CONTENTS
Introduction
Article by Lee Iacocca
Ist Research On Leadership
IInd Research On Leadership
IIIrd Research On Leadership
IVth Research On Leadership
Some Great Leaders
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
What Is LEADERSHIP?
The word Leadership can refer to:
• The process of leading.
• Those entities that perform one or more acts of leading.
• The ability to affect human behavior so as to accomplish a mission designated by the leader.
Leadership can be briefly described as:
1. To consider the team more important than the product. Remember, a good team can develop many products.
2. Not allowing your decisions to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes. The more you do so, the narrower your vision will become. Other people's likes and dislikes, however, are a necessary part of the reality you have to work with.
3. Inviting cooperation from others, rather than demanding their obedience. You can always, as the leader, enforce obedience. You will do so, however, at the cost of their willing and loyal support. Without these - indeed, without enthusiasm on their part - you will never receive their best efforts.
4. Enthusiasm: winning others to your ideas by the joy you yourself feel in them.
5. Doing willingly whatever needs to be done.
"Leadership" organizationally and narrowly as "the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members”. Organizationally, leadership directly impacts the effectiveness of costs, revenue generation, service, satisfaction, earnings, market value, share price, social capital, motivation, engagement, and sustainability.[citation needed] Leadership is the ability of an individual to set rules for others and lead from the front. It is an attitude that influences the environment around us.
Leaders are born and made. Clearly, some people have natural abilities, such as good communications skills, compassion, and decisiveness. However, effective leadership entails such a wide variety of behaviors and skills across an extensive array of circumstances that no one person could possibly be born with all of the qualities necessary to serve in that capacity for all situations. Thus, effective leadership necessarily involves some degree of acquired learning--in most cases, a very substantial degree.
Leadership is more about behavior, skills, and competencies than simple innate traits. Leadership effectiveness is a lifetime pursuit necessarily dedicated to self-awareness and reflection, critical thinking, and action. It is a multifaceted endeavor that touches everyone everywhere
Nine Cs of Leadership
By Lee Iacocca,
former CEO,
Chrysler
A leader has to show Curiosity. He has to listen to people outside the 'Yes, sir' crowd. He has to read voraciously, because the world is a complicated place. George W Bush brags about never reading a newspaper. "I just scan the headlines," he says. Am I hearing this right? He's the President of the US and he never reads a newspaper? Thomas Jefferson once said, "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate for a moment to prefer the latter.''
A leader has to be Creative, go out on a limb, be willing to try something different. You know, think outside the box. George Bush prides himself on never changing, even as the world around him is spinning out of control. God forbid someone should accuse him of flip-flopping. There's a disturbingly messianic fervour to his certainty. Leadership is all about managing change — whether you're leading a company or leading a country. Things change, and you get creative. You adapt.
A leader has to Communicate. I'm not talking about running off at the mouth or spouting sound bites. I'm talking about facing reality and telling the truth. Communication has to start with telling the truth, even when it may be painful.
A leader has to be a person of Character — knowing the difference between right and wrong and having the guts to do the right thing. Abraham Lincoln once said, "If you want to test a man's character, give him power."
A leader must have Courage. Swagger isn't courage. Tough talk isn't courage. Courage in the twenty-first century doesn't mean posturing and bravado. Courage is a commitment to sit down at the negotiating table and talk. If you're a politician, courage means taking a position even when you know it will cost you votes.
To be a leader you've got to have Conviction — a fire in your belly. You've got to have passion. You've got to really want to get something done.
A leader should have Charisma. Charisma is the quality that makes people want to follow you. It's the ability to inspire. People follow a leader because they trust him. That's my definition of charisma.
A leader has to be Competent. You've got to know what you're doing. More importantly, you've got to surround yourself with people who know what they're doing.
You can't be a leader if you don't have Common Sense. I call this Charlie Beacham's rule. When I was a young guy just starting out in the car business, one of my first jobs was as Ford's zone manager in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. My boss was a guy named Charlie Beacham, who was the East Coast regional manager. Charlie used to tell me, "Remember, Lee, the only thing you've got going for you as a human being is your ability to reason and your common sense. If you don't know a dip of horseshit from a dip of vanilla ice cream, you'll never make it.
Reference:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Nine_Cs_of_Leadership/articleshow/2324924.cms
RESEARCHES ON
LEADERSHIP
1. Leadership in Organizations
Gary Yukl
2001, Prentice Hall
Gary Yukl is Professor of Management and Leadership at the State University of New York in Albany, and a board member of the Leadership Quarterly journal. He is a well-known scholar and author on leadership. Leadership in Organizations was first published in 1981. This fifth edition was published in 2002, and the formerly 19 chapters have been consolidated into 15 (which include a new chapter on ethical leadership and diversity). This has been done in order to accommodate a 15-week course. Each chapter covers a particular aspect of leadership research study, with a concluding summary and questions for further discussion. Key terms are highlighted, and there is at least one case study at the end of each chapter. The book is accompanied by an instructor’s manual which is used in conjunction with the case studies and also contains exercises and role-playing activities. The 508 pages of Leadership in Organizations include an extensive references section.
