Analysis of Personal Leadership Development

Leadership is perchance the most studied and documented subject in the history of concern literature. It has been discussed and debated as far back as scriptural times. Most concern gurus have written at least one book or article on the subject. But even today, no two writers can look to hold on a definition. Harmonizing to Avolio and Chan ( 2008 ) in a meta-analysis of leading development research found out that merely 200 out of 12,500 surveies focused on leading development, Warren Bennis says of leading, “ To an extent, leading is like beauty ; it ‘s difficult to specify, but you know it when you see it ” ( Bennis, 1994, p. 1 ) . He has seen over 350 different definitions of leading, with more being coined each month ( Bennis, 1982 ) .

Hire a custom writer who has experience.
It's time for you to submit amazing papers!

order now

Donald Phillips wrote of leading in his book Lincoln on Leadership:

“ aˆ¦a pure definition of leading, it still seems a shadiness unfinished or uncomplete. Such is the instance, nevertheless, with virtually every effort at interpretation, clear uping, or specifying the true significance of leading. Leadership is an elusive construct that, at times, can be obscure and equivocal ” ( Phillips, 1992, p. 3 ) .

Leaderships are those challenge people, inspire shared vision, and enable others to move, put a good illustration, and promote others to win ( Kouzes and Posner, 2003 ) . “ Leaderships are people who think for themselves, pass on their ideas and feelings, and assist others understand and move on their ain beliefs ; they influence others in an ethical and socially responsible manner ” ( vanLinden and Fertman, 1998, p. 17 ) .

Many others have defined leading in footings of behaviours, traits, competences and consequences of leaders. Stephen Covey has his seven wonts of successful people and eight features of principle-centered leaders ( Covey, 1989 and 1991 ) . James Kouzes and Barry Posner place leading as a learnable set of patterns ( Kouzes and Posner, 1995 ) . These legion and obscure definitions of leading imply that leading can look different in different state of affairss. No one definition is right or better than the other definition. Leadership is affected by many different factors and can be viewed from many different positions ( Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1993 ) .

One factor seems consistent in all of the definitions: Leadership does non be without followings. It does non automatically go on because people report to person. In the thick of the decrease of qualified leaders, the concern environment is going progressively more complex and barbarous. Companies are sing amalgamations and acquisitions, work force deficits, rapid engineering alterations, increased domestic and foreign competition, and a decrease of company trueness. Business leaders are confronting corporate turbulence unequaled in history. The companies that will last in this concern battlefield will be those with great leading ( Right Management Consultants, 1999 ) .

Personal Leadership Development Models

Contemporary leading research ranges from a focal point on traits, to behaviour, power-influence and situational attacks. More late a comprehensive model of leading has been discussed under the label of transformational leading ( Bass 1981 ; Avolio, Waldman et al. 1991 ; Tichy 1999 ) . What is apparent is that modern-day involvement, much like the earlier ( wisdom ) literature that focused mostly on the airy hero ( Marchese, 2001 ) , reflects the dominant cultural and other values. A brief reappraisal of the precursor alterations in cultural, societal, economic, and political attitudes makes this point clear. Therefore, the yesteryear can be seen as prologue to the current displacement in leading accent.

Trait theory is the first theory of leading that appeared in history. It is traced back to the nineteenth-century tradition of tie ining the history of society to that of great work forces ( Avolio and Chan, 2008 ) . The lists of traits or qualities associated with leading exist in copiousness and go on to be produced. They draw on virtually all the adjectives in the lexicon which describe some positive or virtuous human property, from aspiration to spice for life ( e.g. unity, confidence, cognitive ability, and cognition of concern ) . This theory indicates leading development involves placing and mensurating leading qualities, testing possible leaders from non- leaders, so developing those with possible, which is what most organisations undertake with their endowment direction programmes. However the trait theory sees these ‘leadership features ‘ as inherent, and consequently labels some people as ‘born leaders ‘ due to their psychological features.

Behavioral theories came approximately due to the disapproval of the trait attack and bookmans began to research leading from a behavioural point of position. The behavioral theory was used during the 1940s and 1970s, with the belief that leaders differentiate themselves by discernible character. The focal point of this theory has been in placing those cosmopolitan behaviors through the belief that can be developed and could be modified through practising certain accomplishments. Supporters of this theory are interested in placing the behavior of ‘flourishing ‘ leaders, determining a behaviour categorization and placing wide leading manners because harmonizing to this theory, people can larn to go leaders through instruction and observation.

