**5.1 Leader-oriented theories**

Theories that are oriented to a leader assumes that leadership is a personal quality possessed by certain people and that not everyone can be a leader [5]. Some of these qualities emanate from their behaviours while others they are simply born with. The following section will focus on the leader-oriented theories of leadership.

### *5.1.1 Trait theories*

Trait theory are based on the view that leaders possess traits that are unique to leaders and that non-leaders do not have such traits [5]. In other words, leaders are born with certain traits that enable them to be developed into becoming leaders [5–7]. Features that distinguishes leaders as proclaimed by the train theories are personal character of a leader, drive; motivation; consistency and integrity; fairness; patience; courage; determination and perseverance; self-confidence; emotional intelligence; innovative thinking; ability to instil entrepreneurship in an organisation; rational decision making;

#### *DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105586 Perspective Chapter: Leading Welfare Organisations from an Integrated Leadership Approach…*

self-management and knowledge of organisation attractiveness [6, 7]. Although a 1948 study by Stogdill concluded that a person does not become a leader by virtue of possessing certain traits, the trait theory remains relevant and influential in leadership [5] and may even be relevant in certain circumstances of welfare organisations.

Leading a welfare organisation aiming to support people living with HIV might for instance require a leader who possess certain traits such as drive, patience and courage for managing a hospice that deals with people with chronic conditions such as AIDS and the inherent challenges associated with such chronic conditions. It may even be crucial for such an organisation to have a leader with full knowledge of the organisation in terms of its strengths and weaknesses so that she/he can make informed and rational decision making. Due to funding related challenges for some of these organisations, a leader should have some kind of strategies for raising funds and therefore possess some competencies in instilling entrepreneurship in this organisation. In summary, a trait theory can also be a crucial theory through which leaders in a welfare organisation are influenced.

#### *5.1.2 Style and behaviour approaches*

Central to the behaviour approaches to leadership is the view that leaders are not born, they are rather developed [6]. Among the behaviour theories are Theory X and Theory Y; autocratic, democratic and laissez faire leadership style, initiating structure versus consideration theory, production-oriented leaders versus employee-oriented leaders and in some instances, may even be a combination of both [5]. In terms of *Theory X*, an average employee or subordinate is fundamentally lazy and will avoid work at all costs. These kinds of workers will then prompt leaders to closely monitor them consistently [3]. A leader who is influenced by Theory X tend to use the rewards and punishments and create compliance rules and procedure in order to get the subordinates to perform [8].

Contrary to Theory X, *Theory Y* assumes that an average employee is ambitious, self-motivated and exercise self-control [3]. For leaders who are inspired by this theory, they consider work to be natural for all human beings and therefore employees would then naturally execute their responsibilities as required [8]. Whereas Theory X adopts a more rigid approach to leading an organisation, Theory Y is more flexible, and a leader have more trust in her/his employees' competencies and abilities [3].

It is generally difficult to draw a line between them in practice and leaders tend to fluctuate between them [8]. Whether both of these theories find relevance in a welfare organisation is subject to the unique contextual features or circumstances presented to a leader at the time and I would argue that this theory does find relevance in welfare organisations. In other words, some instances or even types of organisations, may require a leader to adopt a more rigid Theory X approach while others she/he may consider the Theory Y approach. A leader may for instance in cases where an organisation such as a hospice is presented with a complex crisis case requiring an urgent intervention to save a life, adopt the Theory X approach by prescribing the procedures to follow or by even closely monitoring her/his subordinates as they intervene in such cases. The same approach could be applied in a child welfare organisation when cases such as sexual child abuse are presented which requires social workers to report to police within the prescribed time frames and to ensure medical attention is provided to such a child. In such instances, Theory X might be a relevant approach to adopt. Contrary to the above scenario, cases may be presented before an organisation through which a leader may entrust the competencies and decisionmaking by subordinates, thus adopting the Theory Y approach to leading. This may be your ordinary domestic violence cases that require couple counselling or mediation by third parties as well as your normal foster placement and adoption cases,

In *autocratic leadership,* the leader makes all decisions and employee, merely follow without saying much in decision making [6]. Although research evidence suggests that authoritarian leadership is destructive, undesirable and ineffective, some researchers suggest that this approach may be conducive for employee responses and therefore exert positive effect on such employees [9]. A subordinate centred approach study undertaken among the Chinese organisations to explore the psychosocial process linking authoritarian leadership to employee and the situational factors that may affect the process revealed that authoritarian leadership may also motivate employees to enhance their performance [9]. In arguing for authoritarian leadership Wan and Guan consider it (1) to be effective since it allows leaders to set up specific and unambiguous goals to subordinates; (2) to enhance a sense of identity among subordinates as group members which in turn increases their level of performance; and (3) setting high performance standard expectations for subordinates. Although some authors critique this kind of approach, it does find relevance for adoption in a welfare organisation, which like any other organisation, would benefit from very clear and specific goals for the subordinates and to develop a sense of collective identity within such an organisation.

