Management&Business: style of management

Leadership styles, as we define them here, refer not to models or philosophies of leadership, but to descriptions or classifications of the main ways in which real-life leaders behave. A different way to see this is that a style can be part of a model, but not the other way around. A style is a much narrower behaviour, or a smaller set of behaviours, than would be featured in a model. Also, a leadership style is not an adaptable flexible 'toolkit' - it is a relatively tightly defined description of a particular type of leadership.

Unlike leadership models, the aim of leadership styles is not to help individuals become better leaders; it is simply to describe the main forms of leadership we see in the world, some of which can be incorporated within models, albeit under slightly different names and with slightly different features. Some authors use the headings 'leadership models' and 'leadership styles' interchangeably, which is confusing.

A brief reminder of the definitions and differences between Models, Philosophies, and Styles:

A leadership model provides a process or framework for learning, applying, and adapting leadership for given groups, organizations, or situations. A model is like a 'how-to' framework, a toolkit or a process.
A leadership philosophy is a way of thinking and behaving in leadership - its aims and means - according to values and beliefs. A philosophy is like a subtle but powerful compass or behavioural code.
A leadership style is a narrow and specific behaviour compared to a model or philosophy. Leadership style may be strongly influenced by the leader's personality, the aims of the leader, and relationship with followers. A style is a description of a leader's behaviours, and may also be like a tool in the leadership models toolkit.

Leadership: Definitions, Descriptions, Terminology

Leadership is a vast and important subject, yet full of confusing ideas and terminology, open to widely different interpretations. Definitions and descriptions also vary enormously, and examples can be extremely diverse too.

Examples of leading include:

We lead when we manage a football team or teach a classroom of children. We lead our own children when we are parents, and when we organise anything.
We certainly lead when we manage projects or develop new business. We lead the moment we take the first supervisory responsibility at work, and maybe even before we assume official responsibility to do anything.
A vicar or preacher leads a congregation.
A writer or visionary may lead when he or she puts pen to paper and creates a book or poem, or article which inspires and moves others to new thoughts and actions.
A monarch and a president are both leaders. So is a local councillor, and so can be a community fund-raiser. A ruthless dictator is a leader. So was Mother Theresa, and so was Mahatma Gandhi.

We can find leadership in every sort of work and play, and in every sort of adventure and project, regardless of scale, and regardless of financial or official authority.

And so, given the many ways in which leadership operates, it is no surprise that it is so difficult to define and describe.

So what is leadership? Is it a technical model? A behaviour? Or is leadership more a matter of style or philosophy?

In fact, it's impossible to limit descriptions merely to being a technical model, a process, or a style or philosophy. It's all of these things, and much more besides.

This article aims:

To help clarify what leadership is
To offer a comprehensive summary of the main ways to understand and explain what leadership means

As you will see, leadership can, and necessarily should, be approached from a variety of standpoints.

A helpful way to understand leadership is by exploring the thinking and theories using these three main conceptual viewpoints:

Models
Philosophies
Styles

This three-category approach provides the structure for what follows in this course.

What Is Leadership?

Writers and experts in leadership use many different terms when trying to describe or categorise it - usually as a prefix or a suffix to the word leadership.

Consider how many different single or two-word terms are used with the word 'Leadership'.

Also, consider that many of these terms are rarely used with the word 'Management'.

We would not normally refer to 'management character' or 'management traits', or to 'management behaviour' or a 'natural born manager', but we see these terms, such as 'character', 'traits', 'behaviour', and 'natural born', appearing very commonly with the word 'Leadership'.
Similarly terms like 'ethical leadership', 'inspirational leadership', 'charismatic leadership', ' leadership philosophy', 'authentic leadership', and 'servant leadership' include describing words - some generically defining - which tend not to appear commonly in connection with management and other disciplines.
We see also some proprietary concepts containing the word 'Leadership', representing significant theories and internationally recognised personal and organisational development 'brands', most notably for example action-Centred Leadership ®, and Situational Leadership ®.

This reflects the serious depth and variety of this terminology. The richness of terminology points to the huge variety of interpretations of leadership as a subject and further indicates its potency to operate in very many different ways and directions and at a fundamentally important level for people and society - even civilisations.

Models vs. Philosophies vs. Styles of Leadership

Of the many major terms which refer to concepts or theories about leadership, three terms together offer a useful structure by which to categorise and explore the wide range of theories within the subject. They are:

Leadership Models
Leadership Philosophies
Leadership Styles

These three categories are different ways of looking at it. We could say instead: different aspects of leadership.

Different aspects can cause confusion when we try to understand what leadership is - especially if we use only one aspect to consider the subject.

For example, one person may be looking from a 'style' standpoint while another may be thinking about the 'philosophy'. The two people might hold similar or overlapping views, and yet because the standpoints are different (and usually, therefore, the terminology and reference points are different too), it can seem that there is conflict about what leadership is, when actually there may be close agreement.

Therefore, two people may disagree about something purely because they are approaching it from a different standpoint, when actually they may be seeing the same thing or two things which substantially overlap.

So, in addition to providing a helpful theory structure, using the three stated categories also helps to show that lots of thinking are overlapping and compatible when it might otherwise seem conflicting and wildly diverse.

