Making decisions in the midst of uncertainty has always been a part of leadership (Clark, 2020). Leaders usually make informed decisions, but they cannot be sure about the impact of that decision even if they have done in-depth research on the matter. For example, when my uncle, who is a head of a private equity firm, decided to invest in a local company that was making soaps, face masks, and sanitizers before the pandemic, he did not know that his investment would payback tenfold. Although he invested because research indicated that the company had a great potential to grow because consumer preferences in the area were shifting towards local products, he did not foresee the company’s revenues increasing tenfold during the pandemic. This Covid-19 pandemic will remain a significant event in the world of business because it disrupted the entire supply chain. According to Clark (2020), leaders faced an unprecedented level of uncertainty during the Covid-19 pandemic, and we can learn a lot about how leaders can better deal with pandemics in the future from studying how organizations successfully navigated this pandemic. Learning how to lead during a pandemic is important because studies predict that another pandemic will happen soon: it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when (GilChrist, 2022). As such, this blog will discuss why leaders should employ servant leadership during a pandemic based on leadership experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic.

What is servant leadership? According to Northouse (2021), putting followers first is what defines servant leadership. Instead of the leader prioritizing their needs or only those of the organization, a servant leader prioritizes the needs of all stakeholders, especially employees. The leader also helps his or her followers succeed and grow by empowering them. Many people would think that prioritizing the needs of the employees would be counteractive because it would significantly increase the organization’s expenses. As a result of this mentality, many organizations do not invest significant resources to meet the needs of their employees. I remember when we returned to work after the lockdown was lifted and regulations were relaxed, we asked our boss to provide us with face masks because we had noted that some employees were recycling masks as a way to save money. The manager refused our request, reminding us that the restaurant was already struggling with low revenues so he was not planning to increase the expenses. After two weeks, we had a Covid-19 outbreak in the restaurant, and we were forced to close down for 10 days because more than half the staff had been infected. After we reopened, we noticed that traffic flow to the restaurant had significantly reduced as customers were afraid of getting infected because they had heard the news of the outbreak even though the restaurant was fumigated. Had the manager prioritized our needs as required by servant leadership, we would have avoided the outbreak, but he failed to see the bigger picture. He did not understand that providing us with masks meant better health for us, which would translate to increased productivity and reduced absenteeism.

Contrary to popular belief, servant leadership is associated with improved organizational performance because followers go beyond their duties to help the organization grow (Northouse, 2021). Servant leadership makes employees feel valued because leadership is invested in helping them meet their professional and personal needs, subsequently employee productivity and performance greatly increases, increasing organizational performance. The Covid-19 pandemic made us realize the importance of employers supporting employees with their personal needs, particularly their mental health needs, because it highlighted how employee performance is impacted by factors that go beyond work (Mukhrejee & Krish, 2021).  The uncertainty caused by the pandemic negatively impacted the mental health of employees as uncertainty is usually associated with high distress levels (Northouse, 2021). As a result of this adverse impact, employee productivity and performance decreased, forcing employers to find innovative ways to support their employees with their mental health needs. For instance, my roommate’s employer set aside 1 hour on Fridays for group mindfulness classes. According to my roommate, employee productivity increased as everyone was willing to go above and beyond to meet their targets and goals. He usually came home late, but he did not complain at all because he felt that his manager valued his work. Therefore, leaders should employ servant leadership during a crisis to help meet their employees personal and professional needs because doing do is an investment rather than an expense.

However, employing servant leadership during a pandemic is not easy, and requires courage because the immediate benefits of prioritizing the needs of the society and employees may not be apparent. I am a big sports fan, and I remember the day that the commissioner of the National Basket Association (NBA), Adam Silver suspended the NBA league because it was among the first organization outside China to close down operations in an effort to curb the spread of the virus. Actually, this announcement was made the same day that the World Health Organization announced that the coronavirus was a pandemic. Many fans around the world were infuriated because we had not yet appreciated the severity of the virus. Most of us just thought of it as the “Chinese” virus and we did not think that it would cause lock-downs all over the globe in just a few weeks. However, after some days, people started questioning whether we were underestimating the severity of the pandemic because the NBA is known for its competitiveness, thus suspension of the league must mean that the situation was grave. As a result of this brave action from Silver, other sports organizations followed, with the Major League Baseball, National Hockey League, and NCAA college tournament suspended. Silver’s action is projected to have changed the course of the pandemic in the USA, avoiding the potential exposure of over one million fans at games (Kerrissey & Edmondson, 2020). It also improved the reputation of the NBA as we realized that the company cared a lot about the health of its players and fans, leading to a 12% increase in social media following in 2020 (Curcic, 2021). Although Silver’s decision was highly unpopular, people came to appreciate his bravery in prioritizing the needs of NBA’s stakeholders over company profits.