Leadership in Organizations has a specific focus on managerial leadership in large organizations and is an attempt at bridging the gulf between academics and management practitioners. However, as each chapter begins with a list of learning objectives, the bias appears to tend towards a more academic audience (particularly students of the subject), rather than towards practising managers. The author covers a broad survey of theory and research of leadership in formal organizations of the last 50 years, and though Yukl states that the book “focuses on the 20 per cent of literature that appeared to be the most relevant and informative”, he has provided an in-depth and comprehensive analysis and appraisal of that literature in a clear and moderately accessible language. From the first, introductory, chapter about the nature of leadership, Yukl writes what is essentially an academic text, but with a clarity accessible to a practising manager with a serious interest in the subject area. The research approaches are broadly outlined in terms of the characteristics of a leader, a follower, and the situation. The research theories have been classified into the five approaches of trait, behaviour, power-influence, situational and integrative, which are further conceptualized as intra-individual, dyadic, group and organisational processes. Yukl looks at each of the research theories on the basis of a continuum covering the following distinctions: leader- versus follower-centred, descriptive versus prescriptive, and universal versus contingency (situational). The focus throughout is on leadership in large organisations, which means that many of the research areas studied include the leadership roles undertaken by those in managerial positions in all levels of an organisation and not just those at the top of the organisation. The nature and roles of managerial work are covered in Chapter 2.
Effective leadership, participation and empowerment
Extensive research has been undertaken on leadership behavior since the 1950s. This has divided into three areas: task-oriented, relation-oriented and participative leadership. The thousands of studies undertaken over this 50-year period, mostly through questionnaires, has given rise to a number of taxonomies which Yukl proposes might be refined into the three jointly inter-reacting categories of task-, relations- and change-oriented behaviours. On looking at the fields of study covering participative leadership, delegation and empowerment, the author again examines the research and looks closely at the Vroom-Yetton model of participative leadership developed in the 1970s. This helps managers identify decision procedures in different situations. Throughout the book, Yukl evaluates this research and provides Examples, tables, models and case studies. From this, a series of guidelines are formulated, to which the practising manager can refer for practical advice. Yukl observes that much of the research over the last 50 years has involved dyadic (one individual to another specific individual) relationships between a leader and a follower. Within this context, he goes on to look at a number of follower-based theories including: leader-member exchange (LMX), leader attributions about subordinates, follower attributes and implicit theories, follower contributions to effective leadership, and social learning theory (self-management). All of this emphasises the importance of the follower role to a leader. Within the 10 guidelines the author proposes for ecoming an effective follower, he suggests specific phrases which might be used in a given situation; for example, in a situation where a follower might disagree with a proposed action by a leader: “You know I respect what you are trying to accomplish, and I hope you won’t mind if I express some honest concerns about this proposal”. Yukl states at three points within the text that “influence is the essence of leadership”. This is covered in Chapter 6, which concerns power and influence. Here different types of power are studied, though the focus is on the French and Raven taxonomy of five types of power: reward, coercive, legitimate, expert and referent. Guidelines are proposed for using legitimate authority, reward authority and coercive power. Yukl even describes the tone of voice a leader might use, which (along with his suggested phrases) could be perceived by the reader as prescriptive.
Power, influence, contingency theories, traits and skills
How power is won or lost, and how much power a leader should have, are also discussed, as are the traits and skills approach to leadership in Chapter 7. Possibly the most researched area of leadership is the traits approach, and here the findings of the most relevant aspects of personality for effective leadership are summarised and integrated, including the “big five” personality traits (surgency, conscientiousness, agreeableness, adjustment and intelligence). Personality traits are considered especially relevant to successful leadership, and those highlighted as the most pertinent include energy levels and stress tolerance, self-confidence, internal control orientation, emotional maturity and integrity. The study of a number of theories is also applied in Chapter 8, which considers how leader traits or behaviours are related to indicators of leadership effectiveness in different situations. Five principal contingency theories are summarised and reviewed. The research findings and methodologies are examined, and models, tables and guidelines for their application enhance the chapter. There is much use of psychology and sociology in many of the research studies.
The five contingency theories are: Fiedler’s least-preferred co-worker (LPC) theory, Evans’s path-goal theory, Kerr and Jermier’s leadership substitutes theory, multiple-linkage models (leadership and group effectiveness), and Fiedler et al’s cognitive resources theory. In his general evaluation of the theories, Yukl criticises the research for being lacking in measures and weak on research design. He also comments that “most managers are too busy in any situation to stop and analyse it with a model”. However, they do provide sufficient guidance to help a manager identify leadership requirements. Along with the study of traits, behaviours and contingency approaches, much of the research of the last 50 years has focussed on the study of “heroic” leaders. Chapter 9 covers this when considering charismatic and transformational leadership. Researchers have used the terms ‘charismatic’ and ‘transformational’ interchangeably. However, Yukl describes them as distinct but overlapping terms. Again, the major heories are evaluated and guidelines proposed. In summary, harismatic leaders are deemed to have a tremendous influence on organisations, but they may be negative as well as positive. Transformational leaders make followers aware of the importance and value of the work as well as encouraging them to think beyond self-interest. These theories are, however, largely based on a dyadic level of analysis.
Change
One of the most important and difficult leadership responsibilities is leading change. Chapter 10 discusses the change processes, and places an emphasis on cultural change. The creation and establishment of a clear and compelling vision is useful to guide the organisation through change, and the pre-requisite set of guidelines is included for formulating a vision. Guidelines are also proffered for implementing change for political or organisational or people-oriented actions. Throughout the change process, the role of the leader is key.
Teamwork
Teamwork, group decisions and leadership by executives are considered in Chapters 11 and 12. The use of teams and decision groups in organisations is a growing phenomenon. The leadership required for building and facilitating team learning and decision-making are considered. Yukl describes and discusses the merits of functional teams, cross-functional teams, self-managed work teams (semi-autonomous work groups), self-defining teams and virtual teams. Guidelines propose effective team building to increase ohesiveness, mutual cooperation, and identification with the group. They also put forward leader-centred and groupcentred approaches for leading meetings.
