You are on page 1of 9

Leadership Models and Theories A Reflection of My Personal

History
By Bishop D Thagana
Leadership. Everyone experience it or the lack of it, in daily life. (Blackaby, 2006). In my
life time, I have experienced successful leaders that found satisfaction in making a difference
in their world. Ive also experienced struggling leaders that agonize in the knowledge that
others resent them and blame them for their organizations failures.
Leadership is influence, the ability of one person to influence others to follow his or her
lead (sanders, 1994). Since Im a product of both successful and struggling leadership, I too
have provided good leadership and at times bad leadership in my life time.
In part (a) of this paper, I hope to discuss reflections on my personal history and experience
of working with groups. My focus will be my experiences of working with Kijabe High School
as the Christian Union Secretary, Siriba Teachers college as a Christian union secretary,
Karima Girls High School as both a teacher and Christian union patron. Finally, I will discuss
my reflections as a founder and presiding Bishop of Glory Outreach Assembly.
Part (b) of this paper will describe the various leadership models and theories in light of their
historical development.
Reflections on my Personal history and experiences of working with groups
Sanders poses a key leadership question; Are leaders made or born? (Sanders, 1994). In
his answer to the question he maintains that on the one hand, leadership is an elusive and
electric quality that comes directly from God. On the other, leadership skills are distributed
widely among every community and should be cultivated and developed. (Sanders, 1994). I
consider myself to belong to the category of the leaders who are made. Before I became a
Christian, I never imagined that God would call me to leadership. I was born in a very humble
traditional kikuyu family where nobody has ever been a leader, beyond our family level.
God called me into leadership. For those in leadership it is imperative to be motivated by a
deep and a real sense of call (Kadalie, 2006). I accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and saviour
of my life on the 24th April, 1982. In 1983-84, I held my first key leadership position as the
General Secretary of Kijabe high school Christian union. I regard this as a very significant
moment in Gods call to my leadership. At the end of 1983, the outgoing Christian union
leaders at Kijabe High School asked the entire Christian union to pray and fast for the
election of new Christian leaders. During the entire period of prayer, I felt God calling me to
link the Christian union body with the school administration and other students who were not
Christians. A big lift had historically existed between the people of the book as Christians
were referred to and the none Christians. Little did I know that the elections results would
have me as the General Secretary of the Christian union. Sanders is right when he says that
Spiritual leadership requires superior spiritual power, which can never be generated by the
self. It was only one year since I had become a Christian. I knew I could not lead without
Gods guidance through prayer. I was sustained by prayer. Leaders pray to maintain the right
relationship with God. From that relationship between the human spirit and the spirit of God
comes the divine perspective, insight, direction and courage the leader must have to serve
well, (Kriegbaum, 1998). Kadalie lists 10 things that leadership is not. I concur with his view
because I never had most of the 10 but I had the capacity and will to rally men and women
to a common purpose, and the character which inspires confidence. (Kadalie, 2006)