In sum, servant leadership has been associated with improved organizational performance, and it is particularly useful during pandemic because it prioritizes the needs of a followers. The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted the benefits that employers can gain from helping followers’ meet their personal needs and goals. We saw how employee performance can be impacted by personal matters, and how organizations that invested in their employees, like my roommate’s, benefited from enhanced employee productivity. Additionally, companies like the NBA that suspended their activities to protect their employees and clients from being exposed to the virus build their reputation as an ethical company. Therefore, leaders should be brave enough to employ servant leadership during a crisis because it is a win-win situation.

References

Curcic, D. (2021, November 5). NBA popularity stats. Athletic shoe reviews. https://runrepeat.com/nba-popularity

Clark, L. (2020, November 13). Leadership imperatives for success: Leading through uncertainty (1 of 3). Harvard Business Publishing. https://www.harvardbusiness.org/leadership-imperatives-for-success-leading-through-uncertainty-1-of-3/

Gilchrist, K. (2022, February 18). Bill Gates says Covid risks have ‘dramatically reduced’ but another pandemic is coming. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/18/bill-gates-covid-risks-have-reduced-but-another-pandemic-will-come.html

Kerrissey, M. J., & Edmondson, A. C. (2020, April 13). What good leadership looks like during this pandemic. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/04/what-good-leadership-looks-like-during-this-pandemic

Mukherjee, R. B., & Krish, A. (2021, October 4). 5 ways the COVID-19 pandemic is changing the role of leaders. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/10/5-ways-the-pandemic-is-changing-the-role-of-leaders/

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.

My blog post this week will focus on servant leadership, a concept I resonated with quite well as I was learning about it. As we have rightly learned, the term itself can be considered oxymoronic since leaders are not usually considered servants (PSU, WC, 2022, L11, p 1). Northouse (2021) describes servant leadership as a theory that considers leadership from the leader’s point of view, similar to the skills and behavioral approach we learned about earlier in our studies. It is a theory that insists that leaders should remain attentive to the concerns of their followers, be emphatic to their needs and nurture their growth (Northouse, 2021, p 348). I will illustrate how servant leadership works by recounting my experience visiting my uncle, who happened to be running for a local elective office in China.

Chinese elections are often imagined to be authoritarian affairs, but the people have a significant say in who represents them at the local level. My uncle happened to be running to be a member of the Local People’s Congress, a position that would make him accountable to the people of his locality. Right away, I noticed that my uncle employed unique leadership, and I have come to learn through this course that it can be termed servant leadership. He was a good listener, as indicated by the fact that he would never turn away one of his prospective constituents. He was empathetic to their plight, such as when he ensured that one woman’s sickly grandmother got the healthcare treatment she needed. Listening and empathy are some of the qualities that servant leadership theory promotes (Northouse, 2021, p 350).

Aside from possessing servant leadership attributes, my uncle also came from a cultural background emphasizing filial piety and service to others. Servant leadership does not spontaneously occur; it requires favorable conditions such as culture and leadership attributes (PSU, WC, 2022, L11, p 3). It is interesting because as Northouse (2021), countries with a low power distance, such as Sweden, have more common instances of servant leadership. China is a country considered to have a high-power distance, where decisions are made in a concentrated manner, and employees are not likely to question the decisions made by their superiors (Wei et al., 2017). My uncle was raised in an environment that promoted service to others despite this and was able to cultivate the necessary leadership skills.

