Successful Versus Effective Leader

SUCCESSFUL VERSUS EFFECTIVE LEADER

According to some experts, the influence of leaders on organisational outcomes is overrated and romanticized and this results into biased attributions about leaders. Still, it is largely accepted that leadership is central to a performing organisation and leaders do contribute to key organisational outcomes. In order to facilitate successful performance it is important to understand and accurately measure leadership performance.

It is important to distinguish between performance and effectiveness. Performance reflects behaviour, while effectiveness implies the assessment of actual organisational outcomes. So, it becomes important to delineate the particular behaviours that contribute to key organisational outcomes versus the actual organisational outcomes. At times, outcomes may be subject to external factors and beyond the control of the leader and it may not be easy to determine what exactly is driving a particular outcome.

Leadership effectiveness refers to the ability to influence others and achieve collective goals, according to Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt study. Some researchers, however, suggest that leadership success ought to be based on the effectiveness of the team, group, or organisation. But, leadership effectiveness is “often based on the perceptions of subordinates, peers, or supervisors.

Many studies rely on peer rankings on who emerges as a leader in a given situation, even though many personality traits have been associated with leadership emergence For example, extraversion and openness to experience have been positively associated with leader effectiveness, while neuroticism was negatively related to leader effectiveness.

The relationships between personality traits and performance outcomes were stronger for leader emergence than for leader effectiveness. Another related concept is leadership advancement over a long career span. Early longitudinal research had suggested that factors such as interpersonal, cognitive, and administrative skills were related to leader advancement.

While overlap exists among these constructs, some distinction has to be made between job performance and effectiveness of leadership. By Job performance is meant contributions of the leader to organi-sational goal accomplishment (Motowidlo, 2003). Job effectiveness refers to evaluation of the results achieved by the leader. Effectiveness can be influenced by a variety of external factors, outside of the leader’s immediate control (Campbell et al., 1993). As such, it may not be accurate to attribute all the achievement factors to an indivi-dual’s leadership capabilities. For example, so many CEO’s became achievers only during the booming spree.

Therefore, while assessing performance, it is appropriate to examine elements within the leader’s control, such as speci-fic behaviours that facilitate collective action and goal achievement. Evaluating leadership in such a manner is necessary

for more accurately identifying predictors of leader performance. Likewise, analysts ought carefully weigh leadership behaviours in order to more clearly establish the importance of leadership to organi-sational outcomes.

A leader is anyone who influences a group toward obtaining a particular result. Leadership is not dependent on title or formal authority. Political examples are Gandhi and Jai Prakash Narayan. An individual who is appointed to a supreme position has the right to command and enforce obedience by virtue of the authority of his or her position. Mrs Indira Gandhi was, thus, an effective leader as Prime Minister.