Here are definitions of the three categories: models, philosophies and styles.

Please note that these definitions are specific to this leadership theory article. In other situations, these three words (models, philosophies, styles) may have other meanings.

Leadership Terminology Definitions

Definition of models

Definition of philosophies

Definition of styles

A leadership model contains theories or ideas on how to lead effectively and/or become a better leader.

Action-Centred Leadership is an example of a model.

A leadership philosophy contains values-based ideas of how a leader should be and act; and the sources of a leader's power.

Servant Leadership is an example of philosophy.

A leadership style is a classification or description of the main ways in which real-life leaders behave.

Transformational Leadership is an example of a style.

A leadership model is a structure which contains either processes or logic or a framework, which can be used or applied like a tool, in performing, understanding and teaching leadership.

A model is often also shown in some sort of diagram format. There may also be a sense of mechanics or engineering, with inter-related and linked moving parts. In some cases a model may contain measurable elements, sometimes entailing complex relative factors, and may also enable a reasonably consistent measurement or indication of standard, for example, effective versus ineffective leadership.

Any philosophy, and so too a leadership philosophy, is a way of thinking and behaving. It's a set of values and beliefs.

Philosophy is a series of reference points or a foundation upon which processes, decisions, actions, plans, etc., can be built, developed and applied. A leadership philosophy connects leadership with humanity and morality and ethics. This will at some point be influenced by beliefs about human nature and society, and perhaps religion, or universal truth and a sense of fairness and natural justice.

A leadership style is a more narrow and specific category than a model or a philosophy. In fact, many styles are contained within models as components.

A style is a distinct way of behaving. A leadership style tends to contain and is influenced strongly by the purpose or aim of the leadership. It may also be strongly influenced and perhaps determined by the personality of the leader and/or the personality or capability of the followers or group being led, and/or of the situation in which the leader is leading his or her people.

Leadership Terminology Differences

This explains the differences between the three categories/aspects of leadership which provide the structure of this article - models, philosophies and styles:

	Summary	More Detail	Symbolically
Leadership models	Leadership models aim to teach us how to be successful or effective as leaders. They show us the keys to being effective. Models often contain different styles and enable 'switching' between them.	Models tend to contain or enable processes and measurable standards, and a 'switching' capability in response to different circumstances. Models may be supported by diagrams and graphs. A model may be influenced by or underpinned by a philosophy.	A leadership model is like a toolbox or a kit of parts.
Leadership philosophies	Leadership philosophies examine the sources of a leader's power and offer a value-laden view of the aims that they should pursue and how they should go about them. Leadership philosophies focus on what kind of leadership one should offer. It is usually more difficult to learn and apply than a model as it is dependent on values, not technique.	Leadership philosophies tend more than the other categories to be based on a life code or moral position. A philosophy - since it is expressed mainly through ideas and words, rather than processes and structured elements - is usually more difficult (than a model) to explain, transfer, teach, apply, or to develop into a measurable set of rules or instructions. A philosophy may underpin a model, and may also underpin a style. A philosophy also involves far more and deeper references to society, politics, civilization, etc., than models or styles.	A leadership philosophy is like a compass or code - underpinned by a set of beliefs.
Leadership styles	Leadership styles are essentially descriptive. They have observed classifications of leadership behaviours. They aim to describe the real-life forms of leadership we see around us. And unlike philosophies, they offer no guidance on the kind of leadership that should be offered - they merely reflect what is out there.	A leadership style is a narrow and specific behaviour compared to the other two categories. Leadership styles tend to be determined or strongly influenced by the leader's personality and their aims. A style is also strongly influenced by the purpose for which leadership is needed or has been established. A style may be suggested or dictated by a model, and to a lesser degree also by philosophy.	A leadership style is like a behaviour (good or not so good) and can be like a tool in the leadership models toolbox.

If you want to become a leader or improve yourself as such, using these three categories should help you understand better the different ideas and teachings.

Leadership ideas can be:

Models - learned/taught/applied in a very practical sense, or
Philosophies - about attitude and where power comes, or
Styles - interesting as typical leadership behaviours - helpful in understanding leadership generally, and to a lesser degree may be faceted within leadership models.

This three-way split is also a useful way to appreciate leadership theory from an academic angle since it provides order and classification for the many theories existing on the subject.

Acknowledgements

James Scouller Biography

We are grateful to James Scouller for his help, patience, and expert contribution in producing this leadership guide.

James Scouller is an expert coach and partner at The Scouller Partnership in the UK, which specialises in coaching leaders. He was chief executive of three international companies for eleven years before becoming a professional coach in 2004. He holds two postgraduate coaching qualifications and training in applied psychology at the Institute of Psychosynthesis in London.

James Scouller's book is called "The Three Levels of Leadership: How to Develop Your Leadership Presence, Know-how and Skill" which was published in May 2011.

How is Leadership Defined?

There are many definitions of leadership. Many lines have been written attempting to capture the essence in just a few words.

The Oxford English Dictionary definition of leadership is simply:

"The action of leading a group of people or an organisation, or the ability to do this ."

