Revisit your original definition of leadership from Module 1. Would you make any changes to your definition of leadership? In what ways have learning about these leadership theories informed your own view of leadership? What type of leader are you or do you aspire to be?
"My definition of leadership follows similarly to what has been discussed in the readings for this week. My personal definition of leadership is the ability for a leader to inspire followers towards not only achieving a goal, but for both parties to also improve and push each other to become better than they were before. Leadership is a personally invested process for a person that begins by being immersed in a cause or mission and being able to convey the same vision to others. Leaders are able to compel others to support and work towards a goal or cause because they are motivated enough to do so."
My initial definition of leadership was strikingly similar to the concept of transformational leadership. From what we learned in class, transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of influence that moves followers to accomplish more than what is expected of them (Northouse, 2016, p. 161). The particular aspects that I referred to is the idealized influence and inspirational motivation components for this concept. These two aspects are the top factors for this along with charisma. This type of leadership changes the morality and increases motivation of the follower, but both the leader and follower transforms for the better in a reciprocal manner. It represents the process aspect of leadership that is elevated from transactional leadership and focuses on the follower through the vision of the leader. This synergetic effect is one of the most profound influences of leadership that can be reached through transformational leadership--both subjects affect each other for the better.
"This helps to distinguish between the dichotomy between management and leadership through assigned leadership and emergent leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 8). For example, a person can be assigned a position in a company by being in-charge of a team, but may only have position power and not be necessarily inspiring or able to really improve their workers to become better. The boss in this case may be able to manage well and meet the deadlines as set out by the company, but does not transcend this on a personal level as leadership would."
The second paragraph that I followed my explanation of leadership with focused on the the difference between management and leadership. This goes back to one of the key lessons of this course that aimed at differentiating between the two. Sometimes, the two concepts can be perceived as being interchangeable when they are not. They have similarities, but fundamental differences. Leadership aims at influencing people and management aims at optimizing processes (e.g. planning, organizing, staffing). Leadership can have managerial aspects and managers can use leadership techniques, but the concepts for each can be analyzed separately from each other.
"One of the points that really resonates with me from Northouse (2016, p. 6) is that leadership is transformative and changes the mental capacity of both the leader and follower to accomplish something greater than expected. In a sense, both parties supports each others with the initial jolt given by the leader. Thus, to lead means to influence others in order to reach a goal that is driven by inspiration on a deeper level."
The third paragraph again reflects transformational leadership and spotlights the notion of change. Leaders without followers is void of the potential to have influence. Hence, the relationship between leader and follower acts as the social link where interactions can create significant societal or organizational progress. The way that this is done can be through a variety of means including Path Goal Theory, Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Authentic and Servant Leadership (Northouse, 2016).
"In the article by Zaleznik (1977, p. 70), the distinction between managers and leaders follows along this trend in that leaders take a personal and active attitude towards goals whereas a textbook manager can be more impersonal. This is only in the sense of a manager that only cares about reaching a goal without care for those who helped to reach the goal and at what cost. Managers can exist without having that sense of care for their workers. An experience that I have encountered that relates to this was when my boss would delegate work without much detail and then leave work early many times during the week whilst everyone else working overtime to cover for all of the tasks needing to be accomplished before the next day. This felt very impersonal and gave the impression that they did not care for the job and was just doing it for the money and that was it. They did not care for the actual mission nor the people which adversely affected morale and the reputation of that boss."
Going back to the leadership and management dichotomy, this paragraph delves deeper into the differences between the two. In the impersonal version of management, workers are not seen as 'followers' but as a disposable asset where no relationship exist other than the positional aspect of an organization. There is no emotional care that is needed or really necessary to conduct business as needed. This dry and detached depiction of management shows no leadership. Leadership can be void of care, or for that matter, ethics as well, but this would be considered coercion or domination instead.
"The transformational aspect of leadership is what separates a leader from a regular manager because it goes beyond the assigned leadership and goes as being emotionally and personally invested in the well-being of the individuals. A respectable leader cares about their subordinates on a level that goes beyond the mission. The leader is able to care so much that they are able to inspire their followers to push harder than ever before. This is something that the military does care about and it reflects on aspects of what Winston and Patterson (2006, p. 12-13) focuses on in terms of mental, spirituality, emotion, and physical energy. Leaders are able to transcend beyond reaching a goal, but can change individuals on a personal level to transform for the better through inspiration. That is what I would consider a leader."
My final paragraph reflects leadership by hinting at the servant, adaptive, and authentic concepts in relation to the transformational approach. I touch upon different methods without being able to distinguish between the theories. Ultimately, this class has brought a greater depth to what my understanding of leadership was after completing college, commissioning through AFROTC, and entering the workforce as an Officer in the USAF. I still agree with my initial definition and interpretation of leadership, but have a greater understanding between the different approaches and am able to separate the different approaches. The various perspectives that I have in regards to leadership now is more refined than ever before.
With my better understanding of organizational leadership, the type of leader that I aspire to be starts with continuing to harness my own natural inclination towards the servant leadership while understanding myself better through authentic leadership. I hope to be able to embody transformational leadership as I hone my interpersonal skills as a leader and continue to learn from my subordinates and colleagues as well. I am both a follower and a leader and have a lot of more developing to do as a person. There are many experiences I have yet to encounter that will test my abilities as a leader as I progress through my career and life itself. Leadership is a process and one that is ever evolving within ourselves whether we realize it or not.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
Winston, B.E. & Patterson, K. (2006). An integrative definition of leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(2), 6-66.
Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and leaders: Are they different?. Harvard Business Review, 55(3), 67-78.
No comments:
Post a Comment