For illustration: The managerial grid theoretical account, developed by Blake and Mouton ( 1964 ) shows five different leading manners, in respect to a leader ‘s concern for people and their concern for production or end product ( LaHote, and Simonetti et al.,1999 ) . This include: The Impoverished or the Apathetic Style ( Low Production/Low People ) ; Country Club Style ( Low Production/High People ) ; Produce, Dictatorial or Perish Style ( High Production/Low People ) ; The Middle-of-the-road or The Status-quo Style ( Medium Production/Medium People ) and The Team or Sound Style ( High Production /High People ) . Harmonizing to research workers today, they province that despite the several behaviour-based surveies, there is no cogent evidence that certain behaviors would be more of import than another ( Clark, 1993 ) .

McGregor ‘s Theory X & A ; Theory Y Managers whereby Theory X directors believe that: The mean human being has an built-in disfavor of work and will avoid it if possible. Theory Y directors believe that: The outgo of physical and mental attempt in work is every bit natural as drama or remainder, and the mean human being, under proper conditions, learns non merely to accept but to seek duty. Peoples will exert autonomy and self-denial to accomplish aims to which they are committed..

Situational and Contingency theories are a predecessor to the trait theory of leading. Harmonizing to this theory, no individual best profile of a leader exists as different state of affairss call for different leading features. The advocates of this theory province that leaders in one state of affairs are non needfully perceived to be leaders in another ( Kegan, 2000 ) . Harmonizing to Murphy and Riggio ( 2003 ) some of the outstanding eventuality leading theories include Fiedler eventuality theoretical account which includes: Leader member dealingss: How good do the director and the employees get along? Undertaking construction: Is the occupation extremely structured, reasonably unstructured, or someplace in between? Position power: How much authorization does the director possess? , Tannenbaum and Schmidt leading continuum suggested the thought that leading behavior varies along a continuum and that as one moves off from the bossy extreme the sum of low-level engagement and engagement in determination pickings additions. They besides suggested that the sort of leading represented by the democratic extreme of the continuum will be seldom encountered in formal organisations. The Hersey-Blanchard situational theory provinces that the developmental degrees of a leader ‘s subsidiaries play the greatest function in finding which leading manners ( leader behavior ) are most appropriate. Their theory is based on the sum of way ( task behavior ) and socio-emotional support ( relationship behavior ) a leader must supply given the state of affairs and the “ degree of adulthood ” of the followings. Other theories include Vroom-Yetton determination theoretical account and the Path-Goal theory ( Hamlin, 2002 ) .

There are other, more recent, leading concepts which have followed different categorizations such as transformational versus transactional theories, reliable, and magnetic leading theories. These different theories emphasize one class more than others as the primary footing for explicating effectual leading ( Hamlin, 2002 ) . Leadership theory efforts to bring forth theoretical accounts that explain what successful leading is and where it comes from. Adding visible radiation into how leading can be developed through advanced and valuable leading development intercessions.

Noting that leading is unsuited to a individual definition, for preparation intents the Army describes leading as: “ the art of influencing and directing people towards the willing accomplishment of squad or organisational ends ” ( Army, 2000, p. 2 ) . The accent is on a purpose-driven procedure that involves a series of complex interactions between leader and followings. The cardinal factors are personal influence and usage of power over clip towards a end. Within the definition there are two wide functions apportioned to leading: interpersonal dealingss and undertaking accomplishment. These two functions are loosely consistent with the initiating construction and consideration dimensions to leader behaviors identified by the Ohio State University surveies and employee-orientation and production-orientation dimensions by the University of Michigan surveies ( Robbins, 2001, p. 316 ) .

Leadership Style and Performance

Although different leading theories emphasize the importance of different factors, the general dogma of the situational and eventuality positions is that leading effectivity is dependent on the leader ‘s diagnosing and apprehension of situational factors, followed by the acceptance of the appropriate manner to cover with each circumstance. However, in an evident return to the ‘one best manner of leading ‘ , recent surveies on leading have contrasted ‘transactional ‘ leading with ‘transformational ‘ leading. New leading approaches classify leading into three classs, viz. transformational, transactional and individualistic and these are widely used in surveies on organisational leaders ( Bogler, 2001, 2002 ; Heller, 1993 ; McKee, 1991 ; Timothy and Ronald, 2004 ) ( Wu and Shiu, 2009 ) .

