Locus of Control, originally conceptualized by Julian Rotter (1966), has been found to be critical to numerous studies. Within psychology, it is considered to be a generalized expectancy regarding the forces that determine reinforcement. Individuals with internal orientation perceive rewards as contingent based on personal behavior, whereas those with external orientation attribute reinforcement received to external factors such as chance and powerful others (Levenson 1981). This essay examines the nature and significance of this psychological construct, especially in academic achievement and health domains. Additionally, it has been argued that high internality is positively associated with leadership while high scores of powerful others have detrimental impacts. Finally comes the argument that higher internality is beneficial for career and leadership.
It is important for us humans to know that we must take full responsibility for our actions and maturely deal with any consequences that those actions may lead to. According to Ryon and Gleason (2013), “the first conceptualization of control was developed in 1966 by Rotter,” which is currently referred to as locus of control. Rotter defined locus of control as “the degree to which an individual expects that a contingent relationship exists between one’s behaviors and outcomes” (Ryon & Gleason, 2013). Fournier and Jeanrie reference Rotter’s study by explaining the two types of locus of control: “external control” and “internal control” (as cited in Rotter, 1966, p. 1). The purpose of Rotter’s theory was to examine “what causes reinforcement” whether it be an intrinsic or extrinsic factor (Kormanik & Rocco, 2009). Rotter measured “people’s general control expectancies” by using what is known as the “Internal-External Locus of Control Scale” (Fournier & Jeanrie, 2003).
Leadership at times can be a complex topic to delve into and may appear to be a simple and graspable concept for a certain few. Leadership skills are not simply acquired through position, seniority, pay scale, or the amount of titles an individual holds but is a characteristic acquired or is an innate trait for the fortunate few who possess it. Leadership can be misconstrued with management; a manager “manages” the daily operations of a company’s work while a leader envisions, influences, and empowers the individuals around them.
Leadership has been described as a “complex process having multiple dimensions” (Northouse, 2013). Over the past 60 years, scholars and practitioners have introduced a vast amount of leadership models and theories to explain this complex field and examine its many perspectives. Numerous leadership theories and models have attempted to define what makes a leader effective. From the early 1900s, the trait paradigm dominated leadership literature, focusing on inherited traits of leaders and suggesting that “leaders are born, not made”. However, during the 1950s, the trait approach lost enthusiasm as focus shifted to the behavior of leaders. Similar to the trait theory, the behavioral paradigm was based on general effective leadership behaviors
By definition, leadership has many qualities and characteristics. From intelligence leadership, transformational leadership to structured orders. People react and are drawn to different forms of leadership. In the research qualities of leadership are discussed as being learned or natural in a leader and how others respond. For ages, people have debated if leaders are born or made. So too goes the debate about emotional intelligence. Are people born with certain levels of empathy, or do they acquire empathy as a result for life’s experiences? (Goleman, 2007). The different environments of the organization would determine the type of leadership the people of the organization seek, maybe it is not a one-size fits all template. There is a psychological aspect that has a huge impact on what is leadership to those being led. To some men the matter of giving orders seems a very simple affair; they expect to issue their own orders and have them obeyed without question. (Follett, 1926). Psychological leadership is very dependent on the person being led and the relationship of the people. A boy may respond differently to the same suggestion when made by his teacher and when made by his schoolmate (Follett, 1926). Yet social skills are extremely important to leadership qualities to understand how to lead and what is needed. A leader’s
The ability to be a leader has been studied extensively. Throughout this extensive study, some have pointed to leadership being a born trait (Northouse, 2012) while others point to the ability to learn the skills associated with becoming a great leader (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 2012). While each side has its own valid points, one way to argue either way to see these skills in action. Whether these skills are seen in a high school student government association or the office of a large nationwide non-profit, they are present. The study of leadership has led to the description of several different styles of leadership. These styles include legitimate, expert, information, connections, referent, coercion and reward power. No matter the type of experiences a person has, they will most likely see these types of power.
The pursuit to find what makes a leader great has always been a subject of debate amongst many of the greatest minds for centuries. Some believe leaders are born with the “right stuff”. Their natural abilities are leadership qualities that cannot be taught. Other believe that through education and guidance, leaders can be developed. Many think that situations will dictate leadership capabilities; a leader will rise to the occasion when it is right. There are groups that think it’s a combination of things; personality, culture, values, behaviors and situations that determine a leader and their personal leadership style. Can behavior and personality traits determine a leadership style? Do characteristics play
Skills are a basic requirement, but traits are essential in leadership. Traits are unique in defining an individual’s character. A combination of strong skills and traits that include emotional intelligence and knowledge of leadership behaviors become critical factors for a leader to lead effectively. It is important for a leader to possess “effective managerial skills at some level” (Kreitner 465). On the other hand, a leader will be equipped to turn a “…vision into actionable items and successful implementation” (465) by possessing traits that are needed to achieve results.
One could consider the attributes of a good leader. One could not imagine a shy, backward taking initiative to lead others and resolve conflict. As one might notice, there are certain traits and behaviors of a good leader. “Leadership as a social skill, makes people respect and follow orders and is identified by emotional intelligence factors, such as; attitude, confidence, respect for others, and trustworthiness” (Singh, 2013, para. 1.). In other words, these are skills everyone can agree that one should try to possess whether we have leadership potential or not. When we are learning skills to master for the workplace we have to acquire certain skills, so we can function normally from day to day. Consequently, some of these social skills we acquire so early ...
The general personality traits, which are related to success both in and outside the workplace, are all inherent in my answers given in the Leadership Assessment Quiz. With statements such as, “it is easy for me to compliment others” and “team members listen to me when I speak,” it is apparent I possess these characteristics. Whereas my task- related personality traits associated with successful leadership, such as courage, still need to be developed. Not only do I know this in myself, but it is clearly pointed out throughout the test, with statements such as, “resolving conflict is an activity I enjoy” and “I would enjoy coaching other members of the team”.