My uncle also displayed a knack for problem-solving. Servant leaders often display the ability to put their followers first and to conceptualize solutions that have not been considered before (Northouse, 2021, p 359). An example of such thinking was when he designed a program to assist the local elderly population in becoming tech-savvy. He understood that the majority of these people were unfamiliar with the growing advancement of technology and would be left behind if they were not adequately trained on the basics of information technology. Such conduct showed that he was interested in empowering and adding value to his community, virtues essential in anyone considered a servant leader (Northouse, 2021, p 360). After learning about servant leadership, I called my uncle out of curiosity and asked him why he chose to lead in such a way despite it not being common in our country. He responded by saying that his major concern was the impact he would live behind and the growth of his followers. The response fit well with what I have learned about servant leadership’s goal, which is societal impact and nurturing followers (Northouse, 2021, p 361).

In conclusion, reading through the class materials and the chapter on servant leadership made me realize what an effort my uncle was making. Even though, as Northouse (2021) states, followers must be accommodating to servant leadership for it to work, which was not the case in his area, my uncle exhibited all the characteristics of a servant leader. He was empathetic, follower centered and could come up with solutions that no one else had thought about. In addition, his main interest was empowering his community and adding value to the most vulnerable people in society such as the elderly. It felt like it was a very fulfilling way to lead one’s community.

References

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2022). PSYCH 485 Section 001  Lesson 11Servant Leadership. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2181168/modules/items/35188631

Wei, C., Sun, X., Liu, J., Zhou, C., & Xue, G. (2017). High power distance enhances employees’ preference for likable managers: A resource dependency perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02066

 

Over the past few weeks, I have learned some valuable information about leadership skills. The most exciting part of this journey has been learning the different ways in which leaders are made. According to Northouse (2021), theories about leadership have shifted from the idea that leaders are born to the concept of how leadership develops. I am particularly interested in developing leadership within a group or team. A team has been described as an interdependent group working towards a common goal (Homan et al., 2020). Teams possess varying characteristics as they can be diverse in that they may meet face to face or virtual (Northouse, 2021). Thus, one can accurately state that leadership can be a shareable role where the leader is willing to share leadership responsibility amongst their group members (PSU, WC, 2022, L9, pg 8). I will describe my experience at a non-governmental organization that employed a leadership style unlike any other I had encountered.

Shared leadership became a reality for me when I volunteered at a non-governmental organization essentially concerned with providing computers to needy children in South America. The organization was structured in a way I had never encountered before. I had been previously used to organizations with a hierarchical setup, where the Managing Director was primarily responsible for directing the business and offering strategy. In essence, leadership would usually rest with him. In the NGO, the structure was different as a Board governed the organization. Such a structure is consistent with the theory of shared leadership, where the leadership responsibilities are shared amongst members (Wang et al., 2017). The Board consisted of 7 members who were well versed in different areas, indicated by the fact that some came from a finance background, human resource, technology, socio-political, and a community representative.

I was surprised to learn that the organization did not have a specific person designated as the chairperson. According to Northouse (2021), for shared leadership to be effective, there should be a structure supporting lateral decision-making rather than the traditional set up. This organization did just that, with the issues handled through what they referred to as the coordinator. The coordinator was chosen based on their knowledge of the matter at hand so for instance, when faced with a problem requiring financial acumen, the board member would serve as the coordinator. Such an arrangement is essential to shared leadership, where the team members are expected to step forward when necessary to lead the group and to have the ability to step back when a fellow team member is better placed to offer their wisdom (Northouse, 2021, p 534). The Board, once it had unanimously selected the coordinator for a major issue, would allow the coordinator to decide then whether they would like to be involved in a hands-on manner or monitor the team, which is an essential part of the theory of shared leadership (Northouse, 2021, p 541).

As I learned more about the team leadership theory, I retrospectively understood how the arrangement enabled the organization to succeed. According to Northouse (2021), team effectiveness is measurable by the ability of the team to accomplish a task and maintain such tasks. A primary job that came to the attention of the Board during my time there was a shipping crisis that made it impossible for us to supply computers to Ecuador in time for the launch of a computer lab at the particular school we had engaged. Despite being from a  human resource background, the team member who was known for possessing excellent negotiating skills was able to engage the stakeholders with the view of postponing the launch to ensure that all preparations were properly in place. Negotiating skills are vital within team leadership, as a leader is expected to be able to source information and contacts from different areas to ensure the team performs at its optimum level (PSU, WC, 2022, L9, pg 5). The human resource-focused board member was able to contact shippers and the school’s management to resolve the crisis.

