p h ysio th e ra p y, M a rch 1983, vo ! 39, n o 1 3 Leadership is a very co nt ro v e rsi al subject, pa rti cu la rly in a p r o f e s s i o n a l society such as ours. Ph ys io th e ra p is ts tend to be “doers” , inst ruc ting patients w h a t to do , ho w to do it and even when to d o it. T h e ten d en cy is th u s to put on a “ bold front” an d develop o r display a fairly str ong , c o m m a n d i n g personality. T o c h oo se leaders fro m such a g ro u p , a n d then expect the g r o u p to follow such leaders, is m o r e difficult th an appears at first sight. Why do we need leaders? M a r i o n J. Leslie in the Enid G r a h a m Me m or ia l Lecture (1982) asks why the C a n a d i a n Phys iother apy A ss oc iat ion wished to de velop leaders and what they wished these leaders to do. Wou ld they help physiotherapists achieve gr e at er scientific credibility? W ou ld they help p h y s i o t h e r a p i s t s g a in g r e a t e r a u t h o r i t y , recognition an d financial re wards? W oul d they help kphysiotherapists a t t a i n gr e at er profes sio nal st atu s in o rd e r to ^practice p h y s io th er a py with g re ate r indepe nde nc e? If development of leaders is accepte d as a gu id in g principle, it must imply a lack o f leadership. M ar io n Leslie t h e n e x am in es the co nc ep t of leadership. It has fascinated sc hol ars a nd layme n alike. We un d e rs ta n d history by stu dyi ng great political, religious, military an d social leaders. Ho w d o they inspire de di cat io n a n d devo tion? How do they build empires, be they na tiona lities or mu ltinational c o r p o ra t io n s ? H o w d o they rise to fame or why are they to ppl ed , despite their a cco mp li sh m en ts? Scientific research in to the con cep t of lea dership has resulted in a p le th or a of articles, book s, p a m p h l e ts and speeches this cen tu ry . T h er e seems to be a great variety of definitions of le ad ership b o t h co nf usi ng a n d c o n tr a d ic to ry . Some refer to desirable traits o f c h a r a c t e r and personality, others to behaviour. M ar io n Leslie finally e x am in es lea dership in ter m s of a four fold typology, as described by A r t h u r J a g o . Pr of es so r of manag eme nt studies at the University o f H o u s to n. He defines it thus: Leadership is bo t h a p ro c e ss a n d a p ro p e rly . T he p rocess of leadership is the use o f non -coercive influence to direct a nd c o - or d i na te the activities o f the m em b e rs of an or ganized g r o u p t o w a rd the a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of g ro u p objectives. As a p r o p e r ly , leadership is the set o f qualities or ch ara cteristics a tt ri b u te d to those w ho are perceived to successfully e m pl oy such influence. J a g o identifies two theoretical a pp ro ac he s : the u n ive rsa l theorists who c o ns i d er lea dership a specific p h e n o m e n o n , not varying from sit u at io n to s i t ua ti on (Type 1 a nd II) and the c o n tin g e n t th eo rists w ho hold th at lea dership d e p en d s on certain situ ation s involving va riables such as the task, the followers, the e n v ir on m en t etc (Type I II & IV). Type I - un ive rsa l leadership traits. T he G r e at M a n theories defined leadership in terms of f u n d a m e n ta l traits such as physical and c o ns t it u t io n a l factors; skill a n d ability; pe rso nal it y an d social characteristics. Yet t her e are m an y e xc ep tio ns w ho do not co n f o rm to these theories. T ype I I - u n ive rsa l leadership styles. Th eor ist s ex am in ed b e h a v i o u r prope rti es such as c o n si de r a tio n , initiating stru ctu re , a ut o c r a c y an d d e m oc r ac y to distinguish effective leaders. These theories co ns id er lea dership trai nin g (sensitivity training, role-play a n d self-assessment) r a th e r th a n selection o f leaders. Yet, th ere is little evidence that chang e in a tt i tu d e du e to trai n in g is sustained o r has a m ar ke d effect. Both Ty p e I a n d T ype II theories are simplistic, but d o n ’t seem to hold water! Type I I I - c o n tin g e n cy leadership traits. This t h eo r y evolved from the p ro bl em s with Type I & II theories. However, recognizing increasing per son ali ty traits a nd sit ua ti o n al variables be comes very c o m p l e x a n d again no h ar d evidence of its usefulness has emerged. Type I V - c o n tin g e n cy leadership styles. This seems to be the present sta te of the art. Effective leadership woul d thu s be the ability to identify the ways in which people are mo tiva ted a n d stimu la ted , ho w they re spo nd in va rious situ atio ns an d then to re sp o nd app rop ria tel y! F r o m this analysis it is still difficult to define leadership, which p r o b a b ly represents a cluster o f variables. Zaleznik, a social psychologist from H a r v a r d Business Sc ho ol , c o nt r a st s m an a g er s an d leaders in ter m s o f a tt i tu d e s t o w a r d s goals, co nc e p tio ns of wo rk , rela tions with ot her s a nd sense o f self. In s u m m a r y a leader is active r ath er th an reactive; he creates new goals r a th e r th an reach ing established ones; he ex plores new avenues, op e n s up novel o pt io n s, creates di sorde r, chan ge s the way people t hin k, excites the i ma gi nat io n and seeks out risks; he relates to people intuitively and empa th ica ll y. whilst ha ving a sense o f sepa rat ene ss and i s o l a t i o n f r o m p e o p le a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s . Yet in a technological, econ om ica lly successful society, the need for leaders is a p p a r e n tl y do w n gr a d ed ! M a r i o n Leslie concl ude s t h a t this m ay be the ans we r — th at the profession needs people w ho will get up front, op en new avenues, take risks, a n d s h o o t fro m the hip! But she also asks the qu e sti on w he th er the o p p o r t u n it i e s for leadership are being pro vid ed. Despite the tr e m e n d o u s tec hnological a d van ces o f the past decade, very little real new techn olo gy has been a d d e d to the ph y si o th era p ist 's repertoire. It would seem t h a t we need to design o u r o w n future, r a th e r th a n p la n it in this era o f change. We need to s u p p o r t the science of p h y s io th er a py with research, but the art o f a healing, helping, c ari ng profession sho ul d not be neglected. Ha ve you elected y o u r leaders? Are y ou crea ting o p p o r t u n i t y for th em to practice leadership? A n d are you p r ep are d to follow them with d e d ic at io n a n d de vo tion? References Leslie , M. J. (1982). The Enid G r a h a m M e m o r ia l Lecture. P hysiother. C a nad 34, 249-254. Contents - Inhoud C o nce pts in E arly S e n so ry D e v e lo p m e n t — S. F. B la ch a ..................................................... Exercise in th e R e h a b ilita tio n o f C H D p a tie n ts — T. N oakes .................................................................. SASP N a tio n a l C o n a re s s R e g is tra tio n fo rm s — 'T h e R o le o f th e Q u a d ric e p s M u scle in Knee E x te n s io n — E. S. Ja n ks ............................... W o rld C o n fe d e ra tio n fo r P hysical T h e ra p y B o o k Review s C l a s s i f i e d 13 15 16 1 7 R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. )