John Maxwell in his book Developing the leader within you, writes about five levels of
leadership. With each ascending level, a persons influence or leadership is increased. The
levels are: Leadership by position, leadership by permission, leadership by production,
leadership by people development, leadership by personhood. In 1986-88, I became the
General Secretary of Siriba Teachers college Christian union. Surprisingly, my level of
influence was much lower in the Teachers college yet holding the same position of
influence, as Kijabe High School. In Maxwells levels of influence I think I was at the
positional level. I frequently reminded the people that I led, that I was the general secretary
and that they needed to obey my instructions. I frequently used manipulation in my
leadership such as If you do not come for prayer or go for missions when I send you, God
will punish you for disobeying his authority. Though manipulation and intimidation worked
sometimes to get people to do things, I struggled greatly in my leadership. The greatest
lesson I learnt in my leadership at Siriba Teachers college is that leadership failure does not
mean that God has not called you to leadership. I learnt that the leader serves the God of
redemption, who buys back our blunders and sins and weaves them into the fabric of a
beautiful future. My favourite scripture was He redeems your life from the pit. (Psalm
103:4, NIV)
Gardner outlines the tasks of leadership as envisioning goals, affirming values, the
regeneration of values, motivating, managing, achieving workable unity, trust, explaining,
serving as a symbol, representing the group and renewing. (Gardner, 1990). In 1989, I
became the Christian union patron of Karima Girls High School. Most of my time was spent
leading either students or staff to know God, love Him and worship Him. Seven days a week
I moved from one bible study to a prayer meeting with emerging leaders. It is at this time that
my leadership grew from position, permission, production to people development. During my
initial days of leadership, I believe the students followed me because they had to. I was their
teacher, charged with the responsibility over their spiritual life while in school. As I continued
building relationships with them, they followed me because they wanted to. Through the
relationships built with the students I was able to produce results. Many girls accepted Christ
as their saviour, their lives became changed, and they started performing well academically.
Soon I realized that the ministry task was getting to be overwhelming and yet the community
neighbouring the school needed to be reached with the Gospel, I started spending 3 days a
week nurturing student leaders that I had identified and releasing them to lead various
classes Christian groups. Ministry became a source of Joy when I had student leaders who
could do things the same I could or even better. Together with the Christian union student
leaders and the staff who had spent many months of discipleship, we extended our outreach
ministry outside the school to the neighbourhood.
Gangel argues that biblical leadership takes place when divinely appointed men and women
accept responsibility for obedience to Gods call. They recognize the importance of
preparation time, allowing the Holy Spirit to develop tenderness of heart and skill of hands.
(Gangel 1991). In 1991 God called me to a higher level of influence to the nations. In
response to Gods call, I started Glory Outreach Assembly (GOA). I clearly sensed God
calling me to make disciples of all Nations in obedience to Matthew 28: 19-20. I realize that
my leadership in Kijabe High School, Siriba Teachers College and Karima Girls High school
was all a time of preparation. It was preparation by watching both successful and struggling
leaders. Mainly struggling leaders. It was a preparation as I learnt from my own mistakes
because there was nobody to either coach or mentor me into leadership.
Kouzes and Posner argues that only leaders who serve earn commitment and passionate
leaders are willing to suffer. Loyalty is not something a boss can demand. Its something
people choose to grant to a person who has earned it. (Kouzes and Posner, 2006). A group
of dedicated, loyal but inexperienced staff came under my influence to plant the first Glory
Outreach Assembly church. Neither I, nor any of the members of my team had ever been a
either a church planter or a pastor before. However, I knew without any doubt that in our

neighbourhood, there was need for a church that would be relevant to the contemporary
needs of the Society, by prioritizing missions and embracing, the people regardless of their
class or social status. By then I did not know that what I had is called a vision until much later
when I learnt from George Barna that a vision is a clear mental picture of a preferred future
imparted by God to His chosen servants based on a clear, understanding of God, self and
circumstance. (Barna 2004). Vision is what had brought my team together. The major lesson
that I learnt at the initial stage of starting GOA was the power of vision. Take vision away
from a leader and you cut out his or her heart. Vision is the fuel that leaders run on. Its the
energy that creates action. It is the fire that ignites the passion of followers. It is the clear call
that sustains focused effort year after year, decade after decade, as people offer consistent
and sacrificial service to God. (Hybels, 2000)
In addition to a common vision, we also had a passion for the Harvest. We all had a great
excitement of seeing souls coming to Christ. A passionate person is someone who suffers
and a compassionate person is someone who suffers with and shares the suffering of othersand wants to take action to alleviate this condition (Kouzes & Posner 2006) GOA ministry
was founded on service. During the day I would teach my students in class. In the late
afternoon I would go to the church cell groups to identify leaders and nurture them. At the
end of each month I would receive my salary as a teacher and spend nearly the entire
amount in paying our church hall, buying bibles for the new believers, traveling to missions
and organizing evangelistic meetings to grow the new GOA church. In January 1998, I
sacrificed my job as a teacher to seek training at East Africa school of Theology. This was a
difficult leadership sacrifice to make but I knew my influence had already outgrown my
leadership skills and experiences. In 2002, I made another large leadership sacrifice. I
relocated my family and ministry offices from the familiar areas of Nyandarua where ministry
was very successful to come to Nairobi to be strategically located grow with my rapidly
growing influence. Nearly, every act of my leadership has required suffering and often a
choice between my personal success and safety and the greater welfare of others. Ive learnt
that leaders must be willing to pay a price. By sacrificing leaders demonstrate that they are
not in it for themselves. The result of my sacrifice has been that part of my leaders have
grown to sacrifice and also pay the price of leadership with me. Some of them have relocated
to difficult areas to serve while they had the opportunity to serve in better areas. Others have
resigned their salaried jobs to join GOA ministry. The passion of Christianity comes from
deliberately signing away our rights and becoming a bond servant of Jesus Christ
(Chambers, 2007)
Since I started GOA in 1991, Ive always had a minimal staff working with me at the head
office. However, as our organization has rapidly grown in the last 7 years, our ministries are
requiring additional administrative and logistics support to allow the pastors to focus on
ministry rather than administration. In the last 3 years, GOA has put in place an independent
board of governors, an executive director, a human resource manager, and an assistant
executive director, four vision area directors (church growth, compassion, leadership
development and conflict resolution). We have two accounting staff, one media director, an
information technologists, officer manager, and an assistant director. This expanded
leadership structure has allowed me as the executive director to focus on ministry oversight,
vision casting and raising funds to achieve the vision. My experience in working with this
group of people confirmed Behrmans answer to the question, can managers be leaders?
His answer is that managers can become leaders but they must first learn to lead themselves
to high purpose and let it be seen, so that others may learn how to follow the same path to
self-leadership (Behrman, 1988). Ive seen from the group of staff at the GOA office says:
An administrator is a person who carries policies formulated by someone else or some other
body. Administrators have little influence in determing the policy or making changes to it.
Unlike an administrator, a manager is a person who is primarily concerned with efficiency
whether things are being done right. Managers on the other hand concentrate on having the