The management of the crisis reflected the Team Effectiveness Leadership Model that Ginnett developed to enable teams to perform (PSU, WC, 2022, L9, pg 6). As earlier stated, the board members considered the input of every member when faced with a crisis, ensuring that a coordinator had the right capabilities to guide the team through the issue. The process is an integral part of the team leadership theory since members must clearly understand what the leader wishes to do (PSU, WC, 2022, L9, pg 6). The rules within the organization made it mandatory for the coordinator to delineate their points clearly before any course of action and to take into consideration the critical inputs of the team. Output is also a vital part of Ginnett’s models, where the leader is encouraged to consider output prior to action (PSU, WC, 2022, L9, pg 6). The output of any decision was extensively discussed amongst team members before any implementation.

In conclusion, I witnessed the impact of shared leadership first-hand at the non-governmental organization I worked. The benefits were clear. The team had a clear vision on what to do and the leadership can be described as collaborative. Members were also able to identify crises whenever they arose quickly, and the role of the coordinator enabled problems to be solved promptly. Leadership within the group was empowering, since each member felt as if they were responsible for the decisions of the organization. The flexible structure made it easy for members to utilize their key competencies, such as networking and financial acumen. One negative I noted was the over-reliance on a member who possessed multiple skills. However, the member was gracious enough to allow others to take charge of the decision making.

Homan, A. C., Gündemir, S., Buengeler, C., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2020). Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1101-1128. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000482

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE.

Wang, L., Jiang, W., Liu, Z., & Ma, X. (2017). Shared leadership and team effectiveness: The examination of LMX differentiation and servant leadership on the emergence and consequences of shared leadership. Human Performance, 30(4), 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2017.1345909

Wu, Q., & Cormican, K. (2021). Shared leadership and team effectiveness: An investigation of whether and when in engineering design teams. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.569198

What makes one leader effective and another one fail? Anyone who wants to be a leader has asked themselves this question at one point. The huge interest in this question has caused us to study leaders such as Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey, Mao Zedong, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. Similarly, numerous research articles have tried to research leadership styles that promote the success of leaders. According to Northouse (2021), leadership style refers to how a person behaves to be able to influence others to work together towards certain goals. The primary leadership behaviors that have been determined to be effective include directive, charismatic, supportive, and participative behaviors (Hwang et al., 2015). However, the studies are contradictory about which leadership behaviors are most effective. For example, the study by Fellows et al. (2003) reported that directive behaviors undermined leadership outcomes, while a Hwang et al. (2015) reported that directive behaviors enhanced leadership outcomes. Based on my experience and contradictory findings of studies on leadership behaviors, I will argue that there is no one size fits all when it comes to leadership, and leaders need to use the situational leadership theory (SLT) to adapt their leadership style based on the situation to enhance leadership outcomes.

Leadership does not exist in a vacuum, it is a process in which the leader, followers, outcomes, and context influence each other (Free Management Books, n.d.). The leader can give directives, but if the followers do not follow the directives then the set goals will not be achieved. On the other hand, if the directives are not appropriate, then the set goals will not be attained despite the followers implementing them. Therefore, leaders are just as important as followers when it comes to leadership (Northouse, 2021). However, each person, leader or follower, has unique traits, skills, competencies, and personalities, which can undermine the effectiveness of the leadership process if these differences are not accommodated (Fellows et al., 2003). While one employee may prefer autonomous work, another one may prefer structured work. Additionally, differences in context and outcomes influence the leadership process. Outcomes refer to the common goals that followers and leader want to achieve, while context refers to the task requirements and working conditions (Free Management Books, n.d.). An example of context being important in the leadership process is the current Ukraine crisis. The president, who is usually just expected to just give directives to the military during war, decided to join the military in the field because he felt that the situation necessitated it. This act of joining the war motivated many ordinary people to join the war, and motivated the troops. As such, these differences necessitate leaders to adapt their leadership style, and SLT provides a great framework that leaders can use to ensure that their leadership style fits the situation.