Research into leadership from the 1950s until the 1980s was mostly concerned with middle managers. Theorists turned their attention to top managers from the 1980s, but there is controversy in leadership literature regarding whether executives have much impact on the effectiveness of an organisation. Chapter 12 looks at strategic leadership and top management, and considers external and internal constraints, the degree of discretion a leader has, the bias of attributions and the effectiveness of executive teams. Research shows that chief executives have most impact in a crisis, and the monitoring of the environment by executives is considered essential in the formulation of organisational strategy.
Leadership development
Chapter 13 reviews leadership development and the key facilitating conditions for it. Three forms of leadership development are identified: formal training, developmental activities and self-help activities. Leadership training programmes are discussed, as are the design of the courses, many of which concentrate on a particular theory, for example leader-member exchange (LMX). The author points out the much-vaunted statement that effective skills for leadership are mostly learned from experience and not from training programmes. With this in mind, work-based developmental activities are considered, and the presence of a strong learning culture in an organisation goes a long way to supporting leadership development.
Ethical leadership and diversity
The penultimate chapter covers ethical leadership and diversity. Again, “influence as the essence of leadership” is quoted, as is Gini: “The issue is not whether leaders will use power, but will they use it wisely and well”. Thus, ethical leadership encourages ethical behaviour as well as initiating efforts to stop unethical practices. Sex-based discrimination in the selection and promotion of leaders continues to be a problem in organisations. Research in this area is limited, as it is in leadership in different cultures. The bulk of the research comes from the United States, Canada and Western Europe. It is acknowledged here that, with the rapid pace of globalisation, cross-cultural leadership is an important topic for research. We are introduced to the GLOBE project, which is taking steps in this direction, studying leadership in 62 countries representing all major regions of the world. The project is ongoing and involves 170 social scientists and management scholars.
Conclusion
The book concludes with an overview and integration in Chapter 15. The major findings in leadership are summarised. Controversies about research are considered, and summarised as relying too much on weak research methods. Most theories involve a prediction model identifying traits, skills and behaviours and fitting these into the leadership process, which, in turn, involves criteria and situation variables. Yukl suggests that what is missing are the mediating variables necessary to explain leadership influence on individuals, group processes and organisational effectiveness. Yukl finishes with a list of 10 of the most important leadership functions for enhancing collective work in teams and organisations.
Discussion
Leadership in Organizations concerns itself with looking at the complex field of research in the field of leadership in large organisations. This is a well researched and well thought-out text, and anyone with a serious interest in the subject would benefit from having read the book. The format provides a clear understanding of the learning requirements, with the case studies and questions at the end of every chapter stimulating the reader into asking yet more questions, thus creating a greater awareness of leadership in a management context. Gary Yukl provides a comprehensive review of techniques, citing examples and guidelines throughout. Though some might find the style over-directive, others will benefit from the clear path that Yukl points up.
Reference:
http://www.ncsl.org.uk/media/F7B/97/randd-leaders-business-yukl.pdf
2. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
Effective Leadership Through Emotional
Maturity
By Linda Hyatt, Ph. D., Blaine Hyatt, Me. D, James C. Hyatt, Ph. D.
Candidate
Jul 31, 2007 - 11:09:00 AM
Abstract
This article addresses successful leadership, emotional intelligence, and emotional maturity and their impact on society. To merely hold the position of a leader does not make one a leader. Success is largely an individualistic interpretation of personal increase or satisfaction, whether physical, emotional, or psychological. One’s perception of success is influenced by the social contexts around the individual. A successful leader must possess certain characteristics and have the ability to transform those characteristics into action. A person may understand, believe, and accept proper leadership techniques; however, if one is not able to implement those techniques the leadership would be flawed and the proper leadership model would break down under adverse conditions. Two basic factors contribute to one’s ability or inability to implement proper leadership techniques: first, emotional intelligence, the cognitive understanding and acceptance of basic leadership principles, and second, the ability to implement those principles, emotional maturity. An individual may possess one without the other yet their ability to be a successful leader will be inhibited.
Introduction
What makes a leader successful? This question has been asked throughout the ages; before one attempt to understand what makes a leader successful, one must first have a full comprehension of what constitutes success and what constitutes a leader. To merely hold the position of a leader does not make one a leader. Success is largely an individualistic interpretation of personal increase or satisfaction, whether physical, emotional, or psychological. One’s perception of success is influenced by the social contexts around the individual. A successful leader must possess certain characteristics and have the ability to transform those characteristics into action. A person may understand, believe, and accept proper leadership techniques; however, if one is not able to implement those techniques the leadership would be flawed and the proper leadership model would break down under adverse conditions. Two basic factors contribute to one’s ability or inability to implement proper leadership techniques: first, emotional intelligence, the cognitive understanding and acceptance of basic leadership principles, and second, the ability to implement those principles, emotional maturity. An individual may possess one without the other yet their ability to be a successful leader will be inhibited.
Successful Leadership
Success is often defined by society in terms of social position, income, academic achievement, honors, relationships, etc. However, success is also individualistic and influenced by one’s sociocultural and socioeconomic status. Individuals achieving success is dependent upon them capitalizing on strengths and overcoming or correcting, in some way, their weaknesses. Individuals measure success based upon their established goals and ideals. Success is achieved through an individual’s ability to meet those goals and ideals. In this way, success can be viewed individually and socially. An individual may be socially successful and yet fall short of individual success, and others may view themselves as individually successful while society may not view them as successful. For the purposes of this examination of successful leadership, this article will primarily focus on the social perceptions of successful leadership skills.
Leadership is often viewed by society as a position held by an individual, for instance an administrator, dean, CEO, executive, manager, and one would assume that those filling such positions would possess leadership skills. However, this is a faulty perception of what a leader is. Simply establishing a position and title and being given the responsibilities of a leader does not make one a leader. It is true that those in leadership positions should possess the skills of a leader, but the skills needed for successful leadership are not automatic or guaranteed by holding a certain position. Within any organization, there are those who hold the official position of leadership and have the authority by right of position to lead. However, because of their lack of leadership characteristics, either understanding (i.e., they simply do not know and possess sufficient knowledge of proper leadership skills) or if they possess knowledge and leadership skills they may lack the ability to effectively implement them.