Just like your theory X and Theory Y, autocratic leadership approach may also find application relevance in a welfare organisation. In view of the fact that welfare organisations function within the broader societal context characterised by various factors such as specific legal prescripts, leaders often find themselves having to adopt an autocratic style in order to ensure that compliance with such prescripts is precisely done by setting very clear and specific procedures to be followed. Some of these practices may have been witnessed during the Covid-19 pandemic for instance wherein several countries imposed some regulations for companies and organisations on how to better manage Covid-19 which led to some kind of top-down approach to leadership.

With *democratic leadership,* a leader adopts a participatory approach towards leadership by involving subordinates in her/his decision making [6]. Employees who serve under leaders who are influenced by democratic leadership approach tend to display high degree of satisfaction and are motivated to be creative and to work with enthusiasm and energy. Their performance is not influenced by the presence or absence of a leader [7]. What is central to democratic approach to leadership is that human beings possess the capacity to be intelligent, to self-control and be conscience in making decisions and it is this inherent capacity that makes discussions and continuous participation to be free. The approach is that every person should be listened to since they are capable of sharing ideas that can contribute towards resolving organisational problems [10]. This theory makes sense for welfare organisations which are aimed at addressing complex challenges triggered by dynamic human relations and which normally comprise of various employees and client systems with different talents, skills and experiences and therefore likely to contribute to resolving some of these complex issues.

The word *laissez faire* is a French term which literally means to 'let do' [11]. In organisational terms it basically means to let the process take its course without interference. In terms of the laissez faire approach to leadership, leaders allow subordinates to make all decisions often without any follow-up, with the leader taking no active role besides assuming leadership position [6, 7]. This type of leadership approach is also referred to as "the hands-off, let things-ride" approach or a

#### *DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105586 Perspective Chapter: Leading Welfare Organisations from an Integrated Leadership Approach…*

"zero leadership" [12, 13]. Although Laissez faire leaders are considered to be passive and avoid responsibility, it can be an effective leadership style for organisations where subordinates are highly skilled and motivated though not suitable for employees who lack the necessary skills and knowledge [14]. The non-involvement of a laissez faire leader does not necessarily mean she/he is not active because non-involvement is in this context similar to an empowering leadership [14]. A Pakistanian study aiming to empirically investigate the impact of authoritative and laissez faire leadership approaches on employee thriving (the employee's capacity to vigorously prosper, grow, flourish and develop in the workplace) has revealed that laissez faire and authoritative readership approaches contribute to employee thriving [14].

Within the welfare organisational context, a submission can be made for the relevance of laissez faire approach to leadership. In these types of organisation, one finds a diversity of employees with different talents and experiences. Some may have served the organisation long enough to know all the tools of trade while others may have just joined fresh from universities and colleges. An effective leader might in this instance, adopt laissez faire approach among those who are well vested with the organisation, while applying other appropriate conventional methods such as the autocratic, among those who are fresh from a college or university training. Of course, one might argue that as much there may be a category of the so called experienced who may benefit from the laissez faire as well as the new ones who may need closer monitoring, a blanket approach which involves a blind application of these approaches may not be a good idea. A leader might find it beneficial to further asses even within these categories as to whether a particular approach will be suitable. In a nutshell, the laissez faire should be applied with caution by considering all relevant factors within the organisation as well as among the subordinates.

With *initiating structure versus consideration theory*, leaders define their structures, their role and the roles that are played by employees for the purpose of attaining the overall goals of the organisation [6]. Whereas initiating structure refers to the extent to which a leader defines and facilitates group interactions towards the attainment of set goals, consideration means the degree to which a leader shows concern and respect for subordinates by considering their welfare and expressing appreciation and support [15].