We need now to define 'lead' in this context, which is more helpful with regards to appreciating the breadth and depth of the word 'leadership'. Here are the most relevant points from the dictionary:

Be in charge or command
Organise and direct
Set a process in motion
Be a reason or motive for (others to act, change, etc.)

Note that only the first point strongly implies that leadership depends on a single leader, and even this point may easily be interpreted to mean that it can be achieved by delegated responsibility, even across a number of levels and on a vast scale.

Also consider that the last two points do not restrict leadership to the leading of an organised group of people such as a business or other provider of services/products, etc. The last two points broaden the scope to anyone or any collective of people, who inspire or motivate other people to act in some way towards some sort of aim or task or outcome.

To do this well at any level is not simple, just as finding a definition is not simple either.

Some writers understandably make fun of poor leadership, because when done poorly it is evident, especially at the highest levels of responsibility.

A leadership definition is obviously quite limited because it is only a few words or a couple of sentences.
Some definitions of leadership convey a particular essence very well, but that is all a single definition can represent - just an essence.
Any single definition of leadership can only attempt to convey the essence or most important quality of leadership from a particular standpoint or point of view.

A standpoint of leadership tends to dictate the definition.

For example:

An ethical standpoint will produce a definition focused on ethics
A results standpoint will produce a definition focused on results or achieving an end result
A communications and motivational standpoint will produce a definition focused on communication with and motivating followers
And so on

Therefore when we try to understand leadership we should avoid placing too much reliance on a single definition, or even several definitions, especially when we try to explain it to others.

Definitions do not explain leadership - definitions can at best merely convey the essence of leadership from a particular point of view.

To understand, explain, and apply leadership, we must be able to describe it in greater depth.

What is Leadership?

It is very hard to define the meaning of leadership, but there are certain traits that we can attribute to good leaders:

They all inspire a vision amongst their followers and set a direction for performance that they expect to be followed.
Their main skill is making people around them work hard, not because they are told to, but because they want to.
They are often described as dynamic and inspirational and set tasks that are fun, yet challenging.
Motivation is a key skill required to be a good leader, encouraging others to work hard because they want to work hard for their leader.

Transformational leadership is often cited as the closest model to what we call 'traditional' leadership. This model tells us that to be effective you must have the following attributes:

1. Creates an Inspiring Vision For the Future

Creating a vision is important as it acts as an end goal to direct and motivate your team members.
This gives direction to all actions of your team members and can also act as a point of reference after the task is complete.
The vision created will be based on likely changes in the business environment, competitors' movements and the future behaviours of consumers.
The key skills of a leader here are to first correctly predict a likely future scenario and then to convince their team that reaching it will benefit everyone.

2. Motivates and Inspires People to Engage With that Vision

Creating a vision is not enough to generate hard work and passion, the vision must inspire and motivate employees to work hard.
If the vision is likely to drive to major changes to established processes and take a long time to reach it is likely, at some point during the process, that support for it will decrease.
For this reason, it is an important task for leaders to consistently build and maintain support for the vision.
One way of doing this is to emphasise that the vision will bring about positive changes for the organisation, and these changes will have positive implications for the employees themselves, such as financial rewards.
Employees will be motivated by the thought of the organisation progressing, but also by their potential personal gains.

3. Is Responsible for Their Team's Delivery of that Vision

This area of leadership has many crossovers with the skill of management.
Delivering the vision involves setting out a plan of action, delegating tasks, monitoring and rewarding progress throughout the process and assessing the success when the goal is reached.

4. Coaches and Mentors their Team members to Maximise Their Individual Effectiveness and the Effectiveness of Their Team

It is unlikely a leader will already have a team of high-performing individuals that complement each other to create the most effective team possible.
Therefore, it is important they develop their team members' skills and build an effective team. This may be done by delegating responsibility, transferring skills or formal training.
Regardless of the stage of the process, continuous development of individuals and the team is key to maintaining success.
Developing leadership potential within your team is crucial for the future success of the organisation.

Leadership is not as effective unless it is also supported by good management, as we will discuss throughout this course. Find out more about what Forbes believes it is to be a leader here.

Why is Good Leadership Important?

Good leadership is often cited as the key reason for organisational success.
A leader who inspires their workforce to consistently perform at the highest level is likely to see success resonate throughout the organisation.
Strong leadership also has the power to develop more leaders. This can be very effective as it means new leaders are developed internally, rather than hired externally. It also ensures that they understand the values and processes within the company.
Good leadership also instils a culture within the company where everyone is willing to work hard for each other. This resonates throughout the whole organisation and is an excellent way of ensuring performance remains high.

Regardless of your organisation's talent, model or assets, without strong leadership performance can remain low.

Strong leadership ties these factors together to create a high-performance organisation.
An organisation can theoretically have the potential for success, but only leadership can put this potential into action and deliver tangible results.
Leaders can be particularly important in times of change or weak performance. Here, they have the skills to increase motivation and morale and guide the organisation through troubled times.

What can you Learn about Leadership?

Many people believe that good leader are born with those attributes and the skills they have cannot be taught to others. This is simply not true, learning about theories and models, face-to-face training and experience can be combined to develop a strong leader, regardless of their natural abilities.