When this occurs, the overall effectiveness of the organization will be flawed or break down and the organization will fail to function as effectively as it should and may often create a negative environment. In such cases, that individual may continue to hold the position of leadership. However, in reality, these individuals may not be the actual leaders, as there may be individuals within the rank and file of the organization who do not hold the position, yet due to the leadership skills they possess, they become the leader and wield greater influence with their peers than do those in official leadership positions. Successful leadership is not the result of simply obtaining a position, but rather possessing the knowledge and understanding of successful leadership skills along with the personal ability to effectively implement those skills.
For organizations to succeed in today’s global society, it is necessary that they maintain a strategic advantage. Strategic advantage applies to all organizations whether they are a worldwide organization, family based business, university, a school district, a school within the district, etc.; every organization needs to be aware of and work toward gaining a strategic advantage. To obtain and maintain a strategic advantage, organizations must motivate and encourage their employees (including members, volunteers, etc.) to seek to implement change. Leadership plays an integral part in organizational change, having a great impact on the employees’ perceptions of change. By nature, all human beings resist change. This nature is carried into the workplace as employees, in general, will also resist change. In order for leaders to be successful, they must be able to implement a high level of leadership skills which lead to effective interpersonal relationships with the employees. This creates a plastic environment wherein employees feel safe and are willing to risk the changes requested. As a symphony requires a conductor to direct its various sections and ensure that each section plays its part, change within an organization requires a leader to direct and assist in the transition. Change that occurs as a random event may not produce positive outcomes.
Two factors influencing leadership skills
Successful leaders are often perceived as having superior intellect. However, it is difficult to account for individuals (e.g., former president George Bush) who are perceived as successful leaders, but did not have exceptionally high scores on their Scholastic Aptitude Test (SATs). Incidents such as this make it difficult to use conventional perceptions of intelligence (i.e., I.Q.) to predict success as a leader. Intelligence is perceived as a generalized ability to adapt to one’s environment. The intelligence aspect of a successful leader needs to be understood in terms of one’s ability to capitalize on one’s strengths and correct or compensate for weaknesses (Sternberg 2003). Certain leadership skills influence an organization’s success in implementing change in a positive manner. In today’s fast paced society, organizations must maintain a healthy level of constant change in order to stay competitive. However, many organizations fail to successfully implement positive change programs.
Seventy percent of change programs fail because of lack of strategy and vision, lack of communication and trust, lack of top management commitment, lack of resources, lack of change management skills, resistance to change etc. Research dealing with organizational change has mainly focused on organizational factors neglecting the person-oriented issues. (Vakola, Tsaousis, and Nikolaou 2004, 88)
Two particular factors influence one’s leadership skills: emotional intelligence (EI) and, more particularly, emotional maturity (EM). The emotional aspect of effective leadership has received a great deal of attention over the past few decades. As traditional methods (i.e., IQ and traditional views of intelligence) of gauging potential for success were found to be inadequate, researchers began studying emotional intelligence. “Emotional intelligence is the ability to perceive emotions; to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth” (emotional what?). Qualities of EI include: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills (Goleman 1998). Goleman’s research indicates that in the hierarchy of skills and abilities, traditional views of intelligence constitute a stepping stone, upon which one must build with emotional intelligence in order to be truly successful. Studies have shown that individuals with high levels of EI were more effective in performing their tasks. “For 515 senior executives analyzed by the search firm Egon Zehnder International, those who were primarily strong in emotional intelligence were more likely to succeed than those who were strongest in either relevant previous experience or IQ. In other words, emotional intelligence was a better predictor of success than either relevant previous experience or high IQ. . . .The study included executives in Latin America, Germany, and Japan, and the results were almost identical in all three cultures” (Cherniss and Goleman 1998).
EI is an integral component in successful leadership, yet, in and of itself, it is incomplete. In a complete view of a successful leader one must address EM. As with any words, the words emotional and maturity are ambiguous having no meaning except the meaning which individuals attach to them. Theorists have expressed interest in EM and have sought to define it; however, these definitions are insufficient and simply define components of EI. According to Hyatt, Hyatt, and Hyatt (2007), EI is like water behind a dam, having potential energy. EI is knowledge and understanding which has little or no value until it is properly released and utilized, whereas EM is the willingness and ability to utilize and apply the knowledge and understanding in an appropriate and productive way. One’s emotional facets include the knowledge, ability, and the desire. EI constitutes the knowledge, while EM constitutes the ability and desire or willingness to act upon one’s knowledge. The definition of EM, according to Hyatt, Hyatt, and Hyatt is, “The understanding and acceptance of all of one’s normal feelings and emotions and the appropriate response to those emotions in all circumstances. The understanding of one’s own paradigm and the awareness that this may not be totally accurate or complete. The willingness to expand and enlarge one’s paradigm with the acquisition of new information while recognizing and accepting differences in others as assets to be valued.”
The ability of leaders to implement successful leadership skills is a result of their behavioral response to a situation. Behavior consists of feelings, actions, and thoughts, which is in direct correlation to one’s degree of EM. Therefore, EM is perhaps the most important attribute which an individual can possess to ensure success. One’s behavioral response to any situation is a product of one’s mental script. Our mental script, whether at a conscious or subconscious level is the way we view ourselves, others, our relationship to others and our environment, and all that is around us. This script has been developed over our life as life experiences have played out from birth. Just as a blank tape accepts the information that is available and records that information, our mind accepts and records information from our environment, according to our perception, and over the years this develops into our mental script which becomes responsible for our behavior. The goal of developing EM is to re-write the mental script in a way which will produce positive, productive behaviors.