Leadership behaviors can be categorized as supportive behaviors and directive behaviors (Northouse, 2021). Directive behaviors refers to setting goals, defining roles, developing an action plan, evaluating outcomes, and giving directions. They usually involve the leader telling the followers what to do for them to achieve set goals. Supportive behaviors refer interactions between leaders and followers on a personal level, creating meaningful work relationships. Ukraine’s president joining the military in the field is an example of supportive leadership behaviors. According to SLT, leadership styles can be divided into delegating, supporting, coaching, and directing based on the level of supportive and directive behaviors exhibited by a leader as shown in the figure below (Northouse, 2021). Delegating involves the leader giving followers autonomy on how they want to complete a given task, giving little social support and goal input. Similarly, in a supporting approach, the followers have autonomy over their work, but the leader supports them by giving advice, feedback, and recognition. Coaching involves the leader offering both social support and goal input. Directing involves the leader giving comprehensive instructions on goal accomplishment, but without few supportive behaviors.

As you can see these leadership styles are different, thus the appropriateness of one style over the other depends on the followers’ development level. As such, leaders need to evaluate the development level of their followers to determine which style to use for them to be successful (Northouse, 2021). According to the SLT, the directing approach is suitable for followers who have little knowledge and expertise but are excited about to complete the task. The coaching approach suitable for followers who have some knowledge and expertise but are becoming demotivated. The supporting approach is appropriate for followers who are highly skilled but they are not very confident in their ability to complete the task. The delegating approach is for workers who are highly competent and committed to their job. An example of an industry where the delegating approach is widely used is the technology industry because workers in this industry tend to be highly skilled and have a high level of commitment.

I remember when I started my first internship, I was very excited when given assignment even though I did not know how to complete them. My manager explained the results that he expected and how he wanted to me to go about doing this work. I enjoyed these explicit instructions for a while because I felt that they enhanced my learning and made work easier. His leadership style could be described as directing because he told me how and what exactly to do (Northouse, 2021). However, after two months, I started despising being told exactly what and how to do something because I felt that I was not learning anything new. My motivation for work decreased as it was no longer challenging. When I talked to my manager about my demotivation with work, he did not seem interested in finding a solution to the problem. My manager failed to realize that I was developing as a follower, and he needed to change his leadership style because the directing approach was no longer working for me. I wanted to be able to use my newly acquired skills and knowledge to do tougher assignments. He should have changed from a directing approach to a coaching or supportive approach. As such, it is important for leaders to realize that their followers are growing, and then adapt their leadership style to the current developmental level of the follower for their leadership to be effective.

In addition to followers’ developmental level, leaders should also consider the context of leadership. One of the important aspects of context is the culture of the country in which the organization is operating in as different cultures have different preferences on leadership styles (Northouse, 2021). As more companies are becoming multinational, it is important for leaders to adapt their leadership behaviors based on the local culture. Leadership behaviors that worked for U.S. employees might fail while applied to Chinese employees even when their developmental level is the same. For example, a study by Hong et al. (2016) that compared the impact of leadership styles on affective organizational commitment among US employees versus Korean employees reported that directive leadership fosters organizational commitment among Korean employees but it had the opposite effect among their US counterparts. This difference can be attributed to the culture in the US being individualistic, as such employees value their autonomy. They also reported that supportive leadership had a positive impact in both countries. These findings were similar to those of the study by Dorfman et al. (1997) that established that the impact of directive leadership depends on the local culture present while that of supportive leadership was universal. As such, leaders need to consider the cultural values of their employees in deciding which leadership style to use.

Having worked both in China and America, I have experienced first hand how leadership styles in these two countries are different because of the difference in cultural values. When I worked in China, I saw how employees loved leaders who were high on both directing behaviors and supporting behaviors. Being a collectivistic culture, we value personal relationships the most, thus business is usually mixed with personal life. Therefore, Chinese leaders need to exhibit high supporting behaviors not only related to work matters but also personal matters to gain informal authority. Additionally, Confucianism values are the foundation of our culture, therefore obedience to leaders is highly valued. Followers expect their leaders to offer directives that are effective in achieving the organizational and personal outcomes, and they follow these directives to the letter. As such, leaders who are high on directing behaviors as well as supporting behaviors are successful in China. On the contrary, my colleagues and friends in the US love their autonomy, and do not appreciate being told how and what to do by their bosses. As such, I have had several friends and colleagues quit their jobs because they felt that their bosses are high on directing behaviors. I never heard of such a complaint when I was working in China because we do not mind following instructions. Therefore, adapting the leadership style to fit local cultural values is important in enhancing leadership outcomes.

In conclusion, there is no one leadership style appropriate to all situations because the leadership process is influenced by followers, context, and outcomes. Leaders need to be able to adapt their leadership style based on the specific situation. One tool that leaders can use to adapt their leadership is SLT. SLT describes which leadership behaviors are appropriate for a given goal based on followers’ developmental level. As such, leaders need to determine the developmental level of each of their follower so as to know which leadership style to apply. Leaders also have to realize that followers are constantly developing, therefore they need to regularly determine each follower’s developmental level so that they can adapt their leadership style as needed. Leaders can use employee feedback surveys and interviews to determine the developmental level of employees. Additionally, leaders need to consider the local cultural value when determining the leadership style to use because different cultures based on their values prefer some leadership behaviors over others. By adapting one’s leadership style to a given situation, then one can be an effective leader who meets the goals set.

References

Dorfman, P. W., Howell, J. P., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Tate, U., & Bautista, A. (1997). Leadership in western and Asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective leadership processes across cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(3), 233-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(97)90003-5

Fellows, R., Liu, A., & Fong, C. M. (2003). Leadership style and power relations in quantity surveying in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 21(8), 809-818. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000174521

Free Management Books. (n.d.). Dunham and pierce’s leadership process model. Free Management eBooks – Online Library. https://www.free-management-ebooks.com/faqld/leadtheory-03.htm

Hong, G., Cho, Y., Froese, F. J., & Shin, M. (2016). The effect of leadership styles, rank, and seniority on affective organizational commitment: A comparative study of U.S. and Korean employees. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/ccsm-03-2014-0034

Hwang, S. J., Quast, L. N., Center, B. A., Chung, C. N., Hahn, H., & Wohkittel, J. (2015). The impact of leadership behaviours on leaders’ perceived job performance across cultures: Comparing the role of charismatic, directive, participative, and supportive leadership behaviours in the U.S. and four Confucian Asian countries. Human Resource Development International, 18(3), 259-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2015.1036226

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.

 

 

 

 

 

What is leadership? This people have been asking for years, and hundreds of answers have been given to this question over the years. According to Daskal (2021), the definitions of leadership are as many as the number of leaders that we have. Daskal asserts that conducting a Google Search on the word “leadership” returns 479,000,000 results, which are all unique. So, why are we so obsessed with defining the word leadership? For me, the obsession with finding out the definition of leadership started from an early age because I believed leaders were unique and special people who made a change in the world. I wanted to know the definition of leadership so that I could know how to become one. As such, I read numerous articles on leadership, some explained leadership in terms of traits, behaviors, skills, competencies, and so on. I was not quite satisfied on these definitions because I felt that none of them really captured my perspective on leadership until I read Northouse book “Leadership Theory and Practice”.

According to Northouse (2018), leadership is a “process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p.43). This definition implies that leadership is made of four main components: 1. It is a process; 2. It involves influence; 3. It happens in a group setting; and 4. It involves pursuance of common goals. I believe this definition best speaks to my perspective of leadership because it incorporates these four components, which I believe are essential to leadership. In the subsequent sections, I will discuss each component in detail to show why everyone’s definition of leadership should include these four components.

Leadership is a Process

Leadership is multidirectional, not only does the leader impact the followers, but the followers also impact the leader (Free Management Books, n.d.). As such, leadership does not just involve giving orders, it involves interactions between the leader and the followers. When we define leadership as a process rather than a specific set of traits, skills, or behaviors that one person has, leadership becomes available to every person in the group (Northouse, 2018). Leadership stops being confined to position, it becomes emergent and every group member can become a leader. We all have different skills sets that makes us exceptional at some tasks while awful in others. As such, defining leadership as a process allows for emergent leadership, whereby team members who are not formally designated as leaders can act as leaders and leverage their strengths during certain tasks. According to Przybilla et al. (2019), this kind of leadership enhances group performance, cohesiveness, and community. Therefore, defining leadership as a process is ideal.

Leadership involves Influence

 Influence not authority is what makes leadership successful. Do you believe this is the case? Influence means that a leader is able to affect followers by communicating with them. Northouse (2018) stresses that “influence is the sine qua non of leadership” (p.43), which means that leadership cannot exist without influence. The only way one can lead a group of people is by influencing them. Imagine a case whereby a “leader” gives instructions to her followers, and the followers do the opposite of what they are instructed to do; would you call this person a leader? No, of course not because to lead means that they are people who are following. However, many leaders depend on the authority that their assigned positions give them to lead, which is not very successful in improving team performance (Miller, 2019). Instead of relying on their position of authority, leaders should seek to influence their employees using other more effective sources of authority including their expertise, organizational and corporate understanding, and interpersonal relationships. These sources of authority are more inspiring than leading by threats and fear.

Leadership Happens in a Group Setting

John Boehner famously said, “A leader without followers is simply a man taking a walk.” Therefore, leadership has to occur in a group setting, whereby at least one person is a leader, while the others are followers. This means that leaders are just as important as followers in leadership. If this is so, why are followers usually neglected when defining leadership? How many articles or theories have you read about followers as compared to those about leaders? This neglect of studies on followership negatively undermines our ability to become good leaders. To become a good leader, you need to understand your followers better so that you can be able to effectively influence them. Kellerman (2007) explains that leaders need to learn about followers because they have influence and power even though they lack authority. She discusses the different types of followers – participants, diehards, bystanders, isolates, and activists – and how leaders can effectively influence these different groups of followers in her article “What Every Leader Needs to Know About Followers.” Explaining the different characteristics of these groups of followers is beyond the scope of this blog, but you can read more about this by following the embedded link.

Leadership involves Pursuance of Common Goals

Common goals mean that the goals being pursued are mutually benefiting, that is, both the leader and followers derive some benefits when they achieve the goal. According to Northouse (2018), the emphasis of mutually benefiting goals helps us differentiate ethical leadership from unethical leadership. I agree with Northouse’s assertion that we need to include the concept of common goals in leadership to be able to differentiate good leaders from bad leaders. Think about the traits or behaviors that you have read that a leader should possess. Some of the common traits and behaviors associated with leadership include self-confidence, charismatic, determined, brave, risk-taker, and so on. So, does it mean that every leader who possesses these characteristics is a good leader? Think about a leader like Adolf Hitler, didn’t he possess all these characteristics? Then, what makes you believe that he was a bad leader? When you include common goals in your definition of leadership, then you can confidently classify Hitler as a bad leader because he used his leadership position to pursue his own goals rather than goals that would benefit his countrymen. This is the reason why the definition of leadership should include common goals to ensure that we encourage leadership that is ethical.

In conclusion, leadership is not just one thing, it is made up of four main components: 1. It is a process; 2. It involves influence; 3. It happens in a group setting; 4. It involves pursuance of common goals. All these components are essential to leadership, thus should be included when defining leadership to get a comprehensive view of leadership. It is important to remember that leadership does not only involve the leader impacting the followers, it also involves the followers impacting the leader. As such, leadership is an interactive process that involves followers and leaders influencing one another. It is also important to not that leadership cannot exist without influence or followers, and there are many sources of influence rather that being appointed to a position of authority. To lead effectively, the leader needs to consider the needs and values of followers as well because leadership occurs in a group setting and this act inspires followership that is organic. Lastly, leadership must pursue common goals to be considered ethical; otherwise, it is bad leadership.

 

 

References

Daskal, L. (2021, March 28). 100 answers to the question: What is leadership? Inc.com. https://www.inc.com/lolly-daskal/100-answers-to-the-question-what-is-leadership.html

Free Management Books. (n.d.). Dunham and pierce’s leadership process model. Free Management eBooks – Online Library. https://www.free-management-ebooks.com/faqld/leadtheory-03.htm

Kellerman, B. (2007, December 1). What every leader needs to know about followers. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2007/12/what-every-leader-needs-to-know-about-followers

Miller, K. (2019, October 24). How to influence without authority in the workplace. Business Insights – Blog. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/influence-without-authority

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Przybilla, L., Wiesche, M., & Krcmar, H. (2019). Emergent leadership in Agile teams–an initial exploration. Proceedings of the 2019 on Computers and People Research Conference. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322385.3322423