In fact, even the greatest are constantly learning and are likely to have learnt most of their skills from someone else. The important thing is to never believe you have learnt all there is to know and to keep developing skills and learning from new experiences.

Building this set of skills and becoming an effective leader can make you a very valuable asset to any organisation and is likely to see you financially rewarded for the skills you develop.
There is no 'one size fits all' style and no two leaders are the same. Therefore, as you develop your own techniques you should not worry that it is not straight out of the textbook.

Leadership models and styles are simply guidelines for how you should think about developing your leadership skill-set.

Leadership Roles

Leadership and the Leader's Purpose

An important part of describing anything is to look at its purpose. This is especially appropriate for leadership.

In exploring leadership purposes, we should first differentiate the terms leader and leadership.

This is because we can understand leadership better when we are not distracted by traditional ideas about what a leader does, and how one behaves, etc.

A leader is a person who leads a particular group at a particular time.
Leadership is a much broader and 'multi-dimensional' concept. It is a hugely complex system of effects which strongly influence how a group of people are organized and how they act.

The bigger the group, the situation, and the environment with which the group engages, then the more complex 'Leadership' - as a system of effects - will be.

Leadership is therefore often quite separate from the notion of a single leader of a single group, situation, and time.

James Scouller describes leadership as a process. In referring to leadership as a 'process', Scouller means: "...a series of choices and actions around defining and achieving a goal..."
Scouller asserts that if you see it as a process you will more naturally appreciate that 'leadership' and 'the leader' are not one and the same.

Leadership is a process, within which there may be different leaders acting at different times in different situations.

Other authors, notably John Adair, also say that leadership does not have to rely on one person.
This is a very important notion - that leadership can be shared, and that a leader does not necessarily have to be actively leading all the time.

A leader's responsibility is to ensure that there is appropriate leadership of some sort at all times, but it does not always or necessarily have to be provided by the main leader. Here the 'main leader' refers to the overall ultimate leader of a given group or situation.

Leadership can quite easily be provided and is often better provided, by someone other than the main leader.

What is the Purpose of a Leader?

Leadership purpose can be seen to operate on at least two levels:

Ultimate responsibility ('the buck stops here') - which may not be a direct controlling or active role
Active leadership of a group or situation at a point in time - which may be performed by the main leader or a different person delegated such responsibility.

Note that this can be happening in different areas/projects/situations at the same time, where several people are actively engaged in direct leadership of a group, with very full 'executive' command, i.e., absolute responsibility for decision-making while the ultimate/main leader retains responsibility and accountability for the entire group and wider situation.

Responsibility vs. Accountability

It's appropriate here to explain the differences between responsibility and accountability:

Responsibility usually refers to the performance of a duty or action in making something happen, or perhaps preventing something from happening.

Commonly, responsibility can be delegated, either in broad terms for an area of a project, or in specific terms for a particular task or job element.
Often responsibility requires training and support to be provided to the person responsible.
Responsibility commonly transfers from person to person, or from department to department - for example when a manager takes over a night shift, or a manager goes on holiday or even takes a lunch break.
However, often a responsibility is delegated without proper thought and planning, so the person charged with the duty has little chance of success. Where blame happens in such circumstances it is because a leader is trying to avoid accountability.

Accountability is different from responsibility. Accountability equates to ultimate responsibility.

A common saying that refers to ultimate responsibility is 'the buck stops here' or 'where the buck stops'. True leadership involves accepting accountability, regardless of who is given the responsibility.
Where responsibilities are delegated, which happens frequently where there is good leadership, the good leader retains ultimate responsibility - accountability - for the delegated tasks/responsibilities concerned.
Poor or weak leadership - which we routinely see evidenced in national and corporate governance - tends to try to delegate accountability in addition to responsibility. Good leaders may delegate lots of responsibility, but they never normally delegate accountability, nor seek to pass accountability to others, unless effectively stepping aside for someone to take over the overall job within which the responsibility lies, as in job succession or the creation of a new job role.
Even then, a good leader is unlikely to relinquish ultimate accountability. They accept ultimate responsibility - accountability - for everything within their remit or the range of their job/role.
We might see this instead as a good leader being prepared to take the blame for any faults arising within their full range of responsibilities, even though responsibilities may be delegated far and wide among very many people.
An important point of note is that accountability should not be delegated unless the recipient (of the delegated accountability) has full authority and capability for the responsibilities concerned.

Accountability is always full and absolute, whereas responsibility may be delegated according to varying degrees of authority.

An interesting yet challenging way to see this is that:

A good leader will divert and give credit and praise to others when delegated responsibilities succeed.
And where delegated responsibilities fail, the good leader will accept the blame. This is accountability.

Given the deep qualities of good leadership, there is no other viable way.

Corporations and governments habitually ignore this crucial principle of leadership when middle managers or departmental heads are forced to resign or are sacked after a crisis or scandal. Leaders in such situations often fail to take the blame or to accept his/her ultimate responsibility. Watching such events play out in the national or world news offers excellent examples and lessons of the differences between responsibility and accountability, and how these concepts fit into the wider issue of proper leadership.