The obstacles, according to Hyatt, Hyatt, and Hyatt (2007), which interfere with rewriting our mental script and heightening our degree of EM have been identified as: trashcans, bricks, negative self-validation behaviors, and negative habit patterns. Trashcans and bricks refer to the baggage we carry with us from past experiences and the emotions associated with them, whether conscious or subconscious, that interfere with the ability to acquire and utilize new information, make nonbiased and unemotional interpretations of that information, and apply it appropriately in one’s present life. Trashcans refer more specifically to our response to things that have occurred in our life which, at the time it occurred, the response was appropriate, but is no longer necessary. Bricks, on the other hand, refer to ongoing issues in our lives which we do not deal with appropriately and, therefore, they continue to affect our present behavior responses. Negative self-validation behaviors refer to feeling justified in the way we behave. We feel justified, that we have a right to feel, act, or think in the way we do. Therefore, because we have a right we perpetuate the behavior by continually finding ways to justify it. This continues to be entrenched in the mental script, impeding our self-objectivity in self-evaluation.
Everyone has patterns of behavior which are nothing more or less than habits which have been developed and continued over a process of time. Although some of these patterns may be positive, other patterns are negative and lead to inappropriate behavioral responses. These habits are developed in many ways as we progress through life. Through observation we see others behaving in a certain way in a given circumstance and we begin to parrot their behavior. Some habits are picked up by accident; we simply start behaving in a certain way. Without logical reason or emotional basis, we simply pick up certain behaviors which become habitual. Over time, these habits become more deeply embedded in our behavioral responses and inhibit our ability to respond in an appropriate manner.
In order to be successful, leaders must have a high degree of EM. Most leaders may know what needs to be done and how they should interact with those around them. However, the reason they do not execute this knowledge is lack of EM. One of the authors worked with a school administrator who, after attending a summer seminar, had the knowledge, the understanding, and the desire to implement positive leadership strategies in order to improve the atmosphere, the success, and interactions in the school. At the beginning of the school year, he announced his intention and desire to implement these positive changes in the school. He was successful at moving forward with making these positive changes for about two weeks. However, in order to do so, it was necessary for him to stay consciously focused, as his degree of EM was not sufficient to implement these changes automatically. Under stress and constant pressures, he was not able to consciously stay focused and reverted back to his previous management styles. Despite having the EI (i.e., the knowledge, understanding, and even the desire) he did not have the EM (i.e., the ability) to see the changes through.
This school administrator was not able to rewrite his mental script and change the way his subconscious mind interpreted and perceived his experiences. The subconscious mind is the place our self-concept (e.g., our beliefs about ourselves, others, and our environment) is stored. The information stored is based upon our interpretation of our experiences. Our interpretation is tinted by our trashcans, bricks, negative self-validation behaviors, and negative habit patterns. It becomes the mental script from which we operate. This mental script influences and dictates the way we think, feel, and act on a conscious level. Mental script equals behavior and behavior consists of feelings, actions, and thoughts. If behavior is to be changed, EM must be developed. In order for EM to develop, the mental script must be rewritten. The treatment of any problem is based on our explanation of the problem. The wrong explanation equals the wrong treatment. A faulty mental script equals the wrong explanation and, consequently, the wrong treatment. A faulty mental script equates to lack of EM, which affects all aspects of life.
The development of EM has far reaching effects. As leaders improve their degree of EM, it has a two-fold effect on society. First, as leaders model a high degree of EM, they will assist those working around them in improving their degree of EM. This impact on individuals will ripple out into the lives of those individuals. As individuals improve their lives through the development of EM, they will have a positive impact on the society around them. Second, leaders with a high degree of EM will be more capable of implementing positive organizational change, rippling up through organizational change and positively effecting social change. benefit from the clear path that Yukl points up.
Reference:
Academic Leadership Effective Leadership Through Emotional Maturity
3. The Focus of Leadership: Choosing Service Over
Self-Interest
By: Michael McKinney
From: LeadershipNow.com
American newspaper commentator Walter Lippmann defined leaders as "the custodians of a nation's ideals, the beliefs it cherishes, of its permanent hopes, of the faith which makes a nation out of a mere aggregation of individuals."
Custodians. The word means a keeper, a guardian, or a caretaker. It is a proactive word that implies action on the part of the bearer. Custodians hold something in trust on behalf of others. It is not a behavior motivated out of self-interest.
A custodian then, is an individual who upholds what is best for all people even if it may not be in their own interest to do so. A custodial role must be approached as a temporary role, preserving something greater than the self—principles of enduring and lasting value. This is an attitude of mind that focuses on the task at hand and not on what the leader may gain from the position. It implies a caring and concerned relationship between leaders and followers; individuals motivated by their constituents' best interests.
This idea seems at odds with what we see happening around us today. In all too many arenas, we see many of our leaders holding nothing in trust for those they purport to serve but advancing only their own ideals and hopes.Today, it is often difficult to tell if our leaders are serving themselves or us. And it is all too common to find leaders simply helping themselves to privilege and power. Mismanagement, deceit, greed, and frying-pan-into-the-fire problem solving all beg the question, "Where are our leaders leading?" "To whom can we look to for the direction we need?" Is Lippmann's statement merely an idealistic, unrealizable dream?
CHOOSING SERVICE OVER SELF-INTEREST
Throughout time, leaders who have exhibited the proper kind of custodianship—leaders who have sought service over self-interest—have been held in high regard. We gladly look to them for direction and guidance in times of indecision, turmoil and trouble.
