Leadership others to take a mutual decision for

Leadership
is the vision and action of mobilizing others to take a mutual decision for the
mutual benefits. In its simplest terms, leadership is an attempt to influence.
So anytime one tries to influence someone in a group of organisations, one is
attempting leadership. There is no one all-purpose magical solution for being
an effective leader. The only way to impact the performance of the other people
is through one’s own behaviour. Effective leadership depends upon what
behaviour one is using in a particular situation.

 

Thus,
leadership is not about how one behaves to a person as a leader, but how is one
affecting to that person in reference to a specific activity.  The idea is known as Situational leadership. Situational
leadership simply states that there is no one best leadership style for all
situations. The leadership style that is best for a particular situation
depends upon employee’s skill set and attitude. One need to match the leaders’
behaviour to the performance needs of the individual or the group. A good leader is required change his/her leadership style
according to the maturity level of its followers which could be described on
the basis of their “ability” and their “willingness”. Therefore, assessing a person’s performance
readiness i.e. the extent to which a follower demonstrates the ability and
willingness to accomplish a specific task becomes important. Because not all people
have overall performance readiness. It could be different strokes for different
people or different strokes for the same person, depending upon what a leader
is trying to get done and what performance readiness followers hold.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

Nevertheless,
till 1970s, several types and theories of leadership emphasized on transactional
nature of leadership which implied a leadership
style, in which leaders encourage agreement by followers through both rewards and punishments.
The organizations and
leaders in India, are generally masters of the transactional leadership. However,
transactional style has become a limitation or problem in the working of an
organization as it has limitations inherent in them. It is like working with
blinders on, focused on the task and discrete, and losing the larger context,
which is the context of transformation. The extrinsic motivators of survival:
reward and punishment- the transactional mode, work to the extent they work.
But, when there are more complex problems, more cerebral activity and problem
solving is needed, the survival motivation degrades the ability to engage
people at innovative and creative thinking in higher levels of engagement.

 

In
1970s, Transformational leadership emerged as an important concept. Transformational
leadership is about leaders’ behaviors that transform and inspire followers to
perform beyond expectations while transcending self-interest for the betterment
of the organization. It is the continuum and not necessary about either-or like
transactional leadership. Motivation from the transformational perspective is
when we step up to the higher level of functioning. There are three identified
drivers of this kind of motivation. One, core purpose i.e. why am I here,
what’s my legacy, what’s the core purpose of this business, how do I
contribute; when people are focused on purpose, they are focused in the
transformational realm which is the realm of significance and it allows them to
look at what they are doing in transactions in a new perspective and bring
innovative thinking to it. Two, transformation as a sense of mastery i.e. doing
what I am doing, working with someone or getting coached I get to be more and
do more; this perspective of being more in doing more feeds the energy and
enthusiasm enables and enhances transactions. Three, autonomy i.e. I have some
say and responsibility for my job, I have some freedom and autonomy with personal
mastery with purpose. This sense of significance drives one in the realm of
transformation.

 

Authentic leadership is another approach to
leadership that stresses on developing the leader’s legitimacy through honest
relationships with followers which value their input and are built on an
ethical foundation. It encourages openness in sharing information needed to
make decisions while accepting followers’ inputs. Authentic Leadership is about inclusiveness,
learning and sharing it, challenging followers but supporting them. Also,
developing and recognizing what other people do and what other people
contribute. Every person has its own and different characteristics,
therefore what ‘authentic’ means is difficult to describe. However, it could be
said that authentic leader is
the one who is suitable, transparent, role model, works in collaboration,
ambitious, operational and facilitator. Being self-aware, self-disciplined, consistent,
understanding goals, and having relational transparency could be counted as few
of the characteristics of an authentic leader. Generally, followers of authentic
leader stick with him/her and are loyal as they understand that their leader support
his/her people.

 

The
recent attempt within the domain of leadership could be observed, which tries
to understand leadership approaches from the behavioral as well as cognitive
perspective. Cognitive leadership is a broad range of approaches to leadership
emphasizing how leaders and followers think and process information. Another
idea is to develop shared or distributed leadership, where all team members collectively
lead each other instead of relying on a single/few people.  

 

Though the significance of leadership for an organization
to work effectively has always been emphasized, there is a group of people who
argues that the role of leadership has been romanticized. They claim that, more
than leadership style, an organization’s success is directed by other external
factors. Since the information of about these external factors is not explicitly
present, or people cannot figure out the reasons and nature of organizational actions,
the heroic views of leadership has been developed. People associate rise and
fall of an organization with the characteristics of their leader.