James Scouller says of the leader's purpose:

"The purpose of a leader is to make sure there is leadership - to ensure that all four dimensions of leadership (Scouller's model is explained later) are being addressed... This means the leader does not always have to lead from the front; he or she can delegate, or share part of their responsibility for leadership. However, the buck still stops with the leader. So although the leader can let someone else lead in a particular situation, he or she cannot let go of the responsibility to make sure there is a leadership... For example, the leader has to ensure there is a vision or a goal that all (or at least most) group members want to deliver, but that doesn't mean he or she has to come up with the vision on their own. That is one way of leading, but it's not the only way. Another way is to co-create the vision with one's colleagues."

Scouller illustrates the principle of 'sharing leadership while retaining responsibility to ensure there is leadership' with the following example (extracted from Scouller's 2011 book, The Three Levels of Leadership):

"...Imagine a leader and his team are flying in an aeroplane over the Pacific Ocean, hundreds of miles from civilisation. And imagine the plane crashes on a desert island, leaving only the leader and team members as survivors. The leader calls the team together and says, 'Now look, none of us knows how long we'll be here, and I don't have any experience of emergencies like this. Have any of you learnt survival skills to keep us alive while we figure out how to attract attention for a rescue?' Let's say Jack, one of the team members steps forward and replies, 'Yes, I was in the Army Reserve and trained in survival techniques.' So the leader says, 'Okay Jack, you take charge for the moment. What do we have to do first?..' "

Scouller continues:

"On this island, you can see that the leader realised someone else was better qualified to lead at that moment. So he delegated leadership of the survival challenge to Jack, and played the role of follower, but note that he didn't neglect or delegate his fundamental responsibility to ensure there was leadership. In due course, the group's challenges would have changed, and the leader would judge whether to resume direct control or delegate to someone else."

Leadership Tips

Tips and techniques to improve leadership skills and develop an understanding of effective leadership style.

Leadership development tips and techniques, plus free online materials for organisational and personal development. Tips for business training in management, sales, marketing, project management, communication, leadership, time management and team building and motivation.

Leadership Development Methods and Tips

Explaining and understanding the nature of good leadership is probably easier than practising it. Good leadership requires deep human qualities, beyond conventional notions of authority.

In the modern age, good leaders are an enabling force, helping people and organisations to perform and develop, which implies that a sophisticated alignment is achieved - of people's needs, and the aims of the organisation.
The traditional concept of a leader being the directing chief at the top of a hierarchy is nowadays a very incomplete appreciation of what true leadership must be.

Effective leadership does not necessarily require great technical or intellectual capacity. These attributes might help, but they are not pivotal.

Good leadership in the modern age, more importantly, requires attitudes and behaviours which characterise and relate to humanity.
The concept of serving is fundamental to the role. Good leadership involves serving the organisation or group and the people within it.
Ineffective leaders tend to invert this principle and consider merely that they must be served by the people. This faulty idea fosters the notion that leadership is an opportunity to take: to acquire personal status, advantage, gain, etc., at the expense of others, which is grossly wrong. It is instead an opportunity to give; to serve the organisation, and crucially the people too. The modern notions of 'servant leader' and 'servant leadership ' are attributed to Robert K Greenleaf (in his 1970 essay "The Servant as Leader"). However, the philosophy and concept of leadership being a serving function rather than one that is served is very old indeed and found in ancient civilisations and religious writings.
Leadership is centrally concerned with people. Of course, it involves decisions and actions relating to all sorts of other things, but leadership is special compared to any other role because of its unique responsibility for people - i.e., the followers - in whatever context leadership is seen to operate.

Principles of Leadership

Many capabilities in life are a matter of acquiring skills and knowledge and then applying them in a reliable way. Leadership is quite different. Good leadership demands emotional strengths and behavioural characteristics which can draw deeply on a leader's mental and spiritual reserves.
The leadership role is an inevitable reflection of people's needs and challenges in modern life. It, therefore, is a profound concept, with increasingly complex implications, driven by an increasingly complex and fast-changing world.
Leadership and management are commonly seen as the same thing, but they are not. Leadership is also misunderstood to mean directing and instructing people and making important decisions on behalf of an organisation. Doing it effectively is much more than these.
Good leaders are followed chiefly because people trust and respect them, rather than the skills they possess. Leadership is about behaviour first, skills second.

The Difference between Leadership and Management

This is a simple way to see how leadership is different to management:

Management is mostly about processes.
Leadership is mostly about behaviour.

We could extend this to say:

Management relies heavily on tangible and measurable capabilities such as effective planning; the use of organisational systems; and the use of appropriate communication methods.
Leadership involves many management skills, but generally as a secondary or background function of true leadership. It instead relies most strongly on less tangible and less measurable things like trust, inspiration, attitude, decision-making, and personal character. These are not processes or skills or even necessarily the result of experience. They are facets of humanity and are enabled mainly by the leader's character and especially his/her emotional reserves.

Another way to see leadership compared with management is that the former does not crucially depend on the type of management methods and processes a leader uses; leadership instead primarily depends on the ways in which the leader uses management methods and processes.

Good leadership depends on attitudinal qualities, not management processes.

Humanity is a way to describe these qualities because this reflects the leader's vital relationship with people.