One such custodian stood out in the Fifth century BC. The Roman army was surrounded. The country was in need of a leader who would seize the moment and turn the situation defeat into victory. They called upon a man who was out plowing his field, a farmer. He came. He saw. He conquered. He went home. Cincinnatus gained fame for his selfless devotion to his country. This half-legendary hero of the Roman Republic gave his all in a time of crisis and then gave up the reins of power when the task was done and went back to his plow.
In more modern times, America's first President, George Washington, considered "the Father of his Country," provides a paramount example of this same kind of custodial leadership that Lippmann espoused.
Washington was an aristocratic gentleman farmer of distinctive character. When called upon to defend the interests of a fledgling nation as Commander in Chief of the Revolutionary Army during the American War of Independence, he rose to the challenge and persevered against all odds. Then, after eight and a half years of being the most powerful man in America, he resigned his commission and returned to his agricultural pursuits.
Not surprisingly, he became the reluctant, yet automatic and unanimous choice for the first president of the United States. He served two terms. His final and perhaps greatest act of service to his country was that like Cincinnatus, who he had often been compared to by his contemporaries, he stopped serving and retired back to his Mount Vernon estate in Virginia.
Washington is remembered for his strength of character and discipline, his loyal patriotism, his principled leadership and selfless devotion to public duty. He held in trust for the American people the very values and beliefs that made their nation possible without regard for his own gain.
In reality, true leadership is and has always been a selfless action. It involves taking yourself out of the picture and considering the needs of others. It is a way of thinking that takes other people into account even when your own needs are pressing. It asks what is right or best in the wider interest. Few would doubt the need for more leaders like Cincinnatus and George Washington today. Leaders who will complete the job they were asked to do without regard for themselves; leaders who will lead and not merely register the popular will of the people. Yet it would be difficult to build a consensus as to how a leader might do that; how a leader might be a custodian of or hold in trust a nation's or a groups values and beliefs.
How might we answer this question in a world that has seemingly grown unmanageable? Today our world is faced with serious, even life-threatening problems of a global nature. Where will we find the wisdom necessary that might be applied to modern civilization's most pressing dilemmas?
LEADERSHIP IS EVERYONE'S BUSINESS
Clearly, leadership is an issue that affects all of us. Not only are we impacted by it, but also, we are all called upon to exercise it. Whether we are called upon to be involved in leading government or business, guiding young minds, leading a family, standing for what is right, or organizing a dinner, a carpool, or a household, everyone has a leadership role to play. We are each thrust into many different leadership roles again and again, throughout our lives. We are each called upon to be custodians of what is right and good, lasting and of value, for those in our care.
Surprisingly, this idea of custodianship even runs through the writings of the Renaissance writer often thought to be one of the most cynical yet most observant political thinkers of all time, Niccolò Machiavelli. Machiavelli insisted that leadership was virtuous only if the good of the community was sought out and achieved above all else. A good leader, in other words, was a steward of the community.
When we are called upon to lead, what kind of custodian we will be depends greatly on what we understand a custodian to be, on how we think about other people, and on how we determine what is right and worth holding in trust.
The word custodian as we are applying it here is the same as the word steward that we find in the pages of the Bible and used throughout history. A custodian or steward performs the task of watching over that which is placed in their trust by the one who owns it or for those who will benefit by it. It is a service performed for others. It is not about ownership or control. It is not a technique. It is who the leader is. It is an attitude—a state of being—a way of looking at the world. But it is not the passive, hands-off leadership that some have attributed to this way of thinking. It is a component of leadership that leaders were not intended to function without.
In the context of what Mr. Lippmann is talking about, it means not only maintaining the vision of and faith in those ideals, beliefs and hopes but, living those values as a model and example for others to follow. It means raising the sights and holding the focus of those we lead such that they are empowered to reach their potentials. It means enabling people by getting the roadblocks out of their way and often out of their thinking. To do this, of course, the leader must grasp the larger picture at all times and hold the course for the benefit of all.
UNDERSTANDING SERVANT LEADERSHIP
In the widening chasm between what we want and expect from our leaders and what we are getting, it seems only natural to take a hard look at leadership itself. And many do. Finding the leadership we see around us lacking, our traditional views of leadership might seem to be archaic. Out of what can only be frustration, we often find many traditional ideas tossed out for new and myopic ideas of what leadership is all about. Due to real and perceived problems with what we have seen leaders doing, the faults of the old views seem sufficient to float the new. The self-serving nature of many of the leaders we have looked to in the past, have led some to call for more passive, follower-driven leadership.
One such version has called for replacing leadership with a concept called "stewardship." Although this might look at first blush to be what Mr. Lippmann was referring to, it is not. Neither does it refer to the biblical concept. Stewardship cannot replace leadership because indeed it is an integral part of it.
This nouveau-stewardship, as we will refer to it here, has as a guiding principle, the belief that others have the knowledge and the answers within themselves. As such, there is no need to manage other adults. No need to teach others how to think, behave or conduct themselves. While this sounds very appealing, democratic, liberating and almost mystically primal, it is naïve. We know from experience that people do not always act in their own best interest.
All of this might sound arrogant to an age that has placed in higher esteem personal knowledge over external guidance. As the structures and institutions that have traditionally provided us with external guidance are dissolving—the family, schools and religion—the desire to believe that we are our own best source of wisdom and will act in our own best interest, is strong. Theoretically, it would seem to make sense. Practically, it has never worked in any sustainable way. Human studies have shown that we all take our cues not from the realities of the environment, but from our own biases, desires, perceptions, and distractions. A function of leadership then, should be to help followers create a more accurate and constructive view of reality by painting the larger picture.
WHAT IS STEWARDSHIP?
The nouveau-stewardship model is based on a myth that leadership—where direction, vision and guidance comes from the top of an organization—creates a dependency on the part of the followers and removes personal responsibility and satisfaction. But does it really?