right systems and making certain the systems are working. They may influence policy but
usually dont make it, except at the highest levels of management. On the other hand a
leader is a person whose main concern is effectiveness, whether the right things are being
done, the proper vision and directions have been established and the right atmosphere has
been established to encourage people to live up to their full potential (McConkey, 1989)
The GOA head office staff takes great care in the development of a clear vision and
strategic plans, for our ministries. Part of the planning process includes detailed budget
preparation for each ministry. Some of the lessons that Im learning when working with this
group is that a leader may never have enough people or money to support his vision. The
more the vision of GOA grows the more people and money it needs. However, stewardship
of the available resources is a mark of effective leadership. Kadalie on the principle of
stewardship maintains that a genuine serving leader is predisposed to the concept of
stewardship-that the things and people they have the privilege of serving are not made
available for selfish motives but for the owners satisfaction and ambitions. (Kadalie, 2006).
Description of the various leadership models and theories in light of their historical
development
There have literally thousands of books written on the subject of leadership models and
theories, and whilst it is always useful to learn from others, leadership is a factor of much
more than theories. Each person has to find a way of leading that is congruent with which
they are, so it comes over as authentic. (Cooke, 2009). Models and Theories on the topic of
leadership are a product of various types of social scientific research. They are developed by
scholars to describe, explain and predict behaviour. The research is based on the leader,
group processes and situation context. Leadership models and theories are used to describe
the emergence of leadership, the nature of leadership and the consequences of leadership.
The Great man Theory is a Philosophical theory that aims to explain history by the impact of
great men or heroes; highly influential individuals (who due to either their personal
charlome, intelligence and wisdom or Machieve_ illianism used power in a way that had a
decisive historical impact (Wikipedia.org). This theory is associated most often with 19thcentury commentator and historian Thomas Carlyle who commented that the history of the
world is but the biography of great men. Reflecting his belief that heroes shape history
through both their personal attributes and divine inspiration. This is one of the earliest
thinking on leadership. According to this theory, leaders are great people who some how
alter the course of history. The proponent of this theory Carlyle saw history as having turned
on the decision of heroes.
The Great man approach to history was most fashionable with professional historians in the
19th century. One of the critics of Carlyles formulation of the Great man theory was Herbert
Spencer who believed that attributing historical events to the decisions of individuals was
hopelessly primitive, childish, and unscientific position. He believed that the men Carlyle
called great men were merely products of their social environment. (wakipedia.org) The
Great mans Theory leaves a question unanswered what makes some great. And others
not? An attempt to answer this question leads to the Trait Theory.
According to Trait Theory a person becomes a leader because of his/her traits. This set of
theories identify the traits of personality and character that make a leader. Trait Theory
developed from the Great Man Theory through observing, choice of associates, opinions of
others, testing, historical review etc. Particular traits were identified that separate leaders
from born-leaders. The theory is between 1902 to late 1960s. Leadership trait theory is the
idea that people are born with certain character traits. Since certain traits are associated with
proficient leadership, it assumes that if you could identify people with the correct traits, you

