Leadership

Before I started writing this paper I put a lot of thought into the phrase "leadership development" and what it really meant to me. After all, I took this college level leadership class for professional development. I felt that the premise of this course was that leaders could be developed. If so, what are the factors that influence the development of leaders? Is there a single influence which dominate this development process? Do I have the ability to create my own leadership style and grow beyond the confines of conditional and environmental factors? I acknowledge the importance of a person's upbringing, education, and environment in the creation of the person's leadership style but these factors are largely external. I know for me, before I joined the Army, it was a common belief that leaders were born, not made. But as I grew in the Army I realized that effectiveness as a leader depends less on some innate trait you are born with, and much more on specific principles that anyone can follow. During the course of this class I also realized that learning about leadership means you have to recognize ineffective as well as effective leadership. It means understanding the dynamic relationship between the leader and the follower.

According to Bernard Bass in Stagdill's Handbook of Leadership, there are three basic ways to explain how people become leaders. The first two explain the leadership development for a small number of people and the third is the most widely accepted theory and the premise in which the handbook is based. First way; some personality traits may lead people naturally into leadership roles; this is the trait theory. Second way; a crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings out extraordinary leadership qualities in an ordinary person; this is the great event theory. Third way; people can choose to become leaders. They can learn leadership skill; this is the transformational leadership theory. (Bass, 1989) I concur with this explanation based on my observation of soldiers assigned to me as they grow into junior leaders.

Transformational leadership was a term coined by political scientist James McGregor Burns in 1978 in his book "Leadership." He wrote that: "Transforming leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality...transforming leadership ultimately becomes moral in that it raises the level of human conduct and ethical aspirations of both the leader and led and, thus, has a transforming effect on both." (Burns, 1978) I submit that my ultimate goal is to adapt a transformational leadership style but I recognize that it is a development process.

In my initial personal assessment on leadership potential, I assessed myself with leadership potential but lacked in the managerial department. I also stated that I didn't see the need to change this shortfall because good leaders will have good managers working for them and they would ensure stability and efficiency. What I have discovered, after completing this course is that I still believe the initial self-assessment to be true. However, I find myself to be more of a manager than a leader in my current leadership position, and that good leaders were first good managers. Managers and leaders are not inherently different types of people, and many managers already possess the abilities and qualities needed to be effective leaders. The bottom line is that leadership cannot replace management; it should be in addition to management. Both leaders and managers are concerned with providing direction for the organization. Managers focus on establishing detailed plans and schedules for achieving specific results, then allocating resources to accomplish the plan. Leadership calls for creating a compelling vision of the future and developing farsighted strategies for producing the changes needed to achieve that vision. (Daft, 2005)

In my initial self-assessment of leadership orientation, I stated that I was not a very considerate person and needed to modify my behavior towards people. I needed to be more structured in my life so that I could better initiate structural behavior with others. This course has shown me that according to the leadership continuum, I use the boss-centered leadership style or autocratic, where a leader would centralize authority and derive power from the position. What I should strive to practice is a subordinate-centered leadership style or democratic, where a leader delegates authority to others, encourage participation, relies on subordinates' knowledge for the completion of tasks and depend on subordinate respect for influence. (Daft, 2005) According to Mr. Joe Allbagh, a top aide to President George W. Bush during the presidential campaign, he stated that the President instills incredible staff loyalty because he gives everyone the opportunity to say their piece; and when you have a buy-in to the process regardless of the subject matter, you have people who are willing to do anything for you.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice2004/bush/style.html

In my initial self-assessment of leadership Style, I stated that I was more focused on the task or mission than I was on the people I lead. I stated that it will be a difficult transformation for me to find a happy medium but realized that I needed to do so in order for me to become a better leader. I discovered during this course that it is important to recognize that a general leadership style cannot be used with all group members. According to the individual leadership style, a leader must look at the specific relationship between a leader and each individual member of that group. Individual leadership is based on the notion that a leader develops a unique relationship with each subordinate, which determines how the leader behaves towards the member and how the member responds to the leader. The dyadic theory examined why leaders had more influence over and greater impact on some members than others. This theory focuses on the concept of exchange, or what each party gives and receives. (Daft, 2005) I recognized that a leader with a single leadership style is inefficient and ineffective. A leader is far more effective if he is a flexible leader who has the capability to use different tactics with each member under different conditions. To deal with the issue of matching style to the situation, Vroom and Yego developed an approach that deals with leader-subordinate interaction. Their model explicitly recognized that an effective style depended on situational variables including the leader's expertise, the task structure, and the employees' willingness to accept a solution.