When the concept of nouveau-stewardship is presented, it most often claims to have roots in the Bible. Perhaps so. But then proponents of this nouveau-stewardship go off on a tangent that the Bible never intended. When the concept of stewardship is first presented in the Bible, in Genesis 1 and 2, Adam was instructed to "dress and keep" the physical creation God had made. Not a passive hands-off approach. Adam was to apply God's Laws and thinking to the physical realm he created. Adam was expected to do something. In living with it, he was to make changes in accordance with higher laws and thinking other than his own.
In the same way, when we are given any other leadership responsibility, we are responsible for maintaining a set of standards that is line with higher laws. Again, we are not to impose our own thinking, wants and desires on those we lead, but to apply those standards that are the best for the whole as authored by God. Naturally, this is implemented with respect for and two-way communication with those the leaders serve.
True leadership, not to be confused with dictatorship, does not take away an individual's freedom, choice, accountability, or responsibility. Just as the leader is to be serving and taking into account the ideas and needs of those they lead, those following that lead are to be doing the same thing. In doing so, they, along with the leader, practice self-restraint, develop character, integrate discipline, and practice love and respect for other people. This creates a kind of self-leadership at all levels of the group. It promotes a self-leadership environment where all are empowered and working toward the good of the whole because it is in the best interest of all.
Daniel Goldman, author of Emotional Intelligence, refers to this kind of concern for others feelings, ideas and opinions, as empathy. But, he cautions in a Harvard Business Review article, that "empathy doesn't mean a kind of 'I'm okay, you're okay' mushiness. For a leader, that is, it doesn't mean adopting other people's emotions as one's own and trying to please everybody. That would be a nightmare—it would make action impossible. Rather empathy means thoughtfully considering employees' feelings—in the process of making intelligent decisions." In other words, true stewardship or custodianship means taking others' ideas and feelings into account while holding in trust—keeping as boundaries or guardrails—the groups ideal's, beliefs and hopes. Ironically, an attitude of service keeps the leader aware of other's needs while in turn enabling them to become better leaders.
The nouveau-stewardship model sounds right on the surface, but it plays out more like a defense mechanism than a constructive method to get leadership thinking back on track. As Mr. Lippmann correctly defines, leadership is truly about choosing service over self-interest. Leadership properly performed is not a consensus-building exercise but an exercise in outgoing concern for others including defining and setting boundaries as needed.
LEADERSHIP'S FIRM FOUNDATION
What is critical to the leadership process and its success, is where those values come from that determine those boundaries. They can't come from a single individual. Nor can they come from the collective whole. Where do we get the ideals, the beliefs and the permanent hopes that Mr. Lippmann wrote of, that define the boundaries—those guides that mold and shape us?
George Washington believed that those values and boundaries came from God. In his first Inaugural Address he asserted that "we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained."
Again, our boundaries must come from something outside of ourselves. That something is God. An effective leader has an agenda designed to produce results, but is guided by a core of values that come from outside and not from within. This process is maintained by means of the leader's integrity or custodianship of those values.
Stressing the need for integrity to an outside core of values in the performance of proper leadership, John Adair, Visiting Professor of Leadership Studies at the University of Surrey and Exeter in England, states, "Although it is impossible to prove it, I believe that holding firmly to sovereign values outside yourself grows a wholeness of personality and moral strength of character. The person of integrity will always be tested. The first real test comes when the demands of the truth or good appears to conflict with your self-interest or prospects. Which do you choose?"
Perhaps it is time to apply those "eternal rules of order and right", those values, to the leadership roles we must perform and lives we do lead. Everyday activities are opportunities to demonstrate and illustrate the values and beliefs for which we must be custodians. Thus, the element of empowerment is introduced into our lives. Every person becomes in some sense a leader
Reference:
The Focus of Leadership | Service | Servant Leadership @ LeadershipNow
4. Managers Need To Be Good Leaders Too
By Dr. Ratna Purohit
Editor of
What do leaders really do? Are they managers or different from them? Let us know the underlying principle of that.
Leadership is different from management, but not for the reason most people think. Leadership is not mystical or mysterious. It has nothing to do with having “charisma” or other exotic personality traits. It is not the province of a chosen few.
Rather, leadership and management are two distinctive and complementary systems of action. Each has its own function and characteristic activities. Both are necessary for success in an increasingly complex and competitive business environment.
Most of today’s business environment is over-managed and under-led. It needs to develop its capacity to exercise leadership. Successful business does not wait for a leader to come along. They actively seek out people with leadership potential and expose them to develop that potential.
There are a few essentials to be taken care of while selecting a leader. They are, selection with care, nurturing them with sincerity and encouraging them with positive attitude. Every executive does not necessarily have good leading and managing capability. Some people have the capacity to become excellent managers but not strong leaders.
Others have great leadership potential but have great difficulty becoming strong managers. But when it comes to preparing people for executive jobs, the saying “people cannot manage and lead” is ignored. On the contrary, they try to develop a leader-manager. Once companies/organisations understand the fundamental difference between leadership and management, they begin to groom their top people to provide both.
The Difference
Management is about coping with complexity, whereas leadership is about coping with change. Managerial practices and procedures are responses to significant developments. Good management brings a degree of order and consistency to key dimensions like the quality and profitability of products to companies.
Leadership has become more important and viable in recent years of competition. Faster technological change, greater international competition, and deregulation of markets are some of the major factors that have contributed to this change.
The net result of success is only 5 to 10 percent and this is no longer a formula for success. Major changes are necessary to survive and compete effectively in this new environment.
These different functions – coping with complexity and coping with change-shape the characteristic activities of management and leadership. Each system of action involves: (1) deciding what needs to be done, (2) creating networks of people, and (3) relationships that can accomplish an agenda, and then trying to ensure that those people actually do the job. But each accomplishes these three tasks in different ways.