Qualities critical for a leader's relationship with his/her people are quite different from conventional skills and processes, which are outlined in more detail below.

Significant Leadership Behaviours and Attitudes

Integrity
Honesty
Humility
Courage
Commitment
Sincerity
Passion
Confidence
Positivity
Wisdom
Determination
Compassion
Sensitivity

People with these sorts of behaviours and attitudes tend to attract followers. Followers are naturally drawn to people who exhibit strength and can inspire belief in others.

These qualities tend to produce a charismatic effect. Charisma tends to result from effective leadership and the qualities which enable that. Charisma is by itself no guarantee of effective leadership.
Some people are born more naturally to leadership than others. Most people don't seek to be a leader, but many more people are able to do it, in one way or another and in one situation or another, than they realise.

People who want to be a leader can develop their abilities. Leadership is not the exclusive preserve of the wealthy and educated.

Leadership is a matter of personal conviction and believing strongly in a cause or aim, whatever it is.

Sometimes it comes to people later in life, and this is no bad thing. Humanity tends to be a generational characteristic. There is no real obstacle to people who seek to become leaders if it is approached with proper integrity. Anyone can be a leader if he/she is suitably driven to a particular cause.
And many qualities of effective leadership, like confidence and charisma, continue to grow from experience in the leadership role. Even initially surprised modest leaders can become great ones, and sometimes the greatest ones.

Leadership can be performed in different styles. Some people only have one style, which is right for certain situations and wrong for others. Sometimes they can adapt and use different styles for given situations.

The adaptability of leadership style is an increasingly significant aspect of leadership because the world is increasingly complex and dynamic. Adaptability stems from objectivity, which in turn stems from emotional security and emotional maturity. Again these strengths are not dependent on wealth or education, or skills or processes.

Important Aspects of Good Leadership

Good leaders typically have a keen understanding of relationships within quite large and complex systems and networks. This may be from an intuitive angle, or a technical/learned angle, or both.

A very useful way to explore this crucial aspect of leadership with respect to wider relationships and systems is offered by the Psychological Contract and how that theory relates to organisations and leadership.
Nudge theory is a powerful change-management methodology that emerged in the 2000s. It is very helpful in understanding how and why groups of people think the way they do, and how and why they behave and make decisions, which can be baffling to leaders. Nudge theory also offers some very clever ways to alter group behaviour, which are generally not taught or understood in the conventional leadership field.

People new to leadership (and supervision and management) often feel under pressure to work in a particularly dominant way. Sometimes this pressure to impose their authority on the team comes from above. Dominant leadership is rarely appropriate, however, especially for mature teams. Misreading this situation, and attempting to be overly dominant, can then cause problems. Resistance from the team becomes a problem, and a cycle of negative behaviours and reducing performance begins.

As discussed in What Is Leadership, much of leadership is counter-intuitive and is often more about serving. Besides this, individuals and teams tend not to resist or push against something in which they have a strong involvement/ownership/sense of control.

People tend to respond well to thanks, encouragement, recognition, inclusiveness, etc. Tough, overly dominant leadership gives teams a lot to push against and resist. It also prevents a sense of ownership and self-control among the people being led. It inhibits the positive rewards and incentives (thanks, recognition, encouragement, etc.) vital for teams and individuals to cope with change, and enjoy themselves.
Leaders, of course, need to be able to make tough decisions when required, but most importantly they should concentrate on enabling the team to thrive, which is actually a 'serving' role, not the dominant 'leading' role commonly associated with leadership.

The Relevance of Leadership Philosophies and Ethical Leadership

Today ethical leadership is more important than ever. The world is more transparent and connected than it has ever been. The actions and philosophies of organisations are scrutinised by the media and the general public as never before.

This coincides with massively increased awareness and interest among people everywhere in corporate responsibility and the many related concepts, such as social and community responsibility. The modern leader needs to understand and aspire to lead people and achieve greatness in all these areas.

Philosophy (you could call it 'fundamental purpose') is the foundation on which to build strategy, management, operational activities, and pretty well everything else that happens in an organisation.
Whatever the size of the organisation, operational activities need to be reconcilable with a single congruent (fitting, harmonious) philosophy.

Having a Conflicting Organisational/Leadership Philosophy

Executives, managers, staff, customers, suppliers, stakeholders, etc., need solid philosophical principles (another term would be a 'frame of reference') on which to base their expectations, decisions and actions. In a vast complex organisation, leadership will be very challenging at the best of times due to reasons of size, diversity, political and public interest, etc. Having a conflicting philosophy dramatically increases these difficulties for everyone, not least the leader, because the frame of reference is confusing.

For leadership to work well, people (employees and interested outsiders) must be able to connect their expectations, aims and activities to a basic purpose or philosophy of the organisation.

This foundational philosophy should provide vital reference points for employees' decisions and actions - an increasingly significant factor in modern 'empowered' organisations.
Seeing a clear philosophy and purpose is also essential for staff, customers and outsiders in assessing crucial organisational characteristics such as integrity, ethics, fairness, quality and performance.
A clear philosophy is vital to the 'psychological contract' - whether stated or unstated (almost always unstated) - on which people (employees, customers or observers) tend to judge their relationships and transactions.

