洪賢霖 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

急~~~需各位英文高手幫幫忙...急需的報告

Specifically, they assumed that there was one set of answers to the leadership puzzle. One generic approach focused on leadership traits, and the other looked at leadership behavior.

The first organized approach to studying leadership analyzed the personal, psychological, and physical traits of strong leaders. The trait approach assumed that some basic trait or set of traits existed that differentiated leaders from nonleaders. If those traits could be defined, potential leaders could be identified. Researchers thought that leadership traits might include intelligence, assertiveness, above-average height, good vocabulary, attractiveness, self-confidence, and similar attributes.

During the first half of the twentieth century, hundreds of studies were conducted in an attempt to identify important leadership traits. For the most part, the results of the studies were disappointing. For every set of leaders who possessed a common trait, a long list of exceptions was also found, and the list of suggested traits soon grew so long that it had little practical value. Alternative explanations usually existed even for relationships between traits and leadership that initially appeared valid. For example, it was observed that many leaders have good communication skills and are assertive. Rather than those traits' being the cause of leadership, however, successful leaders may begin to display those traits after they have achieved a leadership position.

Although most researchers gave up trying to identify traits as predictors of leadership ability, many people still explicitly or implicitly adopt a trait orientation. For example, politicians are all too often elected on the basis of personal appearance, speaking ability, or an aura of self-confidence. In addition, traits like honesty and integrity may very well be fundamental leadership traits that do serve an important purpose.

20點!謝謝各位大大

已更新項目:

就給你囉~~謝謝大大的幫忙讓我報告順利完成~~!

1 個解答

評分
  • 1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    具體來說,他們假設,有一套答復對領導難題。一種普通方法集中於領導特徵, 和其他看的領導行為。對學習領導的首先組織的方法分析了強的領導個人, 心理, 和物理特徵。特徵方法假設, 某一基本的特徵或套特徵存在了被區分的領導從nonleaders 。如果那些特徵能被定義, 潛在的領導能被辨認。研究員認為, 領導特徵也許包括智力、斷言、在之上平均高度、好詞彙量、好看、自信, 和相似的屬性。在20 世紀的前半期間, 上百研究進行為辨認重要領導特徵。很大程度上, 研究的結果是失望的。為擁有一個具備共同的特徵的每套領導, 例外一張長的名單並且被發現了, 並且建議的特徵名單很快增長很長它有一點實用價值。供選擇的解釋為關係通常存在了在最初地看上去合法的特徵和領導之間。例如, 它被觀察, 許多領導有好表達能力並且是斷言的。而不是那些特徵的是領導的起因, 然而, 成功的領導也許開始顯示那些特徵在他們達到了領導地位之後。雖然多數研究員放棄了設法仍然辨認特徵作為領導能力的預報因子, 許多人明確地或含蓄地採取特徵取向。例如, 政客是全部太經常被選舉根據體貌、講的能力, 或自信氣氛。另外, 特徵像誠實和正直也許很好是為一個重要目的服務的根本領導特徵。

    參考資料: 自己...
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。