Organizations manage complexity first by planning and budgeting, setting targets or goals for future, establishing detailed steps for achieving those goals, and then allocating resources to accomplish those plans.
On the contrary, leading an organisation to constructive change begins by setting a direction, developing a vision of the future along with strategies for producing the changes needed to achieve that vision.
Management develops the capacity to achieve its plan by organizing and staffing-creating an organizational structure. It sets jobs for accomplishing plan requirement with qualified staff, communicating the plan to those people, and delegating responsibility for carrying out the plan, executing the plan, monitoring it and finally evaluating it. On the other hand, leadership aligns people.
It can be stated that, management ensures plan accomplishment by monitoring and leadership ensures right direction of people with motivation and inspiration.
A sincere effort toward these activities certainly helps organizations grow and develop.
We have to remember that strong leadership with weak management is no better, and is sometimes worse, than the reverse. The real challenge is to combine strong leadership and strong management and use each to balance the other.
DR. RATNA PUROHIT
[email protected]
© Copyright 2000 - 2007 The Hindu
Reference:
The Hindu : Opportunities / Miscellaneous : Managers need to be good leaders too
Some Great Leaders
NAME: ANIL AMBANI
AGE: 46
DESIGNATION: CMD
COMPANY: R-ADAG
He’s aggressive, brash and flamboyant and a recent India today poll ranks him as the #1 business icon among the Indian youth. With good reason;ever since he parted ways with elder brother Mukesh a little over a year ago, he has announced a spate of high profile projects in the energy, entertainment and communications spaces. Now the big picture –and the common thread running through these seemingly disparate random moves-is slowly become apparent. His DTH venture, which was recently cleared by the government, his telecom empire and his footprint in Bollywood will combine nicely into a giant, fully integrated communications and entertainment empire. In other words, he’s applying a Reliance business logic-of owing every link of the value chain-to the new Economy.He has also tied up with the state owned Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd(MTNL) to bid for telecom licences in Kenya, Bhutan and Morocco. And, for good measure, he has also won the bid for constructing the first phase of the Mumbai Metro Rail system. But that can only be a consolation prize for a man who had set his sights on mordernising the Delhi and Mumbai airports. He lost that bid allegedly for his friendship with a controversial UP politician and a Bollywood superstar. Ambani read the signals correctly and resigned his Rajya Sabha membership, which he’d won as an Independent supported by the Samajwadi Party.
People who know him say Ambani is very sharp, and an absolute whiz in finance and strategy (he planned and oversaw Reliance Industries’ 100 year bond issue) and following Dhirubhai Ambani’s death, regularly conducted the flagship’s AGMS-till the partition of the undivided Reliance Group-much in the style of his legendry father.while RIL has gone from strength to strength, Anil’s part of the group, now named R-ADAG, has still to prove that it can implement all the ambitious projects in the sectors mentioned above and in power. It’s going to be a trial by fire, and the world is waiting to see if Dhirubhai’s younger son is really a chip of the old clock.
Reference:
Business Today Magazine, October 8 2006, page no. 198
NAME: RATAN NAVAL TATA
AGE: 68
DESIGNATION: CHAIRMAN
COMPANY: TATA GROUP
Ratan Tata must be delighted man, virtually all his business are doing well. Tata steel has already emerged as a steel multinational. TCS was listed in 2004. and the recent agreement between Tata Motors and Fiat is the first between an Indain auto company and a global biggie where the former is not the junior partner. Clearly the Tata Group is at its most exciting phase: and the credit for this goes almost entirely to Tata’s vision. This architect from Cornell University joined the group in 1962 and maintained a relatively low profile till his 1991 appointment as Chairman of holding company Tata Sons. The Tata Group was then a loose federation of companies presided over by high profile, almost autonomous, satraps. Tata Sons had small stakes in many of the group’s crown jewels and there were serious concerns over whether the group would hold together. But Tata proved all the naysayers wrong. A very hands-on, tech-savvy business leader, he released that group needed a new paradigm to survive in post-reforms India. Consequently, he streamlined the sprawling empire into seven verticals: information systems and communications; engineering; materials; services; energy; consumer products and chemicals. He also assembled a crack team of professionals who helped him consolidate the group-exciting sectors that didn’t hold promise and entering new exciting new sectors like insurance, telecom and retail-and aggressively expand abroad. The Tatas have spend about $ I billion (Rs. 4,500 crore) on a series of global acquisitions and more are in the pipeline.
Insiders say Tata deligates responsibility rather well, despite his instinctive hands-on nature. The results are clearly visible: The stodgy Rs 14,000-crore he took over 15 years ago is now a cohesive, Rs 80,000-crore conglomerate and, arguably, the best known Indain MNC in the world. But Tata expects the group to emerge even higher. “More importantly, I hope the groups comes to be regarded as being best in India-best in the manner in which we operate, best in the products we deliver, and best in our value systems and ethics. Having said that, I hope that a 100 years from now, we will spread our wings far beyond India,” he said recently. That hope already being fulfilled.
Reference:
Business Today Magazine, Feb 12 2006, page no. 150
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Wikipedia Encyclopedia.
2.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Nine_Cs_of_Leadership/articleshow/2324924.cms
3.
Page not found - NCSL yukl.pdf
4.
Academic Leadership Effective Leadership Through Emotional Maturity
5.
The Focus of Leadership | Service | Servant Leadership @ LeadershipNow
6.
The Hindu : Opportunities / Miscellaneous : Managers need to be good leaders too
7. Business Today Magazine, October 8 2006, page no. 198
8. Business Today Magazine, Feb 12 2006, page no. 150