Initiating structure may particularly be appropriate in situations where a leader wishes to address a presenting problem by assigning it a responsibility to address it to a particular team or group of subordinates. This is also a normal practice for welfare organisations wherein for example, a team can be assigned a responsibility to investigate a case of child neglect. With consideration, the leader tends to value the wellbeing of subordinates and is more inclined to encouraging them through support and appreciation of their work. You may have also come across this kind of practice among some welfare organisations wherein structures such as the employee wellness are in place while systems such as performance management systems are in place to encourage employees' performance by recognising their contribution and rewarding them accordingly. Leaders who are influenced by consideration theories are employee oriented as opposed to production or service oriented. Whereas service-oriented leaders are those who are inclined to the task and dimensions of work, employeesoriented leaders are more inclined to focus on interpersonal relationships [6].

#### *5.1.3 Contingency theories*

Contingency theories were championed by Fiedler, whose view is that leadership style appropriate to a given situation is determined by behaviours that emerge from

such situtation [5]. According to this approach, there is no single approach to best respond to all situations and therefore a solution to respond to a presenting situation is determined by internal or external dimensions of the environment [7, 10]. The view is that the style of leadership should be aligned to the maturity or subordinates [7]. In other words, as subordinates grow and develop or advance in their competencies, leaders should also grow and advance in order to merge the needs and dimensions of the subordinates.

Contingency theories can address the societal developments and by demanding from a leader to also acclimatise to such developments. Earlier on we had an example of cyber bullying as one of the issues addressed by a welfare organisations. With some developments in the internet space, cyberbullying might also advance and require a leader to adopt the contingency theory in guiding the organisation to adapt to these developments. There may be certain instance in which a leader can pull out her/his authoritarian style by giving an instruction particularly in crisis situation where negotiating or accommodating subordinates' inputs will waste time. There may equally be instances wherein the presenting problem may require a leader to not only invite opinions of the subordinates, but also involve the active participation of the clients themselves. In a nutshell, circumstances under which a leader exercises leadership will determine the approach that a leader is to adopt [16].

## *5.1.4 Leader's virtues*

The leaders' virtue is inextricably linked to character because good leadership character is built through the practice of virtues [17]. The leader's virtues hold the view that a leader has to possess certain features such as being authentic, being ethical, being responsible, being able to handle crisis and overcome them and to demonstrate adaptability, apply creativity in difficult situations [5]. These features are essential for any typical welfare organisation. Any welfare organisation will benefit from upholding high ethical standards and a sense of responsibility while at the same time adapting to societal developments when working with vulnerable groups such as victims of bullying, persons with disabilities, the older adults and others.

Although some welfare organisations such as the doctors without borders and gift-of-the-givers for instance specialises in responding to crisis situations, from timeto-time, there are crises situations in ordinary welfare organisations, that requires a leader to guide the organisation in swiftly responding to them. An example would be a case of child physical abuse presented to a child welfare organisation, which requires a leader to swiftly guide the organisation to manage such a crisis. It may also happen from within the organisation itself that certain subordinates who specialises in the presenting issues are not readily available to respond and in such situations a virtues leader should accordingly guide the organisation on how to respond.

A welfare organisation may benefit from a leader who introduces some level of creativity or innovations such as creating an impact out of limited resources particularly given the underfunding-related challenges faced by most of these organisations. The term authentic in the context of leadership means the genuine fundamental elements of a positive leadership [18]. An authentic leader provides moral compass by counteracting unethical management, promoting social responsibility and ensuring the wellbeing and development of employees [18]. Subordinates can also feel more comfortable in an organisation which is led by an authentic leader since they will be in a position to fully understand her/his position regarding what is required for realising the organisational objectives and be afforded an opportunity for growth and *DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105586 Perspective Chapter: Leading Welfare Organisations from an Integrated Leadership Approach…*

development. They will also work under assurance that they are respected and being taken care of and that in cases where they have difficulties they are guaranteed of a support from their leader. An authentic leader is that leader whom you find at funerals of employees or their loved ones, delivering messages of condolences on behalf of the organisation.

Undoubtedly, welfare organisations require subordinates who are fully informed about all presenting issues to which the organisation is expected to respond and to continuously receive training on how to better respond to such issues. An organisation may for instance be required to adapt to technological development in order to ensure that employees with visual disabilities are also able to make use of technology. In such instances a leader may pull out her/his creativity and innovation virtues approach to leadership by exposing subordinates to the necessary training which is aimed at enabling them to accurately and from a technological point of view, respond to the presenting issues. To sum up, a virtues leader does find relevance of application in welfare organisation.
