IntroductionI must say that it is very difficult to discuss the subject of leadership effectively. Regardless of the setting and the objectives, leadership is too dynamic to be discussed exhaustively. Various authors have come up with varying approaches to the subject of leadership. There is still much that has not been covered effectively. This author has made an attempt towards the same direction. He has discussed some of the critical aspects of leadership in its various forms. He exploits a wealth of resources that have been researched by other writers on the subject.
At the end of it is a comprehensive approach to the subject of leadership from the information he has gathered. The intention of this report is to dissect the information and the claims made by the author regarding the subject of leadership. The approach of this paper is a critical review and analysis in view of getting a more realistic way of looking at the issue of leadership. Author’s AssertionsDefinition of LeadershipThe author of this article bases on various sources in defining leadership. The definition of leadership is deeply rooted in the attaining of organizational results through others.
Therefore, according to the author leadership deals with achieving the results of the organization efficiently through others (Hotgetts 1992, p. 76). This in setting of the organization implies those people working with the leader. This may include the team members or general subordinates. According to the author, no leader achieves results through their own efforts alone. If that happens, then leadership loses the whole meaning. Who is led? In explaining who is led in relation to leadership, the author uses two perspectives.
One of the perspectives is that of psychology. From a psychology perspective, the person who is led is viewed from a group setting. That is to mean that it is the members and the leader who are connected together through leadership. In such a group setting, the author asserts that members of the group must all have a common goal. Therefore, from the psychology perspective the person who is led is from a group. At the same time, the person is led towards the realization and achievement of common goals.
The other perspective that the author has used to explain the person who is led is from a management perspective. According to the author, organizations are not based on common goals. The main focus of goals is to put down strategies in place in order to achieve specific goals. These goals are determined by the owners of these organizations. The members of such organizations do not necessarily hold the same goals. To lead and to manageThe two terms are much related, but according to this author, there is a very big difference.
Leadership is viewed as an interpersonal relationship that is practised in various situations and is channelled through communication. That what makes a good leader is the desire to leader. This is what shapes one into that position that makes them quite effective as leaders in their various positions. The level of success of a leader is therefore determined by the way in which all this factors are put together. The author has presented a number of reasons that people adopt when they want to clinch leadership positions.
From what the author has written, the selfish ambitions that lead many into leadership is what leads to their failure as leaders. In understanding much about leadership, the author explains the various settings that are used to define the leader. This includes the role a leader plays in a group and the responsibilities that the leader is expected to delegate to other members of the group. That while in a group there is only one leader, the duties and responsibilities of the leader can be easily shared amongst individual members.
Through all these, the leader will have to be assessed on the basis of how the entire organization succeeds (Farkas & Wetlaufer 1996, p. 115). That means a non-performing entity is considered to be having bad leadership. Therefore, the view of the author is that successful leadership must only be measured on the basis of the success of the goals of the organization.