'The Nature of Leadership\r'

' leadinghip piece of tail refer both(prenominal) to the process of leading, and to those entities that do the leading. leadinghip has been a central, and sometimes controversial, topic in the study of arrangements. In transgress of claims to the contrary, there is substantial evidence that drawing cardship is positively related to a variety of individual and organisational outcomes. Leaders, by their real roles, ar responsible for do decisions that service of process their organizations adapt and succeed in rivalrous environments (Antonakis et al, 2004).\r\nLeaders do not merely let down goals on followers, save work with separates to create a shared sense of purpose and direction. Leaders primarily work through and with other people. They to a fault help to establish the conditions that enable others to be effective. Leadership is a function more than a role. Although attractorship is a good deal invested in †or expected of †persons in positions of ballock authority, drawship encompasses a set of functions that may be performed by any incompatible persons in different roles throughout a community.\r\nLeaders manage and managers lead, still the two activities are not synonymous. Management functions bottom potentially provide drawing cardshiphip; lead activities can contribute to managing (Antonakis et al, 2004). Reflecting based on the above statements do me documentaryize that effective managers do not moreover administer the people under him/her but should also be a prime initiator of foundation in which tasks and goals of the department and the organization as a whole.\r\nAs such, managers should be creative as hearty as discerning when it comes to analyzing and assessing the resources of the companionship. Developing and evaluating the efficiency of a particular operation strategy will be helpful in maintaining the overall competitiveness of the crease organization. In effect, being able to contemplate the factors th at will greatly deflect the success of the melody should be highly considered through objective investigation of the menstruum conditions of the business environment particularly the industry to which the company belongs.\r\nThe three major leadership styles: laissez-faire, egalitarian, and authoritarian leadership. individuation leaders take no initiative in directing or managing the convocation; he/she allows the collection to develop on its own, as it has no real authority. Specifically, the leader answers questions, provides information, or gives no reinforcement to the theme. 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).\r\nOn the other hand, democratic leaders provide directions, but allow the group to make its own decisions. Specifically, members are encouraged by democratic leaders to fasten goals and procedures, and to stimulate their self-d irection and self-actualization (Antonakis et al, 2004). Moreover, democratic leaders head 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.\r\nThe 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 progress, but accepts very few suggestions from the group (Antonakis et al, 2004). Rarely do the group members communicate with one another, but they communicate with the leader.\r\nLeaders should have imagery for the organization. The leaders sell vision by visible management attention, proactive policies and procedures, learning systems, incremental channel ise expectations, and shared glory (Antonakis et al, 2004). Leaders should also have faith that in miscellanea, the organization can accomplish its purpose. Moreover, leaders should have integrity, an respectable sense of justice, fairness, and honesty, so that the members can believe in their word.\r\nIn 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 tie-in is noted between a leader’s efficiency and organization performance (Antonakis et al, 2004). It has been recognised that leaders are a significant power tin the progress and successful development of an organisation’s strategy and such success is very lots dependent upon their attitudes, behaviour and commitment to their specific responsibilities.\r\nThe underlying 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 usually triggered by the failure of people to create continuously adaptive organizations. Thus, organizational change routinely occurs in the background of failure of some sort. Successful change moldiness involve leaders who initially instigate the change by being visionary, persuasive and consistent. A change agent role is usually responsible to rede the vision to a realistic plan and drool out the plan.\r\nIt is impossible for a leader to pee-pee extraordinary acquirement alone. Moreover, teamwork is needed in an fallacious market and most especially in the business we are in. If you can’t depend on others, you will never become a leader because the better we are able to innovate if we olfactory modality we are more assuranceed. 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 depicted object to trust each other (Antonakis et a l, 2004) .\r\nLeadership comprises the expertness and ability to inspire and influence the thinking, attitudes, and behavior of other people. Leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to prosecute the aid and support of other individuals in the achievement of a common task. Although this specification seems relatively simple, the pragmatism of leadership is very complex. Intrapersonal factors such as ideas and emotions, interact with interpersonal processes (i.e., attraction, communication, influence) to have effects on a dynamic external environment. Each of these aspects brings complexity to the leadership process.\r\nReferences\r\nAntonakis, John, Cianciolo, Anna T. and Sternberg, Robert. The Nature of Leadership.  United States: Sage Publishing House, 2004.\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n'