrast to Kelleys’ idea that it is the qualities of the individual follower that dictates whether they were an effective follower or not, the ‘transactional’ theory of leadership put the onus on the leader to incentivise their team to work to their full potential. Burns (1978. p.19) defined leadership as: “…inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations – the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations – of both leader and followers.” This definition, with its emphasis on goal setting for motivating the followers, complements the idea of transactional leadership. “Transactional leadership involves an exchange between the leader and follower wherein the leader offers rewards in return for compliance and performance” (Jackson and Parry, 2007. p.29). Whist this theory does show how important followers are, their importance is almost dictated by the leader who is encouraging them to work to their full potential. The transactional leader will be the one prescribing motivators to followers and thus the leaders can take responsibility for the success or failure of business tasks, “leadership is generally acknowledged to involve influencing followers’ motivation and moving followers toward (collective) goal attainment” (Hamstra et al., 2014. p.415). Microsoft founder Bill Gates arguably employed a very transactional leadership style during the early years with Microsoft. Paul Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft has said that Gates pushed others as hard as he pushed himself (Allen, 2011), admitting that it sometimes caused a high-stress environment (Allen, 2011). This drive from Gates for each employee to meet his expectation of them is what makes him a transactional leader, however his style proved successful as he also used praise to incentivise his workforce (Holley, 2016).

In a follow up article to his 1985 study, written in 1995, Meindl stated that “The romance of leadership perspective moves a researcher away from the personality of the leader as a significant, substantiate, and causal force on the thoughts and actions of followers” (Meindl, 1995. p.330). This directly contradicts leader-centric theories such a trait theory which point to specific personality traits that exist within certain individuals which make them a better leader than others. Trait theory is defined as “the search for an explanation of leadership success related to the qualities of the leader as a person” (Carnell and Roebuck, 2015. p.39). The trait theory of leadership was first studied in depth by Stogdill in 1948 who argued that it was an insufficient way to study leadership effectiveness. In a follow up study in 1974 however Stodgill conceded that leadership success might well be down to a combination of traits and situational factors (Carnell and Roebuck, 2015. p.39). One of the most recent lists of positive leadership traits is the idea of ‘level five’ leadership. As presented by Collins (2001. p.17) the five levels are: “Highly capable individual, contributing team member, competent manager, effective leader and executive leader”. This list contains 4 levels which contrast directly with the statement from Meindl at the beginning of this paragraph as they would indeed make the leader a causal force behind the actions of followers. Personality traits are commonly still assessed in leadership selection in a wide range of organisations including Hewlett Packard enterprise, Procter and Gamble, Ford Motors and Deloitte (Weiss, 2007). The major issue with trait theory was summed up by Stogdill in his 1948 research paper who said; ““persons who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations” (Stogdill, 1948. p.65). Different followers will work better with different leaders, which means there needs to be a degree of flexibility within the leadership style “...leaders need to be able to display an array of different approaches and styles to leadership” (Zaccaro, 2007. p.9). If for example, a leader displays the trait of self-confidence, it will be perceived by some followers as a sign of competence, whilst others could perceive it as arrogance and not respond as positively to it: Wright (1996. p.87) states that “traits such as self-confidence… appear to be beneficial if they are at a moderate, rather that high or low level”. Thus followers’ perception of the traits is important to a successful leader/follower dynamic. Exeter University Centre for Leadership Studies summarised trait theory saying that it; “leads to a particularly individualistic notion of leadership and a relatively prescribed approach to leadership development” (Bolden et al., 2003. p.2). In contrast to trait theory, Richard Branson is someone who does not necessarily display the ‘required’ traits, he dropped out of school at 16, but has since grown to be the 20th richest person in the UK with a combined wealth of over £4.1 billion (Ward, 2015). Whist he is credited as possessing some of the traits required for a successful leader such as ambition and self-confidence (Bloomberg, 2016), he has in personal interviews highlighted the importance of his team in his success; saying that too much credit goes to him for the success of Virgin, and in reality success is down to the team that works around him, (Schawbel, 2014). Richard Branson is an example of a successful business leader who does not necessarily possess the required leadership traits and often mentions the importance of others within his team for his business success, thus he supports the notion that followers are important to the construction of leadership.

