The Nature of Leadership

Leadership can refer some(prenominal) to the process of leading, and to those entities that do the leading. Leadership has been a central, and sometimes controversial, topic in the study of organizations. In spite of claims to the contrary, there is substantial evidence that leading is positively related to a variety of individual and organisational outcomes. Leaders, by their very roles, be responsible for making decisions that help their organizations adapt and gain in competitive environments (Antonakis et al, 2004).Leaders do not merely subvert goals on followers, hardly work with some otherwises to create a shared grit impression of purpose and direction. Leaders primarily work by dint of and with other people. They to a fault help to establish the conditions that enable others to be effective. Leadership is a cash in peerlesss chips more than a role. Although attractorship is often invested in or evaluate of persons in positions of formal authority, drawing ca rdship encompasses a set of functions that may be performed by any different persons in different roles throughout a community.Leaders manage and managers lead, but the two activities are not synonymous. centering functions can potentially render loss attractionship lead activities can fall in to managing (Antonakis et al, 2004). Reflecting based on the above statements made me reliableize that effective managers do not only administer the people under him/her but should in like manner be a prime initiator of innovation in which tasks and goals of the department and the organization as a whole.As such, managers should be creative as well as discerning when it comes to analyzing and assessing the resources of the company. Developing and evaluating the efficiency of a exceptional operation strategy result be helpful in maintaining the overall competitiveness of the business organization. In effect, being able to contemplate the factors that will greatly influence the adv antage of the business should be highly considered through objective investigation of the current conditions of the business environment particularly the patience to which the company belongs.The three major leadership styles laissez-faire, antiauthoritarian, and authoritarian leadership. Laissez-Faire leaders take no initiative in directing or managing the assemblage he/she allows the group to develop on its own, as it has no real authority. Specifically, the leader answers questions, provides information, or gives no reinforcement to the group. Furthermore, the leader evaluates and criticizes little, and is thereby non-threatening. The leader allows the members to make their own decisions (Antonakis et al, 2004).On the other hand, democratic leaders provide directions, but allow the group to make its own decisions. Specifically, members are further by democratic leaders to determine goals and procedures, and to stimulate their self-direction and self-actualization (Antonakis e t al, 2004). Moreover, democratic leaders offer suggestions and reinforce members ideas. After offering these suggestions, providing information, and clarifying ideas, the leader allows the group to make the decision. In leadership styles, the democratic leader is in the middle of the styles.The authoritarian leader is the opposite of the laissez-faire leader. The authoritarian leader sets the agenda, determines the groups policies, assigns tasks to the members, and makes decisions for the group without consulting them. In the end, the leader takes responsibility for the groups proficiency, but accepts very some suggestions from the group (Antonakis et al, 2004). Rarely do the group members communicate with one another, but they communicate with the leader.Leaders should have lot for the organization. The leaders sell vision by visible management attention, proactive policies and procedures, recognition systems, incremental kind expectations, and shared glory (Antonakis et al, 2 004). Leaders should also have faith that in smorgasbord, the organization can accomplish its purpose. Moreover, leaders should have integrity, an ethical sense of justice, fairness, and honesty, so that the members can believe in their word.In regards to leaders in an organization as the life-giving elements in every organisation in that without managers, organizations cannot possibly function properly. Thus, a strong link is noted among a leaders efficiency and organization performance (Antonakis et al, 2004). It has been accepted that leaders are a significant power behind the progress and successful development of an organisations strategy and such success is very much dependent upon their attitudes, behaviour and commitment to their specific responsibilities.The elementary tension that underlies many discussions of organisational change is that it would not be necessary if leaders had done their jobs right in the first place. Planned change is ordinarily triggered by the f ailure of people to create continuously adaptive organizations. Thus, organizational change routinely occurs in the context of failure of some sort. prospering change must involve leaders who initially instigate the change by being visionary, persuasive and consistent. A change agent role is usually responsible to translate the vision to a realistic devise and carry out the plan.It is impossible for a leader to get uncomparable achievement alone. Moreover, teamwork is require in an unstable market and most specially in the business we are in. If you cant depend on others, you will never become a leader because the better we are able to innovate if we feel we are more trusted. If a leader trusts his staff, his staff will trust him back. As a leader, trust is needed and that a team should be bonded with the capacity to trust each other (Antonakis et al, 2004) .Leadership comprises the aptitude and ability to inspire and influence the thinking, attitudes, and behavior of other peo ple. Leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of other individuals in the achievement of a common task. Although this specification seems relatively simple, the reality of leadership is very complex. Intrapersonal factors such as ideas and emotions, interact with interpersonal processes (i.e., attraction, communication, influence) to have effectuate on a dynamic external environment. Each of these aspects brings complexity to the leadership process.ReferencesAntonakis, John, Cianciolo, Anna T. and Sternberg, Robert. The Nature of Leadership. United States Sage Publishing House, 2004.