will be able to identify leaders Shead, 30/1/2007. Shead further argues that most of the time
traits are considered to be naturally part of a persons personality from birth. From this stand
point, leadership trait theory tends to assume that people are born as leaders or not as
leaders. Sanders view is in contrast to Shead in that he maintains that leaders are both born
and made. A trait may be defined as any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which
one individual differs from others( Guilford, 1959). Trait psychologists, then typically seek to
reveal the Psychological dimensions along which people differ and ways in which traits
cluster within individuals (Buss, 1989). Trait theories, also known as dispositional theories,
start with the basic assumption that personality is composed of dispositions within the
individual to behave in certain ways. Further they assume that these dispositions are
relatively stable in time and generalize over a wide variety of circumstances (Bourne &
Ekstrand, 1982).
Leadership is seen more as the expression of a particular style then traits. The three
predominant styles of leadership are autocratic, democratic and Laissez-faire. Autocratic
leadership is where the leaser seeks to make as many decisions as possible, have the most
authority and control in decision making, retain responsibility rather than utilize complete
delegation, consultation with other colleagues is minimal and decision making becomes a
solitary process. Autocratic leaders are less concerned with investing their own leadership
development, and prefer to simply work on the task at hand. (http://www/leadershipexpert.co.uk/leadership styles) .
Democratic leadership is the leadership style that promotes the sharing of responsibilities,
the exercise of delegation and continual consultation. The style has the following
characteristics. The leader seeks consultation on all major issues and decisions. The leader
effectively delegate tasks to subordinates and give them full control and responsibility for
those tasks. The leader welcomes feedback on the results of initiatives and the work
environment leader encourages others to become leaders and be involved in leadership
development.
Laissez Faire leadership style was first described Lewin, Lippitt and white in 1938 along with
the autocratic leadership and the democratic leadership style. The laissez faire style is
sometimes described as a hands off leadership style because the leader provides little or
no direction to followers. The two main characteristics of the Laissez faire style include;
allows followers to have complete freedom to make decisions concerning the completion of
their work or ask questions of the leader. The leader provides the followers with the materials
they need to accomplish their goals and answers questions to the followers. Lewin, Lippitt
and white were one of the first to categorize leadership styles in terms of behavioral
characteristics. Prior to their work, leadership traits were the focus of leadership studies.
(www.money-zine.com/Definitions/career-Dictionary/Laissez-Faire-leadership-style).
In Stylistic Theory, leaders function in group settings out of their style-i.e the concept is still
mostly leader centered-focusing on the qualities of the leader. The essence of humanistic
Theories Center on optimistic perspectives of humanity. For example; Humans are by Nature
motivated organisms and organizations are by nature structured and controlled. The function
of leadership then is to modify the organization to provide the freedom necessary for
individuals to realize their potential and to contribute to the accomplishment of organizational
goals. Humanistic personality theories gained prominence in the early 1960s, when Carl
Rogers (1902-1987) published their first books outlining important humanistic ideas (Matlin
1999, p.428). These were regarded as a viable alternative to the two theories of personality
dominant at the time, the behaviourist and Freudian Psychoanalysis approaches. It is out of
this perspective that McGregors distinction between Theory X and Theory Y management
styles emerges. The two theories were proposed by Douglas McGregor in his 1960 book The
Human side of Enterprise. Both of these theories begin with the premise that managements