Meindl feared that; “the concept of leadership is a permanently entrenched part of the socially constructed reality that we bring to bear in our analysis of organizations. And there is every sign that the obsessions with and celebrations of it will persist” (Meindl, Ehrlich, and Dukerich, 1985. p78). However, there are a few modern leadership theories that bridge the gap between leaders and their followers and serve to emphasise the integral importance of both leaders and followers working together to ensure business success. Transformational leadership is one such example. “Transformational Leadership is a style of leadership geared towards change and towards improving individual and collective performance” (Bass and Bass, 2008. p.97). In contrast to the seemingly cold concept of transactional leadership, discussed earlier in this essay, Transformational Theory offers a more appealing leadership style with its emphasis on motivation and positive development of followers (Crowther and Sutherland, 2014). This emphasis on the development of followers suggests that leaders should understand the importance of followers in the construct of leadership, thus transformational theory agrees with the assumption made within the question. The work of Bernard Bass and Bruce Avolio in the late 1990’s bought Transformational Theory to the forefront of research. During his research, Bass found that; “employees say that they themselves exert a lot of extra effort on behalf of managers who are transformational leaders” (Bass, 1990. p22). The relationship formed between transformational leaders and their followers fits perfectly with the Rost (1993) definition of leadership, which was that leadership is “an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes” (Rost, 1993. p.102). This is because transformational leaders lead their followers through a shared vision and goals. The heroic leader that Meindl (1985) talked about would have the ability to act as a figurehead for the team, and lead from the front, the same way that a transformational leader leads. Transformational leadership however is not without its critics. In 2002 Rakesh Khurana wrote for the Harvard Business Review; “...The truth remains that the factors affecting corporate performance are varied, highly nuanced, almost frighteningly complex, and certainly beyond the power of even the most charismatic leader to influence single-handedly” (Khurana, 2002. p.62). The criticism is that the optimistic idea of a charismatic leader coming in and leading a successful team from the front fails to take into account all of the external factors that affect team success, such as the situation, and other external forces. The emphasis within Transformational leadership is on changing and adapting the team’s focus, however recent research has shown that literature on transformational leadership “…tends to underplay the fact that effective leadership requires leaders to function as both agents of change and pillars of stability” (Rast, et al 2016. p.267). In fact, the expectation for a transformational leader to have an almost heroic influence may lead to reduced creativity from a team as the expectation of change may lead to over-dependency on the leader (Satell, 2015). Steve Jobs is arguably a very financially successful transformational leader who, after leaving Apple in 1985, re-joined in 1997 and rescued the company from dire straits (Tryhorn, 2008). Jobs’ style of leadership fits perfectly with the Forbes definition; “Transformational leaders are people who, irrespective of audience, possess the ability to create big shifts in their audiences’ thinking, which leads to big shifts in their behaviour, which enables them to achieve extraordinary results.” (Vernon, 2015. p.22). What Jobs achieved while at Apple was certainly extraordinary, Apple’s market capitalization went from $3 billion at the start of 1997 to $350 billion in 2011 (Stone, 2011). He achieved this by ensuring that his vision for the future of the company was expressed and shared by shareholders, customers and staff (Isaacson, 2002, Vernon, 2015). However, Jobs doesn’t necessarily fit with every aspect of the idea of a transformational leader. Jobs has been described as a brutal leader and a dictator (Allen, 2011). Whilst he did indeed motivate his staff through a shared vision, he could also be harsh, abrupt and abrasive, leading to increased staff turnover within the Apple senior management team (Isaacson, 2002, Denning, 2012). Despite his dictatorial manner however, Jobs never underestimated the importance of his followers and often gave them the credit that he thought they were due, saying that the best things in business were never done by one individual, but by a team of people working together (Hom, 2013).