Transformational leading can be categorized into idealised influence properties, idealized predisposed behaviours, inspirational motive, rational stimulation and individualised consideration ( Antonakis, et Al. 2003 ) . This refers to personality of the leader whether he or she is perceived as confident and powerful and the idealised influence behaviour refers to the magnetic actions of the leader that are focused on values, beliefs and rules. Inspirational motive refers the behaviours of the leaders that motivate followings to see the hereafter optimistically, emphasis on the squad spirit, undertaking idealized vision and pass on a vision that is accomplishable. As for the rational stimulation, the leader stimulates invention and creativeness in their followings by oppugning premises and nearing old state of affairss in new ways Individualized consideration is a state of affairs where the leader pays more attending to every follower ‘s demand for accomplishment and growing by moving as a wise man ( Antonakis, et Al. 2003 ) .

Transactional leading on the other manus involves actuating the followings through the usage of wagess, congratulationss and promises ( Burns, 1978 ) . There exists a common understanding between the leader and the follower where one time the followings achieve the work aims, they will be rewarded. Antonakis, et Al. ( 2003 ) categorized the transactional leading into three sub graduated table ; contingent wagess, direction by exclusion ( active ) and direction by exclusion ( inactive ) . Contingent wagess refers to the leader clear uping the work that must be achieved and utilize wagess to accomplish consequences Management by exclusion ( inactive ) refers to leaders who intervene merely when jobs arise whereas direction by exclusion ( active ) refers to leaders who actively monitor the work of followings and do certain that criterions are met.

Leaderships who adopt the individualistic leading manner exercising small control over the followings and allow the followings have freedom to transport out their assigned undertakings without direct supervising ( Wu and Shiu, 2009 ) .

Harmonizing to Snodgrass and Schachar ( 2008 ) , transformational and transactional leading manners have been found to optimistically link with organisational results in surveies of assorted types of organisations. Harmonizing to Avolio and Bass ( 2004 ) and Dumdum et al. , ( 2002 ) they province that transformational leading is positively correlated with organisational effectivity. Fiedler ( 1996 ) , one of the most well-thought-of research workers on leading, has provided a recent treatise on the importance of leading by reasoning that the effectivity of a leader is a major determiner of the success or failure of a group, organisation, or even an full state. Indeed, it has been argued that one manner in which organisations have sought to get by with the increasing volatility and turbulency of the external environment is by developing and developing leaders and fiting them with the accomplishments to get by ( Darcy and Kleiner, 1991 ; Hennessey, 1998 ) . For the success of an organisation leading is cardinal as organisations are runing in an progressively dynamic and complex environment, therefore necessitating effectual leading to accomplish targeted organisational ends

Understanding Leadership Practice in the Military: A South Sudan Perspective

Leadership and its associated values are ever context edge. Hence, the emerging manner demands to be understood in footings of modern-day pattern in the military. In specifying leading pattern, what sets military leaders apart from leaders in the wider society is the demand to command and take their subsidiaries in an environment of potentially utmost personal danger. This duty may besides affect the controlled or threatened usage of deadly force. This context introduces the organisational world of bid authorization, whereby the military commanding officer ever has place power or authorization based on formal assignment or senior status in rank. Yet, authorization inherited through higher rank or place falls short of what is understood as leading. This point, one can reason, is besides non new to the armed forces. For illustration, it is normal pattern in operational state of affairss of high hazard that competency ( cognition ) takes precedency over rank and authorization. Consequently, despite the presence of bid authorization and a purely hierarchal environment in the military services, there is still a great accent placed on leading.