role is to assemble the factors of production, including people, for the economic benefit of the
firm. Beyond this point, the two theories of management diverge. Theory X assumes that
people are passive and resistant to organizational needs. They need to be motivated and
manipulated to achieve organizational needs. Theory Y assumes people are motivated and
posses an inner desire for responsibility. The need is to arrange organizational condition in
such a manner to make it possible for people to fulfill their needs while achieving
organizational objectives.
Sigmund Freud described his theory of personality in An outline of Psychoanalysis,
published in 1949. He said the Id is present at birth. It represents the basic instinctual
(biological) drives of a person and operates on the pleasure principle. He believed that id
unconsciously and impulsively drives these instinctual forces to seek immediate gratification.
The libido, or psychic energy, drives the id. According to Freud, the libido consists of the life
instinct and death instinct. The life instinct (eros functions to help a person and the species
service. The major expression of the life instinct is sexual energy that is expressed through
the libido. It motivates a person in a wide variety of thoughts and behaviours. Freud said
Eros is not limited to direct sexual motivation but is involved in any pleasurable activity.
Freuds death instinct/thanatos includes both aggression and destruction but is not
developed to the extent of the life instinct. (Brock Raymond, 2006). In Psychoanalytic Theory
leadership is explained in terms of early childhood and family development such as the
influence of father figures, childhood deprivations etc. Both negative Psychotic, neurotic as
well as positive (healthy) influences are considered as factors in the development of the
leader.
Political science here generated a number of theories and ideas regarding leadership that
tend to be framed with a particular political philosophy. For example Marxism and the notion
of economic determination, the relationship between the elite and the proletariat.
Situational centered leadership Theory developed in direct contrast to trait theories.
According to this theory leadership is all a matter of situational demands. The leader is a
product of the given situation i.e. leaders are made not born. This theory maintains that the
society is dynamic and developing; individuals are only a part of that process and are not
shapers of the process. A leader comes on to the scene as the result of a particular time,
place and circumstance and normally as the expression of those needs of his time. This
theory became popular in the 1970s.
In Situation Leadership Theory, leadership does not reside in a person but is the function of
an occasion (Murphy). For example after social revolution the need is for structure and order
and so a dictator can emerge. The situation creates a need who fills that need is not as
significant. The great man could not help what he did since he was directed and controlled by
the historical environment. Traits and styles do not need to be set aside completely but
instead they must take a more appropriate position-the situation will define the traits and
styles that are necessary for leadership. One could have all of the desirable traits and a very
particular style but if the situation does not establish a need for those traits then leadership
will not occur.
The leadership-situation centered Theory is a natural conclusion of the debate between
leader-centered theory and situation-centered theory. Rather than make one more important
than the other they are seen to be working in a connected manner with each other being
equally important. In leadership-situation centered theory, a leader need to take into
consideration the traits and/or style of the leader and the situation the nature of the group
and the event/task involved. Leadership does not occur in a vaccum. In this theory
forecasting of leadership potential is the act of assessing potential fit, evaluation of
performance is the act of assessing actual fit.

