Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
A leader is anyone who influences a group toward obtaining a particular result. It is not
dependant on title or formal authority. (elevos, paraphrased from Leaders, Bennis, and
Leadership Presence, Halpern & Lubar). An individual who is appointed to a managerial
position has the right to command and enforce obedience by virtue of the authority of his
position. However, he must possess adequate personal attributes to match his authority,
because authority is only potentially available to him. In the absence of sufficient
personal competence, a manager may be confronted by an emergent leader who can
challenge his role in the organization and reduce it to that of a figurehead. However, only
authority of position has the backing of formal sanctions. It follows that whoever wields
personal influence and power can legitimize this only by gaining a formal position in the
hierarchy, with commensurate authority.[10] Leadership can be defined as one's ability to
get others to willingly follow. Every organization needs leaders at every level.[11]
The simplest way to measure the effectiveness of leadership involves evaluating the size
of the following that the leader can muster. By this standard, Adolf Hitler became a very
effective leader for a period — even if through delusional promises and coercive
techniques. However, this approach may measure power rather than leadership. To
measure leadership more specifically, one may assess the extent of influence on the
followers, that is, the amount of leading. Within an organizational context this means
financially valuing productivity. Effective leaders generate higher productivity, lower
costs, and more opportunities than ineffective leaders. Effective leaders create results,
attain goal, realize vision, and other objectives more quickly and at a higher level of
quality than ineffective leaders.
Studies of leadership have suggested qualities that people often associate with leadership.
They include:
The approach of listing leadership qualities, often termed "trait theory of leadership",
assumes certain traits or characteristics will tend to lead to effective leadership. Although
trait theory has an intuitive appeal, difficulties may arise in proving its tenets, and
opponents frequently challenge this approach. The "strongest" versions of trait theory see
these "leadership characteristics" as innate, and accordingly labels some people as "born
leaders" due to their psychological makeup. On this reading of the theory, leadership
development involves identifying and measuring leadership qualities, screening potential
leaders from non-leaders, then training those with potential.
Twelve distinctions between a manager and a leader:
Blanchard and Hersey characterized leadership style in terms of the amount of direction
and support that the leader provides to their followers. They categorized all leadership
styles into four behavior types, which they named S1 to S4:
• System 1: Directing/Telling Leaders define the roles and tasks of the 'follower',
and supervise them closely. Decisions are made by the leader and announced, so
communication is largely one-way.
• System 2: Coaching/Selling Leaders still define roles and tasks, but seek ideas
and suggestions from the follower. Decisions remain the leader's prerogative, but
communication is much more two-way.
Of these, no one style is considered optimal or desired for all leaders to possess. Effective
leaders need to be flexible, and must adapt themselves according to the situation.
However, each leader tends to have a natural style, and in applying situational leadership
he must know his intrinsic style.