综上所述，仅仅把领导理论的发展理解为从特质论向行为论再向权变论的演进是不够的。实际上，特质论、行为论和权变论的划分都没有脱离管理主义的视野。由于领导与管理是有着根本不同的两种社会活动，因此，仅仅把对领导现象的理解局限于管理主义的框架中，显然是不够的。管理主义的领导理论是与企业等私人组织紧密联系在一起的，它注重的是效绩导向的领导，而且这一效绩并没有超越管理学所理解的客观效绩。如果我们把领导理论局限于管理主义的框架中，就无法理解那些公众领导者为什么对社会产生如此强大的影响，也无法理解那些由公众领导者与私人领导者的根本区别。正是基于这一思考，我们才认为必须从领导的内涵出发，重新确立领导理论的类型结构。本文按照管理主义的领导理论、人文主义的领导理论和宪政主义的领导理论这一框架重新确立领导理论的类型结构（当然不排除这三种领导理论的相互渗透与相互借鉴），重点不在于对过去的领导理论进行重新梳理，而是试图揭示领导所
包含的历史、政治和文化内涵，从而使人们可以在更为广阔的视野中重新理解“领导”（leadership）。
参考文献：
[美]斯蒂芬·P·罗宾斯：《组织行为学》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，1997年。
[美]弗兰克•J.萨洛丰：《天生反叛》，江苏人民出版社，1998年。
[英]阿伦•布洛克：《西方人文主义传统》，北京：三联书店，1997年。
[美]菲德勒、加西亚：《领导效能新论》，北京：三联书店，1989年。
吴岩：《领导心理学》，北京：中央编译出版社，1996年。
刘建军编著：《领导学原理》（第三版），上海：复旦大学出版社，2007年。
Peter G. Northhouse (2004) Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, Inc
Gary Yukl (2002) Leadership in Organizations. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Michael Z. Hackman, Craig E. Johnson (1996) Leadership: A Communication Perspective, Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press. Inc
Gilbbert W. Fairholm (1991) Values Leadership: Toward a New Philosophy of Leadership, New York: Praeger Publishers.
Richard L. Hughes, Robert C. Ginnett and Gordon J. Curphy (1996) Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience, Chicago: Times Mirror Higher Education Group.
Bernard M. Bass (1990) Bass & Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership, New York: the Free Press.
Edited by Jamedson W. Doig and Erwin C. Hargrove (1990) Leadership and Innovation: Entrepreneurs in Government, Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press.
Hal G. Rainey (1997) Understanding and Manage Public Organizations, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pbulishers
.Edited by Felice Davidson Perlmutter and Simon Slavin: Leadership in Social Administration: Perspective for the 1980's, Phladelphia: Temple University Press, 1980.
Edited by Bryan D. Jones: leadership and Politics, Kansas: University Press
of Kansas, 1989.
作者简介：刘建军（1969-）男，山东昌乐人，系复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院教授，复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院副院长，复旦大学马克思研究院副院长。
Leadership Theories: Rethinking and Beyond
LIU jJian--Jun
Abstract：As traditional view, leadership theory is divided into three phrases as traits approach , behavior approach and contingency theory. That points out the emphasis of leadership theory in different period as well as the transit of research perspective. Obviously, “three phrases of leadership theory” is based on the scientific paradigm that regarded the leadership as a social phenomena to be measured and controlled. This research approach makes leadership to be depended to management. As a result leadership is regarded as a function of management. My opinion is that leadership should be investigated by its technical, cultural, moral, historical and political meanings. So we can draw a conclusion there are three leadership theory types as follows: managerialism, humanism and constitutionalism theory of leadership. According to this opinion we can rethink leadership beyond scientific and managerial perspectives.
[1] Peter G. Northhouse (2004) Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand（third edition），London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, Inc,P23-24 [2] Peter G. Northhouse (2004) Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand（third edition），London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, Inc,P75-76