There are definitions of leadership that mention the proactive role of followers. Meindl was the first to study the importance of followers in depth and his research is still frequently quoted in modern papers as being relevant. As this essay has shown, though there are many leader-centric theories, follower-centric theories though lagging are gaining in currency. After Meindl’s 1985 research paper, Kelley (1988) argued his own 4 key qualities of a follower, further exploring the importance of individual follower traits in supporting a leader. Theresa May, the current Prime Minister was used as an example of a follower whose possession of Kelley’s follower traits led to her career progression and to her reaching the top of the Conservative party. However, his theory is juxtaposed with the idea of Transactional leadership, which involves a leader using incentives to make the follower comply with his or her own requirements. Bill Gates was discussed as an example of a leader who adopted a very transactional leadership style. Transactional leadership could supress the traits that Kelley talked about in 1988. This essay then looked at trait theory, and the idea that leaders had a common set of traits which dictated their success as a leader. This theory trivialises the role of followers as it implies that business success is more down to the individual leader rather than the team as a whole (Bolden et al., 2003). Trait theory has however received a lot of criticism over the years, especially as it appears to ignore all of the external factors that affect the success of a team (Stogdill, 1948). Richard Branson was used as an example of a leader who despite not possessing all of the leadership traits on paper, has made a huge success of his business ventures and is now one of the richest men in the world. Branson himself has credited his team as playing a key part in his success in business. The final section of this essay looked at how leaders and followers can work together to achieve business success. Transformational leadership, with its focus on developing the follower offers a good middle ground between the leader and follower centric theories. Transformational leadership does however have its own critics (Khurana, 2002), as it is claimed that it focusses too much on the influence of a single charismatic leader in influencing the team’s dynamic and business success. Steve Jobs was the example used as a single transformational leader who used his own vision to change the fortunes of Apple and build one of the biggest companies in the world. Having looked over the theories and research relating to leadership, it is clear that however you look at it, followers are key to the construct of leadership, in essence; “Leadership, in effect, is too important to be left to leaders” (Grint, 2000. p.4).

References

Allen, F.E. (2011) Steve Jobs broke every leadership rule. Don’t try it yourself. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2011/08/27/steve-jobs-broke-every-leadership-rule-dont-try-that-yourself/#2537c8063b27 (Accessed: 18 December 2016)

Allen, P. (2011) Microsoft’s odd couple. Available at: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/05/paul-allen-201105 (Accessed: 17 December 2016)

Bass, B. M. (1981). Stodgill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press

Bass, B.M. (1990) ‘From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision’, Organizational Dynamics, 8(3), pp. 19–31

Bass, B.M. and Bass, R. (2008) The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, & managerial applications. 4th edn. New York: Free Press, p.97

Bligh, M.C. and Kohles, J.C. (2012) ‘From radical to mainstream? How follower-centric approaches inform leadership’, Journal of Psychology, 220(4), pp. 205–209

Bloomberg billionaires - Richard Branson (2016) Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/profile/richard-branson (Accessed: 15 November 2016)

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. and Dennison, P. (2003) ‘A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks’, Centre for Leadership studies,

Brady, D. (2012) Jack Welch: An oral history. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-28/jack-welch-an-oral-history (Accessed: 17 December 2016)

Burns, J. M. (1978), Leadership. New York : Harper & Row. p19.

Carnell, C. and Roebuck, C. (2015) Strategic leadership development: Building world class performance. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

Collins, J.J. (2001) Good to great: Why some companies make the leap... And others don’t. London: Random House Business Books.

Collinson, D. (2006) ‘Rethinking followership: A post-structuralist analysis of follower identities’, The leadership Quarterly, 17(2), pp. 179–189.

Crowther, J. and Sutherland, P. (eds.) (2014) Lifelong learning: Concepts and contexts. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Day, E. (2014) Theresa May – what lies beyond the public image? P.12 Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/27/theresa-may-profile-beyond-the-public-image (Accessed: 14 November 2016)

Denning, S. (2012) Apple’s employees have A hell of A ride. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2012/06/25/apples-employees-have-a-hell-of-a-ride/#797c00647926 (Accessed: 18 December 2016)

Grint, K. (2005) Leadership: Limits and Possibilities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Grint, K. (2000). The arts of leadership. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hamstra, M.R.W., Van Yperen, N.W., Wisse, B. and Sassenberg, K. (2014) ‘Transformational and Transactional leadership and followers’ achievement goals’, Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(3), pp. 413–425.