The transmutation of the societal, economic and political landscape, mostly due to the historical referendum that saw South Sudan secede from the big Sudan, is the point of going. While this comprehensiveness of analysis is beyond the range of this survey, it is necessary for all leaders and possible leaders to understand that the new worlds challenge ways of operating and being, and there are accordingly clear deductions for predominating constructs of leading. The passage from dependant to independency is characterized by complexness, consecutive activity and the demand for liberty in contrast to the conventional control paradigm that exists in many state constructions. In a dynamic and unsure knowledge-based environment, a centralised attack is likely to confront sedate challenges. The world is that in such an environment, senior leaders may non cognize best and cognition instead than authorization becomes pre-eminent. Not surprisingly, there is a displacement in accent to a originative and distributed leading paradigm, where leaders are expected to be able to move autonomously in flatter constructions and with bleary lines of authorization.

Reflecting a likewise changed environment in the armed forces, the treatment of South Sudan has foreshadowed a transmutation of the universe and its struggles. While much of the attending is directed towards engineering, substructure development, cleaner energy and stableness there is acknowledgment in the organisation that the nub of the challenge is leading. Given the important function of instruction and preparation in fixing future leaders from a military point of position, attending demands to concentrate on the two wide factors that influence the nature of leading: the organisational systems and procedure that create portion of the context for the pattern of leading, and the human component. The consequent demand appears to set up a model for leading development that links these two factors ( organisational systems and procedure and the human component ) with the emerging manner of leading as theory-in-use.


Kouzes and Posner ( 2003b ) developed the widely used Leadership Practices Inventory ( LPI ) , a standardised appraisal tool based on what they call The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership. The Five Practices remainder on the rule that certain behaviours are common to successful leaders ‘ personal-best leading experiences. That is Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Promote the Heart separately describe what it means to act as a strong leader ( Kouzes and Posner, 2002 ) .

Leaderships who Model the Way set a positive illustration by fiting their ain actions to their words. They set an illustration for the other group members through day-to-day actions, showing devotedness to personal and group values.

Leaderships who Inspire a Shared Vision means appealing to a group ‘s shared aspirations to enlist others into the leader ‘s dream. Harmonizing to the LPI writers, “ every organisation, every societal motion, begins with a dreamaˆ¦vision is the force that invents the hereafter ” ( Kouzes and Posner, 2002, p.15. ) Understanding that the leader entirely can non carry through a vision is of import in animating a shared vision. Rather, the leader must assist the others to recognize the possibilities of their vision, and that teamwork will convey about the sought-after success ( Kouzes and Posner, 2002 ) .

Challenge the Process, entails working through obstructions for the executing of a vision. This normally means seeking advanced ways to alter, turn, and better piece on path towards the shared vision. To efficaciously exhibit this behaviour, a leader needs to assist his or her organisation experiment and take hazards to get the better of inevitable resistance and reverses along the manner. Kouzes and Posner ( 2002 ) believe that strong, effectual leaders seek and accept challenge because it means invariably endeavoring for the best.

The 4th rule, Enable Others to Act, involves leaders assisting others feel confident every bit good as competent. This pattern requires trust amongst squad members, possible merely when the leaders portion power and supply pick. In making so, they foster coaction so that everyone who is involved with the undertaking becomes engaged and critical to the overall success.

Finally, model leading involves Promote the Heart, a pattern based on the spirit of community. Leaderships promoting the bosom maintain everyone on the same page and maintain the fire alive. While defeat and exhaustion might deluge the way towards a shared vision, a leader practising this behavior clears the manner by assisting others maintain finding alive. When group members become disenchanted, disengaged, or disorganized, the leader “ uplifts the liquors and draws people frontward ” ( Kouzes and Posner, 2002, p. 19 ) .

Therefore, the leading suggestions developed by this study include:

Each individual is a possible leader as there could be scenarios where they act as such ( i.e. household environment, athleticss squad, out-of-door activities, crisis state of affairss, etc. ) .

Leadership is corporate ; it does non belong to one person like in old organisations ( some thriving illustrations in the cyberspace e.g. Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube ) .

Leadership competences ( cognition, accomplishments and attitudes ) are embedded on peoples ‘ natural traits and are developed through clip. These competences are articulated and could be deliberated through discernible behaviors.

The most appropriate leading behaviors particularly in the armed forces from South Sudan context are situational. There is non a nucleus set of leading accomplishments or traits that define leaders for all clip and all fortunes. Alternatively, the competence of a leader includes the ability to accommodate and modify one ‘s manner or behaviors to suit specific state of affairss, e.g. the followings ‘ competence degree or the organisational civilization.


I'm Heather

Would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out