Example:

The BBC is an example (it's not the only one) of an organisation that has a confusing organisational philosophy. At times it is inherently conflicting. For example: Who are its owners? Who are its customers? What are its priorities and obligations? Are its commercial operations a means to an end, or an end in themselves? Is its main aim to provide commercial mainstream entertainment, or non-commercial education and information? Is it a public service, or is it a commercial provider? Will, it one day be privatised in part or whole? If so will this threaten me or benefit me? As an employee am I sharing in something or being exploited? As a customer (if the description is apt) am I also an owner? Or am I finding somebody else's gravy train? What are the organisation's obligations to the state and to the government?

Given such uncertainties, not only is there a very unclear basic philosophy and purpose but also, it's very difficult to achieve consistency for leadership messages to staff and customers. Also, how can staff and customers align their efforts and expectations with such confusing aims and principles?

The BBC is just an example. There are many organisations, large and small, with conflicting and confusing fundamental aims.

The lesson is that philosophy - or underpinning purpose - is the foundation on which leadership (for strategy, management, motivation, everything) is built.

If the foundation is not solid and viable and is not totally congruent with what follows, then everything built onto it is prone to wobble, and at times can fall over completely.

Get the philosophy right - solid and in harmony with the activities - and the foundation is strong.

Again, the Psychological Contract provides a helpful perspective for aligning people and organisational philosophy.

This, of course, gives rise to the question of what to do if you find yourself in charge of a team or organisation which lacks the clarity of fundamental philosophy and purpose, and here lies an inescapable difference between managing and leading:

As a leader, your responsibility extends beyond leading the people. True leadership also includes - as far as your situation allows - the responsibility to protect or refine fundamental purpose and philosophy.

Allegiance and Leadership

Different leaders have different ideas about leadership.

For example, see below Jack Welch's perspective, which even though quite modern compared to most, is nevertheless based on quite traditional principles.

First here is a deeper more philosophical view of effective modern leadership which addresses the foundations of effective leadership, rather than the styles and methods built on top, which are explained later.

A British government initiative surfaced in March 2008, which suggested that young people should swear an oath of allegiance to 'Queen and Country', seemingly as a means of improving national loyalty, identity, and allegiance.
While packaged as a suggestion to address 'disaffection' among young people, the idea was essentially concerned with leadership - or more precisely because it was failing.

Important Principles of Leadership

The above idea was rightly and unanimously dismissed by all sensible commentators as foolhardy nonsense, but it does provide a wonderful perspective by which to examine and illustrate the actual important principles of leadership:

Always, when leaders say that the people are not following, it's the leaders who are lost, not the people.
Leaders get lost because of isolation, delusion or arrogance, etc., but above all, because they become obsessed with imposing their authority, instead of truly leading.
Incidentally, leading is helping people achieve a shared vision, not telling people what to do.
It is not possible for a leader to understand and lead people when their head is high in the clouds.
That is to say - loyalty to leadership relies on the leader having a connection with and understanding of people's needs and wishes and possibilities. Solutions to challenges do not lie in the leader's needs and wishes. Solutions lie in the needs and wishes of the followers.
The suggestion that loyalty and a following can be built by simply asking or forcing people to be loyal is not any basis for effective leadership.
Prior to expecting anyone to follow, a leader first needs to demonstrate a vision and values worthy of a following.
A given type of leadership inevitably attracts the same type of followers. Put another way, a leader cannot behave in any way that they ask their people not to.
In other words, for people to embrace and follow modern compassionate, honest, ethical, peaceful, and fair principles, they must see these qualities demonstrated by their leadership.
People are a lot cleverer than most leaders think.
People have a much keener sense of truth than most leaders think.
People quickly lose faith in a leader who behaves as if points 10 and 11 do not exist.
People generally have the answers which elude the leaders - they just have better things to do than help the leader to do their job - like getting on with their own lives.
Leadership that screws up in a big way should come clean and admit their errors. People will generally forgive mistakes but they do not tolerate being treated like idiots by leaders.
And on the question of mistakes, a mistake is an opportunity to be better, and to show remorse and a lesson learned. This is how civilisation progresses.
A leader should be brave enough to talk when lesser people want to fight. Anyone can resort to threats and aggression. Being aggressive is not leading. It might have been a couple of thousand years ago, but it's not now. The nature of humankind and civilisation has become more 'civilised'. They should enable and not obstruct this process.

However - always remember the philosophical platform - this ethical platform is not a technique or a process - it's the foundation on which all the techniques and methodologies are based.

Plan carefully, with your people where appropriate, how you will achieve your aims.
You may have to redefine or develop your own new aims and priorities. Leadership can be daunting for many people simply because no one else is issuing the aims.
Leadership often means you have to create your own form of a blank sheet of paper, set and agree on clear standards, and keep the right balance between 'doing' yourself and managing others 'to do'.

Build teams: Ensure you look after people and that communications and relationships are good. Select good people and help them to develop. Develop people via training and experience, particularly by agreeing on objectives and responsibilities that will interest and stretch them, and always support people while they strive to improve and take on extra tasks.