Holley, P. (2016) The crazy thing Bill Gates used to do to monitor workplace productivity. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2016/02/03/the-crazy-thing-bill-gates-used-to-do-to-monitor-workplace-productivity/?utm_term=.fe888bc6b7c1 (Accessed: 17 December 2016)

Hom, E. (2013) Steve Jobs Biography. Available at: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/4195-business-profile-steve-jobs.html (Accessed: 16 November 2016)

House, R.J., Spangler, W.D. and Woycke, J. (1991) ‘Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), pp. 364–396

Hunt, J.G. (1999) ‘Transformational/charismatic leadership’s transformation of the field: An historical essay’, The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), pp. 129–144.

Jackson, B. and Parry, K. (2007) A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about studying leadership (very short, fairly interesting & cheap books). London: Sage Publications.

Kelley, R.E. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business Review, 66, 142-148.

Khurana, R. (2002) ‘The Curse of the Superstar CEO’, Harvard Business Review, 80(9), pp. 60–67.

Meindl, J.R. (1995) ‘The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: A social constructionist approach’, The Leadership Quarterly, 6(3), pp. 329–341.

Meindl, J.R., Ehrlich, S.B. and Dukerich, J.M. (1985) ‘The romance of leadership’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(1), pp. 78–102.

Parker, G. and Warrell, H. (2017) Theresa May: Britain’s Angela Merkel? Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/896aaa54-12bf-11e4-93a5-00144feabdc0

Rast, D. E., III, Hogg, M. A., & Giessner, S. R. (2016, August 8). Who Trusts Charismatic Leaders Who Champion Change? The Role of Group Identification, Membership Centrality, and Self Uncertainty. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. Advance online publication. P.267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000053

Riggio, R.E. (2014) ‘Followership research: Looking back and looking forward’, Journal of Leadership Education, 13(4)

Ro, S. (2015) Jack Welch endorses GE’s mega-restructuring. Available at: http://uk.businessinsider.com/jack-welch-endorses-ges-restructuring-2015-4 (Accessed: 17 December 2016)

Rost, J.C. (1993). Leadership Development in the New Millennium. The Journal of Leadership Studies: 91-110

Rost, J.C. and Burns, J.M. (1993) Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Satell, G. (2015) True leaders are not heroes. True leaders create heroes. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2015/10/03/true-leaders-are-not-heroes-true-leaders-create-heroes/#48947ef72b51 (Accessed: 18 December 2016)

Schawbel, D. (2014) Richard Branson’s Three most important leadership principles. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2014/09/23/richard-branson-his-3-most-important-leadership-principles/#7604b49b5ccf (Accessed: 15 November 2016)

Stogdill, R. M., 1948. "Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature." Journal of Psychology. 25: 35-71

Tichy, N. and Charan, R. (1989) Speed, simplicity, self-confidence: An interview with Jack Welch. P.112 Available at: https://hbr.org/1989/09/speed-simplicity-self-confidence-an-interview-with-jack-welch (Accessed: 17 December 2016)

Tryhorn, C. (2008) Timeline: The rise and fall and rise of Steve Jobs. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/dec/17/steve-jobs-timeline (Accessed: 14 January 2017)

Uhl-Bien, M., Pillai, R., Shamir, B. and Bligh, M. (2007) ‘Follower-centered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl’.

Vernon, A. (2015) Developing the 3 habits of Transformational leaders. P.22 Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/yec/2015/08/27/developing-the-3-habits-of-transformational-leaders/#293787811c45 (Accessed: 16 November 2016)

Ward, V. (2015) Rich List 2015: Super rich’s wealth soars as new money floods in from abroad. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11563981/Rich-List-2015-Super-richs-wealth-soars-as-new-money-floods-in-from-abroad.html (Accessed: 15 November 2016).

Weiss, T. (2007) Surviving the personality test. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/21/personality-tests-interviewing-leadership-careers_cx_tw_0222bizbasics.html (Accessed: 18 December 2016)

Wright, P.L. (1996) Managerial leadership. London: Cengage Learning EMEA.

Yukl, G. (2013), Leadership in Organizations Global Edition, Pearson International, NJ

Zaccaro, S.J. (2007) ‘Trait-based perspectives of leadership’, American Psychologist, 62(1), pp. 6–16.