CONCEPT OF LEADERSHIP

The meaning of a message is the change which it produces in the image.

Kenneth Boulding in The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society
Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an
objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and
coherent.
Some other popular definitions of Leadership are:
A process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a
common goal (Northouse, 2007, p3).
The U.S. military has studied leadership in depth. One of their definitions is a
process by which a person influences others to accomplish a mission (U.S. Army,
1983).
Leadership is inspiring others to pursue your vision within the parameters you set,
to the extent that it becomes a shared effort, a shared vision, and a shared success
(Zeitchik, 2012).
Leadership is a process of social influence, which maximizes the efforts of others,
towards the achievement of a goal (Kruse, 2013).
Note that all the definitions have a couple of processes in common:
o

A person influences others through social influence, not power, to get

something accomplished (bosses use power to get things done).

Leadership requires others, who are not necessarily direct-reports, to get

something accomplished.

There is a need to accomplish something.

Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership knowledge and skills.
This is called Process Leadership (Jago, 1982). However, we know that we have
traits that can influence our actions. This is called Trait Leadership (Jago, 1982), in
that it was once common to believe that leaders were born rather than made. These
two leadership types are shown in the chart below (Northouse, 2007, p5):

While leadership is learned, a leader's skills and knowledge can be influenced by his
or hers attributes or traits, such as beliefs, values, ethics, and character. Knowledge
and skills contribute directly to the process of leadership, while the other attributes
give the leader certain characteristics that make him or her unique.
For example, a leader might have learned the skills in counseling others, but her
traits will often play a great role in determining how she counsels. A person who has
empathy will make a better counselor than a person who thinks the employees are
simply there do accomplish her biddings.
Skills, knowledge, and attributes make the Leader, which is one of the Factors of
Leadership.

2.) What are the factors in leadership?

FACTORS IN LEADERSHIP
There are four primary factors of leadership (U.S. Army, 1983):
Leader
You must have an honest understanding of who you are, what you know, and what
you can do. Also, note that it is the followers, not the leader or someone else who
determines if the leader is successful. If they do not trust or lack confidence in their
leader, then they will be uninspired. To be successful you have to convince your
followers, not yourself or your superiors, that you are worthy of being followed.

Followers
Different people require different styles of leadership. For example, a new hire
requires more supervision than an experienced employee does. A person who lacks
motivation requires a different approach than one with a high degree of motivation.
You must know your people! The fundamental starting point is having a good

understanding of human nature, such as needs, emotions, and motivation. You must
come to know your employees' be, know, and do attributes.

Communication
You lead through two-way communication. Much of it is nonverbal. For instance,
when you set the example, that communicates to your people that you would not
ask them to perform anything that you would not be willing to do. What and how
you communicate either builds or harms the relationship between you and your
followers.

Situation
All situations are different. What you do in one situation will not always work in
another. You must use your judgment to decide the best course of action and the
leadership style needed for each situation. For example, you may need to confront
an employee for inappropriate behavior, but if the confrontation is too late or too
early, too harsh or too weak, then the results may prove ineffective.

Also note that the situation normally has a greater effect on a leader's action than
his or her traits. This is because while traits may have an impressive stability over a
period of time, they have little consistency across situations (Mischel, 1968). This is
why a number of leadership scholars think the Process Theory of Leadership is a
more accurate than the Trait Theory of Leadership.

Various forces will affect these four factors. Examples of forces are:
your relationship with your seniors
the skills of your followers
the informal leaders within your organization
how your organization is organized

3.) What is a leadership philosophy?

An effective leadership philosophy is different than your personal purpose,
values, and valued behaviors. While your leadership philosophy will be built upon
the foundation your clear personal purpose and values statement creates, it is
specific to your leadership efforts (in the workplace, in a community organization,
wherever you are taking a leadership role).

An effective leadership philosophy defined is a values-aligned statement that helps

you inspire consistent high performance and positive relationships with all of your
team members, every day.

4.) What are the historical perspectives of leadership?

HISTORY OF LEADERSHIP

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has continued for centuries.
Philosophical writings from Plato's Republic to Plutarch's Lives have explored the
question "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying this
search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the
assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals
possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the
"trait theory of leadership".

A number of works in the 19th century when the traditional authority of monarchs,
lords and bishops had begun to wane explored the trait theory at length: note
especially the writings of Thomas Carlyle and of Francis Galton, whose works have
prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle
identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power.
Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869) examined leadership qualities in the families of
powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off
when his focus moved from first-degree to second-degree relatives, Galton
concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not
developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the notion that
leadership is rooted in characteristics of a leader.

Cecil Rhodes (18531902) believed that public-spirited leadership could be nurtured

by identifying young people with "moral force of character and instincts to lead",
and educating them in contexts (such as the collegiate environment of the
University of Oxford) which further developed such characteristics. International
networks of such leaders could help to promote international understanding and
help "render war impossible". This vision of leadership underlay the creation of the
Rhodes Scholarships, which have helped to shape notions of leadership since their
creation in 1903.

Sanskrit literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten
types of leaders are explained with examples from history and mythology.

Aristocratic thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's "blue blood"
or genes. Monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its
assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction (see
the divine right of kings). Contrariwise, more democratically inclined theorists have
pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals
profiting from careers open to talent.

In the autocratic/paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of

leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may
object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them emotionally attuned,
responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated
with matriarchies.

Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on "right living"

relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule,
buttressed by a tradition of filial piety.

Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and

discipline ... Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of
humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence
on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in
command result in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate
to its function, then one can be a leader. Sun Tzu

Machiavelli's The Prince, written in the early 16th century, provided a manual for
rulers ("princes" or "tyrants" in Machiavelli's terminology) to gain and keep power.

In the 19th century the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of
leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary traces the word
"leadership" in English only as far back as the 19th century.) One response to this
denial of litism came with Leninism, which demanded an lite group of disciplined
cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the
dictatorship of the proletariat.

Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between
secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred
and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has
often emphasized stewardship of divinely provided resourceshuman and material
and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan. Compare servant
leadership.

For a more general take on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the
statesperson.

Transformational leadership is a style of leadership where a leader works with

subordinates to identify needed change, creating a vision to guide the change
through inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members
of a group. Transformational leadership serves to enhance the motivation, morale,
and job-performance of followers through a variety of mechanisms; these include
connecting the follower's sense of identity and self to a project and to the collective
identity of the organization; being a role model for followers in order to inspire them
and to raise their interest in the project; challenging followers to take greater
ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of
followers, allowing the leader to align followers with tasks that enhance their
performance.

Collective leadership is considered an ideal form of ruling a communist party, both

within and outside a socialist state. Its main task is to distribute powers and
functions from the individual to a single group. For instance, in China or in Vietnam,
when the country was ruled by Le Duan, powers have been distributed from the
office of General Secretary of the Communist Party and shared with the Politburo
Standing Committee while still retaining one ruler. Nowadays, in Vietnam there is
not one paramount leader, and power is shared by the party General Secretary,
President and the Prime Minister along with collegial bodies such as the Politburo,
Secretariat and the Central Committee.

LEADERSHIP AND DECISION MAKING

It is inevitable that leaders, no matter what type, will be faced with many different
decisions. Some decisions will be minor and may not affect anyone but themselves.
Other decisions can be quite large and have the capacity to affect everyone and
anyone under their leadership. Decision making is part of a leaders daily
expectations. This makes decision making important for those in a leadership role.
Leaders have a responsibility to make good decisions for everyone involved, and
therefore, should have some kind of framework for which to make those decisions.

There are four basic decision-making styles that effective leaders use. These styles
can vary by department or organization, the leaders own philosophy and style, as
well as other outside influences, such as money or subordinates.

1. Command

Leaders who tend to make decisions without consulting anyone on their team are
said to be command leaders. However negative it may sound, it can be a good
style of decision making, especially for quick moving situations that need guidance
immediately. Leaders use this style most effectively and strategically when they
apply it to monetary decisions and crisis decisions. In these types of situations,
there may be no time to consult with others, and doing so could lead to bigger
problems and an outcome determined by a delayed decision.

2. Collaborative

Collaborative decision making requires and uses the opinions and insight of others
on the team. Leaders who routinely ask those under them for their feedback and
viewpoints are seeking to make a collaborative decision. This doesnt give those
under the leader the right to make the decision, however, it can give the leader the
information need to make the best decision fit for the situation, especially if it
affects a lot of people. Collaborative decision making also falls under evidence
based decision making. If a leader is using collaborative decision making, it is
actually best to not surround him or herself with people who always agree with
them. People should feel open and willing to argue either side of the coin. Even if
the leader ends up not taking their advice, it will help bring the decision and
situation more clarity.

3. Consensus

Decision making done with a vote is called consensus decision making. It is similar
to that of a democratic vote. Leaders can gather their teams, explain the decision
at hand, and then everyone gets a vote. If a leader needs to make a decision that
will not affect the bottom line, but does, however, affect a vast majority of those
under him or her, then a consensus is a good way to go. When using a consensus,
leaders need to remember that they cannot please everyone. Decisions made by
consensus tend to help mold the culture of a company or organization and can help
give everyone a voice. Being heard is important to most people on a team or in a
group, and satisfaction will go up when they feel like they are heard.

4. Convenience

Some leaders choose to delegate their decision making tasks. This can be out of
convenience and can have several benefits, including the empowerment of team
members and evaluating the decision-making skills of other team members. It is
important for leaders to remember that those new to making decisions may have
some fresh an innovative ideas or ways of looking at a problem and its solutions.

Applying Ethics to Decision Making

Ethics is an integral part to decision making for every type of leader. In order to
understand ethics in decision making, the values of the leader and the organization
must be taken into careful consideration. Leaders who are effective have an
understanding and an awareness of their own morals, values, and system of ethics.
Integrity, transparency, and solid character are cornerstones of good leadership.
Leaders should know that transparent and consistent ethically based decisions will
help build the team and the business. Leaders who apply ethics to their methods of
decision making will consider the following:

Keeping promises
Not being deceitful
Treating others as they wish to be treated
Not blaming others
Making informed decisions without favoritism
Working to make the work or organizational environment better
Operating within the law
Minimizing hardships and helping others when possible
By taking these factors into account and exercising them, leaders can create an
ethical environment, causing those underneath their leadership to also work and
live ethically. There may be times, however, that two values of equal importance
clash in the decision making process and cause an ethical dilemma. In this
situation, the leader will need to carefully balance both values in order to make an
ethical decision. This can be easier said than done in most situations, though going
back to the core values and goals of the company and of the leader can help give
clarity in these situations.

Decision making can be difficult, especially for those in positions of leadership.

Making the wrong decision can impact the bottom line of the business or
organization, it can turn people against a leader, and it can cause many other

people to be affected. Leaders should consider what decision framework they use,
as well as the ethical standards and principles of the business, as well as their own
when making a decision. However, leaders should not be afraid to make a decision,
as it is a key component to being a leader.

Resources: http://projectmgmt.brandeis.edu/resources/articles/leadership-anddecision-making/