The fourth concept of leadership is the concept of leadership as the exercise of influence under this concept, there are also two definitions. The first definition by Tead in 1935 stated that leadership is the activity of influencing people to co-operate towards some goal which they come to find desirable. The second definition is that leadership is the process or the act of influencing the activities of an organized group in its efforts towards goal setting and goal achievement. This definition was given by Stogdill in 1950.
Other existing concepts under which leadership can be defined include leadership as an act of behaviour, leadership as a form of persuasion, as well as leadership as a form of power relations, and leadership as an instrument of goal achievement. However, this last concept is the one most relevant to the research work. Under this concept there are equally two definitions of leadership. These definitions were given separately by Bellows (1959) and Davis (1942).
Bellows defined leadership as the process of arranging a situation so that various members of a group, including the leader, can achieve common goals with maximum economy and minimum of time and work. Davis definition explained leadership as the principal dynamic force that stimulates, motivates and coordinates the organization in the accomplishment of its objectives.
All the leadership theories have been group into six theories in some existing literature. These are:
According to these theories, the general perception of the leader is that of a person who is endowed with special qualities peculiar to him. These qualities can arrest the interest of the followers through endearment. As far as the Greatman theories are concerned there is no leadership by the masses. Leadership is only by some individuals in every society who posses different degrees of leadership qualities. These “superior few are those with the right qualities who always influence the masses. These few posses the personality traits or attributes and character which are often referred to as the qualities of leadership. For instance, the exercise of will- power is seen as an important leadership trait Usendia (1989), has criticized these theories because of its assumption that leaders are born and not made. The in-born leadership qualities according to the theories are initiative, courage, intelligence and honour which together predestine a man to be a leader. The major point of criticism of Greatman’s theories is that by rough tutorship of experience and training, some of these qualities can be developed.
In these theories of leadership, leadership does not reside in a person, but instead, it is the function of the occasion. According to Murphy (1941), who tried to explain some of the theories, a particular situation calls for certain types of action, therefore the leader does not inject leadership. He is only an instrument through which solutions are achieved for problems. According to Mumford (1909), a leader emerges by virtue of his abilities and the use of special skills which enable him to deal with specific situations. This is the situational approach to leadership. This approach according to Usendia (1998), is base on the assumption that a great leader emerged as a result of time, place and circumstance.