A Definition Of Leadership

A Definition of Leadership

Forces That Affect Leadership Styles A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leaders, and the situation. Some examples include: · Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee. · Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the problem well, but he wants to create a team where the employees take ownership of the project. The employees know their jobs and wan to become part of the team. The situation allows time. · Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job. Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places doing other things. · Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative). Forces that influence the style to be used included a number of things such as: ·

Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect?

·

Who has the information – you, your employees, or both?

·

How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task.

·

Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple?

There is also a difference in ways leaders approach their employees: Positive: Positive leaders use rewards, such as education, and independence to motivate employees. Negative: If the emphasis is placed upon penalties, then the leader is using negative leadership. Although it has its place in a leader’s repertoire of tools, it should be used carefully due to its high cost on the human spirit. Negative leaders act domineering and

superior with people. They believe the only way to get things done is through penalties, such loss of job, days off without pay, and reprimand in front of others. They believe their authority is increased by freighting everyone into higher levels of productivity. Leaders are not strictly one or another, but are somewhere on a continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. Leaders who continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work out of the positive are real leaders. Leader Use of Consideration and Structure Two other styles that leaders use are: · Consideration (employee orientation) – Leaders are concerned about the human needs or their employees. They build teamwork, help employees with their problems, and provide psychological support. · Structure (task orientation) – Leaders believe that they get results by consistently keeping people busy and urging them to produce. There is evidence that leaders who are considerate in their leadership style are higher performers and are more satisfied with their jobs. Consideration and structure are independent of each other so they should not be viewed on opposite ends of the continuum. For example, a leader who becomes more considerate does not necessarily become less structured. One of the two emerging approaches to leadership is the charismatic leadership theory. This type of leadership theory takes a more practical view of leadership than previous theories have. It looks at leadership from the way the average person does. Charismatic leadership theory states that followers make attributions of heroic or extraordinary leadership abilities when they observe certain behaviors. There are several key characteristics that appear to differentiate charismatic leaders from non-charismatic leaders. The following are seven key characteristics of charismatic leaders: · Self-confidence – Charismatic leaders have complete confidence in their judgment and ability. · Vision – They have an idealized goal that proposes a future better than the status quo. The greater the disparity between this idealized goal and the status quo, the more likely that followers will attribute extraordinary vision to the leader. · Ability to articulate the vision – They are able to clarify and state the vision in terms that are understandable to others. This articulation demonstrates an understanding of the followers’ needs and, hence, acts as a motivating force.

· Strong convictions about the vision – Charismatic leaders are perceived as being strongly committed and willing to take on high personal risk, incur high costs, and engage in self-sacrifice to achieve their vision. · Behavior that is out of the ordinary – They engage in behavior that is perceived as being novel, unconventional, and counter to norms. When successful, these behaviors evoke surprise and admiration in followers. · Appearance as a change agent – Charismatic leaders are perceived as agents of radical change rather than as caretakers of the statue quo. · Environmental sensitivity – They are able to make realistic assessments of the environmental constraints and resources needed to bring about change. Charismatic leaders have a compelling vision or sense of purpose; they could communicate that vision in clear terms that their followers could readily identify with; they demonstrated consistency and focus in the pursuit of their vision; and they know their own strengths and capitalize on them. It has also been found that charismatic leaders have an idealized goal that they want to achieve and a strong personal commitment to that goal; they are perceived as unconventional; are assertive and self-confident; and are perceived as agents of radical change rather than as managers of the status quo. Charismatic leaders have an effect on his or her followers. There is an increasing amount of research that shows impressive correlations between charismatic leadership and high performance and satisfaction among followers. Compared with people working for noncharismatic leaders, people working for charismatic leaders are motivated to exert extra work effort and, because they like their leader, express greater satisfaction. Being a charismatic leader might not always be such a great thing. Charismatic leaders may be ideal for pulling an organization through a crisis but become a liability to an organization once the crisis and the need for dramatic change subside. Why? Because the charismatic leader’s overwhelming self-confidence often becomes a problem. He or she is unable to listen to others, becomes uncomfortable when challenged by assertive employees, and begins to hold an unjustifiably belief in his or her “rightness” on issues. Leadership is like love; it can be difficult to define because it means different things to different people. The age-old question about rather leaders are made or born still seems to arise in today’s times. However, too much is at stake for organizations to plunder that question because rather an effective leader was born or made the organization will value the skills that the individual brings into the setting. Most organizations are looking for individuals who posses leadership skills. These individuals can be either men or women from either dominant or third world cultures. Often times the term leadership has a very narrow view. People are prone to think of only males from either the U.S. or Japan when the term “leader” is used. This is too narrow of a view. There are many women with leadership qualities and people from

diverse cultures who exhibit profound leadership skills. Another aspect of leadership, which is so narrow as to sometimes not even be thought of, is that of follower ship, without followers, there would be no need for leaders. We are familiar with the basic duties of a leader but everyone will not be a leader however in that case it will be necessary to understand the duties of a follower/employee. There are keys to being an effective follower, which includes such things as: being dependable, humble and patient. Although those things may seem of little value now, they are the building blocks to becoming an effective and efficient Leader, which who listens, is enthusiastic, takes action, is dependable, educated and gets results. As a male or female, leadership will not vary in a broad since because the main objectives for any given leader is basically similar; to motivate, organize and sway into action its subordinates. However, as in most things the way in which women and men go about achieving a certain outcome is different. Women tend to lead using a democratic style while men typically use a more task-oriented style of leadership. While understanding what leadership is, it is also important to understand what leadership is not. Almost any one can be elected, selected, promoted or succeeded; there fore leadership is not a position. Giving too much power to one individual can be detrimental to the leader, the employees and the organization therefore leadership is not building a personality cult. Effective leadership is being dispensable and the mark of a good leader is demonstrated by the fact that the show can and must go on with or without that particular individual therefore leadership is not being indispensable although many would like it to be. Lastly, leadership is about being responsible for the decisions you make leadership is not about blaming others when you do not achieve your desired outcome.

Bibliography: