Absence Application Form - Manor School: Fill & Download for Free

Defining Leadership: Major Growth and Discoveries of Leadership: part 1 to a 3 part series that can be found at iServed Veteran ® blog Radio CheckThoughts on LeadershipLife shatters people and in the aftermath many are stronger where once weak. However, the ones who refuse to fall apart, life kills. Life shatters the good, the gentle, and the brave with indifference. If a soul is none of the latter, it can be confident life will shatter it as well, to the exception of being in no rush to do so (Hemingway, 1929). Shortly after adolescence many people learn the difficulties, challenges, and adversities, which come while on this Earth. For an even less fortunate few, this discovery comes at an even younger age as a child. Hemingway, (1929) eloquently stated it is those few: the good, the gentle, and the brave that emerge to guide others through what at times can be the murky darkness or the blinding brightness known as life.It is a quality that is a living-breathing organism to which forms into the mold or challenge it is poured into. The execution is equally as fluid, capable like water to take on many forms and methods. Its very mystery can be its strength, as others gaze in respect and admiration of those who hold such a talent or skill. This craft whether born with it, develop through trial and error, or mentorship has the greatest power on the face of the Earth. It holds the power to change the world. Those who possess it can achieve the unthinkable, revolutionize an entire culture, commit atrocious evils, and stop tyranny and uplift a people. It is these words that define the essence of leadership, its theories, traits, ethical framework, and development; which provide the foundation and framework for an individual to strengthen and guide a group through a given task, shared vision, or desired future state.An organization is defined as a preplanned grouping of individuals working to achieve a common goal. Senge, (2006) defines this common goal as effort put forth towards a shared vision by a group of individuals. Shared vision is the solution to the query of “what do we want to create?” Once a shared vision is linked within an organization in which each member holds a visualization of the existence of this vision a bond is created. It is in this bond through which an organization seeks to create and maintain as a shared vision. Leadership is the method of application of an organization to create a foundation and framework to drive a group toward this shared vision or desired future state. Going forward in this discussion of leadership, shared vision or desired future state will describe the purpose or end state goal for understanding leadership.In addition leadership has profound impact on the individual, the group, and the society in which it takes action. Evaluation of leadership requires measurement. Going forward evaluating topics of discussion and evaluating theories, principles, and practices with a litmus test of greatest application. The “best test” is challenging the idea or individual through evaluation of the impact of the follower. Evaluating whether the follower achieves a greater quality of life coupled with improved motivation (Greenleaf, 1991). For an organization defining leadership is the beginning stage of outlining ethical framework, organizational behavior, and organizational development. It is the assessment and measurement of leadership that allows organizations to drive change and strengthen leadership within the confines of the establishment.Defining LeadershipIn order to complete a given task an individual needs tools; with these tools one must then understand how to properly use these tools to successfully complete a given task. While one could use a screwdriver to complete the task of a hammer, it is the comprehension of the defining purpose of a tool that makes a carpenter efficient and successful. How then does one, who desires to lead, unlock the mystery that is leadership and clearly outline its very existence? It is not a tangible trait, many would add it is a perishable skill when not used or not challenged on a regular basis. To classify it as perishable but calling it a skill, leadership then becomes something anyone can obtain and develop. On the other hand, a former Marine officer might challenge the thought as he recalls many officer candidates who were dropped for their lack of leadership abilities; this within an organization that has mastered leadership in combat and military organization. To understand leadership one must understand the environment and execution in which leadership functions. Acknowledging the fact that a successful leader must have depth and the ability to exercise many different tools at any given moment to achieve an overarching goal of an organization while connecting with each member of the group. The latter must be done in order to gain buy-in for a shared vision, ensuring welfare of the group, and maintaining trust and respect or good order and discipline depending on the environment and structure of a given group or organization.Leadership then is the ability, not talent or skill, to influence and motivate a group of followers to maintain a unified vision toward a defined objective while maintaining morale and exude the standard(s) of an established foundation of ethics and values within an organization. Jackson, (2006) discusses leadership as an art and a science, impacting individual’s actions in order to complete a given task. Furthermore leadership is the lifeblood of an organization to which successful leaders do so through the view of their followers.The view then of leadership, whether skill vs. talent or art and science still yields the same requirement of understanding through definition of leadership. In the United States, society has coined the term “leader” to be synonymous with that of an executive or manager (Kotter, 2013). While individuals in these positions are in positions of power, privilege, and responsibility it does not directly establish him or her as a leader. To this context of defining a leader a position of hierarchy, while it brings entitlement and power, does not hail an individual with the definition of being a leader (Senge, 2006). Further arguing, individuals within an organization further down the chain of management and executives in fact do hold a power for change. Thus defining a leader as an individual not necessarily of power or privilege, rather an individual who has the capacity to compel others toward change.The ability to drive change while understanding and connecting with the group of followers who have been bought into a shared vision or desired future state of change narrows the scope of the definition of leadership. To then define leadership including the latter of the definition of connecting with followers can best be understood through the theory of servant leadership. Servant leadership states a leader is an individual who desires to serve first rather than lead first. In turn being a leader is not a position of power or privilege, instead it is a responsibility to those you serve (Greenleaf, 1991).Through organizational principle the purpose of a leader is to develop, drive change, and transform an organization through connecting and understanding the people who follow him or her. This ability to lead raises the argument that a leader is either born as a leader or a leader can be made. Though by this definition both hold true when an individual exudes the capacity to connect with his or her followers. It is not the traits or principles that define and outline a leader. It is the foundation of character that allows an individual to be or become a successful leader. It is the qualities of the individual that must emerge or be brought to life, whether through the individual’s own initiative or through mentorship. John Hoffman, a biographer of Lieutenant General Chesty B. Puller, discusses the character traits outlined by General Puller that yields a successful leader. These character traits are self-confidence founded on expertise, initiative, commitment, identity to a cause and recognition of responsibility (Hoffman, 2001). While General Puller was the most highly decorated and combat hardened Marine in history, these qualities he stated can be found even in other leadership roles. It can be rationalized a young child no more than the age of 11 or 12 who’s parents tragically die and now must be the head of the household in order to raise his or her younger siblings could be thrust into a leadership role by necessity and display these leadership strengths. The same adage could go for a young manager within an organization that, while highly talented, lacks business experience and savvy, though upper executives elevate his or her role and responsibilities due to the needs of the corporation.Regardless of reason an individual whether born or developed can become a leader. A leader is an individual who displays the competency and ability, not talent or skill, to influence and motivate a group of followers to maintain a unified vision toward a defined objective while maintaining morale and exude the standard(s) of an established foundation of ethics and values within an organization. Kotter, (2013) states leadership produces vision, while management oversees a process, quality, and services rendered. The common misconception of leadership is a leader is a manager in turn a manager is a leader. This sentiment transitions to the discussion of management vs. leadership.Management and LeadershipA manager is someone who is a figurehead of a group or organization, oversees an area, delegates tasks, or monitors a group of people. To oversee something and hold accountability for achieving a standard does not define a leader. A manager can task a group of people with no knowledge or experience in that given field. Kotter, (1996) discusses management as comprehending and putting into action the process of planning, budgeting, staffing, and problem solving. While a manager within the hierarchy of an organization may oversee others he or she can be misconstrued as a leader; key roles of a manager fall under planning and organizational structure. The divide of management and leadership on an emotional context to problem solving varies as well. Zaleznik, (2004) discusses managers seek process and control, with a desire to instantly solve issues that arise. In contrast leaders embrace instability and seek for complete comprehension of issues before acting to drive a desired change. Henry Mintzberg, a renowned author in the field of business management defined managerial roles that he broke into three segments: Interpersonal, Informational, and Decisional. Within these three segments Mintzberg defines the role a manager plays within a given organization (Mintzberg, 1973).Mintzberg, (1973) discusses the interpersonal role of a manager as a figurehead, leader, and liaison, transition a focus specifically on leader, the role of an individual is one of being a motivator and provider of guidance. While this is to be considered a leadership trait, an individual can continue to manage with the absence of this action. Informational is defined as the action of monitoring, passing on information, and being a spokesperson of an organization. Decisional, which exhibits entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resource allocator, and arbitrator are representative of roles not requiring leadership (Mintzberg, 1973). This taken into consideration then managers have the capacity to conduct themselves in such a manor in which they are not a leader.The misconception of a manager being a leader is outlined as a misunderstanding of the role. Kotter, (2013) identifies a few common misconceptions of a manager vs. a leader. Individuals use the term manager and leader interchangeably, missing the vital variance of the two functions. Individuals coin the term leader in reference to individuals in a position of power or privilege. Nayar, (2013) discusses the variance between managing and leading is counting vs. creating. A manager is one who counts gains, while a leader is one who creates gains. In addition managers develop a network of power, while leaders develop a network of influence (Nayar, 2013). Finally, individuals observe leadership as an ability to charm or attract. The error of leadership vs. management is not that a manager fails if he or she is not a leader. A manager can be highly valuable to an organization and successful without being a leader. The error occurs in comingling the two terms to be synonymous with one another.Leadership as a manager is further defined by the interaction a manager has with his or her subordinates. It is the manager’s capacity to connect with followers on a professional and personal level in which the shift from manager to leader occurs. Kotter, (1996) states leadership within an organization is founded on vision, gaining followers buy-in, empowering followers, and driving change. Inspiring people to come together inside of work and in life is the mark of a leader. To have a profound enough impact on an employee that when he or she leaves the worksite the choices made in his or her personal life now reflect the creed and values of an organization. It’s a leader who inspires people to do the right thing when in the absence of leadership. The strength of a strong leader is not his or her ability to accomplish a task while present and engaged with the group, rather to train and develop a group around a moral and ethical code toward a shared vision or desired future state for overall organizational accomplishment.What Leaders DoUltimately a leader is also a manager, while a manager may not be a leader. As discussed leaders have the capacity to inspire and provoke a shared vision or desired future state within a given organization or task. The two roles while separate should interact fluidly throughout the overall process of accomplishing a goal. An effective leader within an organization has the capacity to encompass both a manager and a leader mentality. In order to accomplish this, a leader must consider his group and have them apply specific skill sets each individual has and stay the course to accomplish this common goal. Leadership is founded on behavior rather than qualities an individual has to oversee a group of individuals or assigned task (Kotter, 2013). While leadership’s objectives are to instill a vision and maintain motivation toward a shared vision or desired future state, it is imperative to the organization to be able to accomplish both tasks of leadership and management. Two individuals can, as a conglomerate, manage and lead a situation. However, a successful organization will seek out individuals and develop their abilities to be both a leader and a manager. While managing and its roles and responsibilities can be found within a job description, it is the challenge of the organization to define what a leader does.Motivation. One recognizes that the definition of a leader as the ability, not talent or skill, to influence and motivate a group of followers to maintain a unified vision toward a defined objective while maintaining morale and exuding the standard(s) of an established foundation of ethics and values within an organization. While this is a specific definition of leadership, if an individual desired to purse leadership in action a greater understanding of each component of the definition would prove beneficial. Leadership, having been established in an action context, requires an individual to understand leading in a behavioral context.Leadership through influence is a leader’s ability to bring a group of individuals and unit into a unified organization striving toward a shared vision. Rost, (1993) discusses a manager is an individual who maintains a position of authority over a subordinate in order to coordinate actions toward providing a good or service for a customer. In contrast to Rost’s definition of a manager, a leader’s focus falls more on the followers and on the responsibility and loyalty to those who follow. It is the innate ability of an individual to connect with their followers through actions such as caring, listening, providing vision, motivating, showing compassion, and providing a sense of ownership to a follower that defines leadership influence in the process of what a leader does (Greenleaf, 1991).Leadership in this context is the actions of a leader to inspire and provide hope to those who follow. Motivation, within this defined leadership responsibility, is the lifeline for the success an organization seeks. In the absence of motivation productivity, quality, safety, and cohesion can be diminished or lost. The very essence of motivation as a leader is the actions of providing a desire to succeed at a given task or responsibility while improving the overall quality of life of the individual and group as a whole (Senge, 1996). The act of motivating can come in various forms such as avenues of reward, praise, punishment, and reprimand. Defining what leaders do via the servant leadership theory would yield a leader whose central focus is for the greater welfare of his or her followers through selfless actions of service to the follower and organization. Greenleaf, (1991) discusses motivation of followers as an act of empowerment of the individual while developing strong bonds of trust and respect between the leader and follower is the essence of servant leadership. It should be noted, however, that leadership in motivation could be acted out in negative forms of punishment or reprimand for failure to succeed. In respect to servant leadership or negative reinforcement motivation is an action of what leaders do.Ethics and values. Leadership ethics and values is the moral standard in which a leader holds him or herself and those he or she leads accountable in the cultural character that a given organization operates. Throughout history and within given geographical locations around the world societies have varying definitions of what is and is not ethically acceptable. As a result ethics and values change depending on the time period and cultural values of a given society. Universal to these barriers are basic building blocks for any organization to define what a leader does ethically and to choose how the leader within an organization will conduct him- or herself. Kurchner-Hawkins, and Miller, (2006) discuss how these building blocks are charted with five segments focusing on:Serving self vs. Serving visionPower vs. ServiceControlling vs. AchievingCompeting vs. CollaboratingWorks standards/no ethical standards vs. Work standards/ethical standardsThrough out these five segments an organization then defines leadership ethics and values on a sliding scale from negative to positive, the first of each being a negative leadership ethics trait and the latter being a positive leadership ethics trait. Pertaining to ethics and values, leaders evaluate their current organization from their own cultural impact gained throughout his or her development of character from life experiences. These established character traits that become the foundation of ethics and values to enable the leader to set the example through action and words, re-enforce standards and polices, and maintain order and discipline. From such life experience that outlines a leaders character and ethics are so deeply rooted that it becomes the identity of the leader and in part defines who the individual is as a person (Colby & Damon, 1995). In consideration for ethics and values, what leaders do is establish the foundation and maintain the ethical framework for ethics within an organization.Leadership in action. The action of what a leader does or fails to do is a result of the responsibility of driving an organization toward a shared vision or desired future state. What leaders do then is not a question rather an action. Leaders put into action influence, motivation, and ethics and values required for an organization to sustain or drive toward a shared vision or desired future state. The study of organizational leadership discusses various theories, principles, and practices. While the study of leadership can have a profound impact on any organization, it is the capacity of the leader to put these teachings into action. Leaders in action are the decision makers of an organization who guide followers to a shared desired result. In addition leadership in action requires an individual to be a teacher or coach to followers responsible for followers leadership development. Rost, (1993) discusses a leader has ownership for the responsible development of followers in doctrinal and practical growth of followers within a business organization. Such development must also remain within the confines of an organization’s established business ethical framework and values.Leadership in action brings to life an organization and its followers through various methods; a key method or avenue of leadership in action is James Burns’s theory of transformational leadership. Burns, (2003) discusses the application of transformational leadership as capturing the essence of and putting into action the vision of an individual’s pursuit of happiness. Though the idea of happiness is not enough to engage an organization to achieve a shared vision or desired future state, rather it is the process of the pursuit that yields the end state result. From Burns established theory of transformational leadership, Bernard Bass supported Burn’s work through defining measurable effects transformational leadership has on an organization’s overall performance. Bass, and Riggio, (2006) discusses the leaders ability to exude charisma or charm inspires and puts into action followers to imitate displayed actions by a leader. It is through leaders actions of confidence, character, and resolve that empower followers while also gaining insight to the follower resulting in driven change toward a shared vision (Bass, & Riggio, 2006). A leader in action in the context of transformational leadership is measurable through multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ), which was developed by Bass. In context to action, what leaders do is empower, guide, instill confidence, mentor, and measure desired change and development toward a shared vision or desired future state.ConclusionA focus on defining leadership results in a deeper understanding of the actions a leader takes within a given organization. It is the ability, not talent or skill, to influence and motivate a group of followers to maintain a unified vision toward a defined objective while maintaining morale and exuding the standard(s) of an established foundation of ethics and values within an organization in which leadership is defined. Leadership then is not an esoteric mystery that only a privileged few through talent or skill obtain. An individual may be born with natural leadership characteristics or through mentorship and development become a leader. Regardless of the foundation in which a leader is established, leadership at its core is the action one takes regardless of a position of power or privilege. The comprehension of the role and responsibilities of a manager allows an individual to gain greater understanding of how to marry to the role of a manager the actions of a leader. While a manager is a figurehead for a group or organization, oversees an area, delegates tasks, or monitors a group of people; intertwined in management lies leadership (Kotter, 1996). The result is a manager who in addition leads.Leaders in action execute guidance to a shared vision through influence, motivation, and ethics and values. While all managers by position or assignment oversee and delegate tasks to ensure a quality service is provided (Mintzberg, 1973). As a result not all managers are leader and in contrast not all leaders are managers. In the absence of power, privilege, and/or responsibility individuals still rise as leaders. Senge, (2006) discusses top down leadership will have minimal impact in driving change due to lacking the establishment of genuine commitment at all levels of an organization. In this form leadership is acted upon in the forms of listening and empowering followers out of respect and recognizing the source of his or her leadership is in the follower (O’Toole, 1996). Furthermore a leader in action has the capacity to mentor and develop him- or herself and followers within a given organization to drive measureable change. The result is an individual, regardless of position or power, who has a profound impact on a collective group within an organization to provoke influence, provide motivation, and drive change toward a shared vision.Reference:Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: A new pursuit of happiness. New York, NY: Atlantic Monthly Press.Colby, A. & Damon, W. (1995). The development of extraordinary moral commitment. Morality in everyday life: Development perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 342-369.Greenleaf, R. (1991). The Servant as Leader. Westfield, IN: The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.Hemingway, E. (1929). A Farewell to Arms. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Jackson, J. C. (2006). Organizational development: The human and social dynamics of organizational change. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.Kotter's 8-step Model: Implementing change powerfully and successfully (2013). In Mind Tools. Retrieved from Kotter's 8-Step Change Model: Implementing Change Powerfully and SuccessfullyKotter, J. P. (1996) Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Mintzberg, H. (1980). The nature of managerial work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.Nayar, V. (2013). Three differences between managers and leaders. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from Three Differences Between Managers and LeadersO’Toole J. (1996). Leading change: The argument for values-based leadership. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Westport, CONN: Praeger.Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.Zaleznik, A. (2004). Managers and leaders: Are they different. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?