The next set of theories is the interaction and social learning theories. Unlike the leadersituation centered theory this has to do with the group interaction. This set of theories
explains leadership as a product of the interaction between people-leaders and followers.
Leadership is an interpersonal relationship between the individual leader and the situation;
focus should be on the relationship between leaders and other people (followers). In the
group interactions, experienced leaders emerge. Theory plays a part or role based on social
interactions. Life is about dreams. So leadership is emergent. Some of the interaction and
social learning theories include the leader-Role Theory, leader emergence Hemphill which
developed in 1973, Group Dynamics.
In the social exchange Theory leadership and followership are explained as a social
exchange. This exchange is established and maintained if it is mutually beneficial-i.e. if the
leaders gives things of value to the followers such as a sense of direction, value, recognition,
resources and in turn receives other things that the leader values responsiveness,
cooperation, resources. Followers expect that the leader will enable them to achieve a
favourable outcome and believe the exchange to be fair if the rewards are distributed
equitably. This implies a Psychological contract with expectation on both sides. This leads to
the Transaction cycle in there is no vision. The question is performance
In the late 1960s the dominant leadership theory became the transformational leadership
which builds on the previous theories because it incorporates the leader, the situation and
the followers (group). The central concept is that leadership is all about change-leaders are
change agents. No change no leadership. The change is seem in all areas: the leader
develops and grows. With the change of the leader comes the transformation of the situation
(situation change) and the group members are developed and grown (followers change).
Transformational leadership examines attributes such as the qualities that are necessary for
a leader to bring about change, the context that exists which necessitates transformation,
and the nature of the relationship between the leader and the followers that facilitates
change. The goal of transformational leadership is to articulate vision and empower others.
The transformational leader asks followers to transcend their own self interest for the good of
the group (organization or society and to consider long-term needs over immediate needs.
In 1973 Robert Greenleaf came up with the Servant leadership. The event that crystallized
Greenleafs thinking came in the 1960s when he read Hermen Hesses short novel, Journey
to the East-an account of a mythical journey by a group of people on a spiritual quest. The
Central figure of the story is Leo, who accompanies the party as the servant and who
sustains them, with his caring spirit. (Spears,1998). This is intentional Stewardship of ones
influence to enable and empower other people to identify and achieve the goals of the
community in the service of God. Greenleaf argues that the concept of servant leader is
birthed from a fresh critical look at issues of power and authority, where people are beginning
to learn, however haltingly, to relate to one another in less coercive and more creatively
supporting ways. He further argues that a servant leader is a servant first. Then conscious
choice brings one to aspire to lead. (Greenleaf, 1995) The core priorities for a servant leader
are servanthood, interdependence, Teamwork, results focused and vision. Servant leaders
exhibit the attributes of listening, empathy, awareness, persuasion and conceptualization
Conclusion
Reflecting on my personal history and experience of working with groups (in part a) has not
only rekindled my vision and passion but has also given me the opportunity to examine my
growth in leadership. As my influence grows, I desire to be a successful leader who will finish
well. Based on my reflections in this paper, a successful leader is a humble, God-dependent,
team-playing servant of God with the vision, calling, gifts, and abilities to bring others into the
race.

After a description of various leadership models and theories in light of their historical
development (in part b) I prefer a biblical model of leadership that is a hybrid of servant
leadership, Transformational leadership and Spiritual leadership. This would best be
illustrated by an equilateral triangle with three equal sides each representing one of the three
models of leadership. God is in the Centre of triangle. Such a biblical model would be the
product of Christian leadership. A Christian leader is a humble, God-dependent, teamplaying servant of God who is called by God to shephered, develop, equip, and empower
some people of God to accomplish an agreed-upon vision from God (Kraft, 2004).
Bibliography
1. Backaby ,& Richard (2006) Spiritual leadership, Nashville, TN Broadmen Holman
Publisher.
2. Sanders, (1967) Natural and Spiritual leadership. Spiritual Leadership. (PP 35-42).
Chicago, IL:Moody Press
3. Kadalie, D. (2006), Leaders resource kit: Tools and techniques to develop your
leadership. Evangel publishing House, Nairobi
4. Maxwell, Developing the leader within you
5. Gardner, W. (1990). The tasks of leadership (pp 11-12). On leadership , New York
6. Gangel, O. (1991). Biblical Theology of leadership. Christian Educational Journal, 12(1).
13-21
7. Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z (2006). Leaders serve and sacrifice. In A leaders legacy. (pp:
12-19). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-bass. Barbour Publishing Inc.
8. Chambers, (1963) My utter most for His Highest, Uhrichsville,OH
9. Behrman, Jack N (1988). Van Managers be leaders? Essays on ethics in business and the
professions, (pp 182-200), Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
10. McConkey. Dale D. (1989, Sept/Oct) Are you an administrator, a manager, or a leader?
Business Horizons , 32(5), 15-21
11. Richard Derwent (1-change 2009) http://www.I-change.biz/models&theories
12. htt://www.leadership-expert.co.uk/leaders styles
13. www.money-zine.com/definitions/career-dictonary
14. Mattin,(1999);Psychology, Third edition, Harcourt Bruce college publishers, Orlando
15. Green leaf, K, (1995). Servant Leadership. In J. Thomas Wren, ed. The leaders
companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (pp.18-25). New York, NY; Free Press
16. Larry, (1998). The power of servant leadership pp 3-4
17. Kraft, (2004) Leaders who last Timeline Books PP.17

A paper by Bishop David Thagana - bishopthagana@goaweb.org

You might also like