What do you mean by alternatives. Alternatives in modern historical scholarship, or those that could have taken its place historically? You have to remember that the "great man" theory is not as widespread outside the Anglosphere as within it. In the 19th cenntury German tradition, it was much more common to assume a superorganic development in which inevitable onward development is driven by nations or communities as primary actors. All rather Hegelian. Traditional historiography, of course, often goes with the idea of history as theologically informed, either as an example of divine intervention or decision, or as a narrative towards universal salvation. The Chinese tradition tends to think of it in terms of a struggle to preserve or restore harmonic and appropriate social relations (not having them displeases the Heavens). Of course, there were also materialist and evolutionary conceptions fairly early, and in the nineteenth century these became quite popular, too (though the vanilla Marxist model is too telic to be thought of as properly materialist). All of these ideas could well prevail over the "great man" idea in popularity.
In actual reality, very few serious historians subscribe to the "great man" model. That doesn't mean it doesn't structure their thinking, of course.