Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership

Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Some people are leaders because of their formal position in an organization, whereas others are leaders because of the way other group members respond to them. These two common forms of leadership are called assigned leadership and emergent leadership.
Leadership that is based on occupying a position in an organization is assigned leadership. Team leaders, managers, department heads, directors, and administrators are all examples of assigned leadership. Person assigned to a leadership position does not always become the real leader in a particular setting.
When others perceive an individual as the most influential member of a group or an organization, regardless of the individual’s title, the person is exhibiting emergent leadership. This type of leadership is not assigned by position; rather, it emerges over a period through communication.
Some of the positive communication behaviors that account for successful leader emergence include being verbally involved, being informed, seeking others’ opinions, and initiating new ideas. In addition to communication behaviors, researchers have found that personality plays a role in leadership emergence.

Source: Leadership: theory and practice/ Peter G. Northouse – 6th edition 2013

Trait Versus Process Leadership

Trait Versus Process Leadership
We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader” or “She is a natural leader.”
The trait perspective suggests that certain individuals have special inborn characteristics or qualities that make them leaders, and that it is these qualities that differentiate them from non-leaders. Some of the personal qualities used to identify leaders include unique physical factors, personality features, and other characteristics.

The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon that resides in the context of the interactions between leaders and followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a process, leadership can be observed in leader behaviors and can be learned.
Source: Leadership: theory and practice/ Peter G. Northouse – 6th edition 2013


Leadership and Power

Leadership and Power
In organizations, there are two major kinds of power position power and personal power
Position power is the power a person derives from a particular rank in a formal organizational system. It is the influence capacity a leader derives from having higher status than the followers have. Position power includes legitimate, reward, and coercive power. 
Personal power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable. When leaders act in ways that are important to followers, it gives leaders power. Personal power includes referent and expert power.

Source: Leadership: theory and practice/ Peter G. Northouse – 6th edition 2013




Leadership and Coercion

Leadership and Coercion
Coercive power is one of the specific kinds of power available to leaders. Coercion involves the use of force to effect change.
To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may include manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment. Coercion often involves the use of threats, punishment, and negative reward schedules.
Leadership is reserved for those who influence a group of individuals toward a common goal. Coercive people are not used as models of ideal leadership.
Leaders who use coercion are interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in the wants and needs of subordinates. Using coercion runs counter to working with followers to achieve a common goal.

Source: Leadership: theory and practice/ Peter G. Northouse – 6th edition 2013