Follow the rules about delegation closely - this process is crucial. Ensure that your managers are applying the same principles. Good leadership principles must cascade down through the whole organisation. This means that if you are leading a large organisation you must check that the processes for managing, communicating and developing people are in place and working properly.

Communication is critical. Listen, consult, involve, and explain why as well as what needs to be done.

Some leaders lead by example and are very 'hands-on'; others are more distanced and let their people do it. Whatever - your example is paramount - the way you work and conduct yourself will be the most you can possibly expect from your people. If you set low standards you are to blame for low standards in your people.

"... Praise loudly, blame softly." (Catherine the Great). Follow this maxim.
If you seek the single most important behaviour that will rapidly earn you respect and trust among your people, this is it: Always give your people the credit for your achievements and successes. Never take the credit yourself - even if it's all down to you, which would be unlikely anyway.
You must, however, take the blame and accept responsibility for any failings or mistakes that your people make. Never publicly blame another person for failing. Their failing is your responsibility - true leadership means there is no hiding place.

Take time to listen to and really understand people. Walk the job. Ask and learn about what people do and think, and how they think improvements can be made.

Accentuate the positive. Express things in terms of what should be done, not what should not be done. If you accentuate the negative, people are more likely to veer towards it. Like the mother who left her five-year-old for a minute unsupervised in the kitchen, saying as she left the room, "...don't you go putting those beans up your nose..."

Have faith in people to do great things - given space and air and time, everyone can achieve more than they hope for. Provide people with relevant interesting opportunities, with proper measures and rewards and they will more than repay your faith.

Take difficult decisions bravely, and be truthful and sensitive when you implement them.

Constantly seek to learn from the people around you - they will teach you more about yourself than anything else. They will also tell you 90% of what you need to know to achieve your business goals.

Embrace change, but not for change's sake. Begin to plan your own succession as soon as you take up your new post, and in this regard, ensure that the only promises you ever make are those that you can guarantee to deliver.

Leadership Behaviours and Development of Leadership Style and Skills

Leadership skills are based on behaviour. Skills alone do not make leaders - style and behaviour do. If you are interested in leadership training and development - start with leadership behaviour.

The growing awareness and demand for idealist principles in leadership are increasing the emphasis (in terms of leadership characteristics) on business ethics, corporate responsibility, emotional maturity, personal integrity, and what is popularly now known as the 'triple bottom line' (abbreviated to TBL or 3BL, representing 'profit, people, planet').

For many people (staff, customers, suppliers, investors, commentators, visionaries, etc.) these are becoming the most significant areas of attitude/behaviour/appreciation required in modern business and organisational leaders.

3BL (triple bottom line - profit, people, planet) also provides an excellent multi-dimensional framework for explaining, developing and assessing leadership potential and capability, and also links strongly with psychological aspects, for instance psychometric (personality testing) features in leadership selection and development methods. Each of us is more naturally inclined to one or the other (profit, people, planet) by virtue of our personality.

Much debate persists as to the validity of 'triple bottom line accounting' since standards and measures are some way from being clearly defined and agreed upon.
This does not reduce the relevance of the concept, nor the growing public awareness of it, which effectively and continuously re-shapes markets and therefore corporate behaviour.
Accordingly, leaders need to understand and respond to such huge attitudinal trends, whether they can be reliably accounted for or not at the moment.

Adaptability and vision - as might be demonstrated via project development scenarios or tasks - especially involving modern communications and knowledge technologies - are also critical for certain leadership roles, and provide unlimited scope for development processes, methods and activities.
Cultural diversity is another topical and very relevant area requiring leadership involvement, if not mastery. Large organisations particularly must recognise that the marketplace, in terms of staff, customers and suppliers, is truly global now, and leaders must be able to function and appreciate and adapt to all aspects of cultural diversification.

A leader who fails to relate culturally well and widely and openly inevitably condemns the entire organisation to adopt the same narrow focus and bias.

Bear in mind that different leadership jobs (and chairman) require different types of leaders - Churchill was fine for war but not good for peacetime re-building. There's a big difference between the short-term return on investment versus long-term change. Each warrants a different type of leadership style, and very few leaders are actually able to adapt from one to the other.

If it's not clear already, leadership is without doubt mostly about behaviour, especially towards others. People who strive for these things generally come to be regarded and respected by their people:

Integrity - is the most important requirement; without it, everything else is for nothing.
Having an effective appreciation and approach towards corporate responsibility, (Triple Bottom Line, Fair Trade, etc.), so that the need to make a profit is balanced with wider social and environmental responsibilities.
Being mature - never getting emotionally negative with people - no shouting or ranting, even if you feel very upset or angry.
Leading by example - always be seen to be working harder and more determinedly than anyone else.
Helping alongside your people when they need it.
Fairness - treating everyone equally and on merit.
Being firm and clear in dealing with bad or unethical behaviour.
Listening to and really understanding people, and showing them that you understand (this doesn't mean you have to agree with everyone - understanding is different from agreeing).
Always take responsibility and blame for your people's mistakes.
Always give your people the credit for your successes.
Never self-promoting.
Backing up and supporting your people.
Being decisive - even if the decision is to delegate or do nothing if appropriate - but be seen to be making fair and balanced decisions.
Asking for people's views, but remain neutral and objective.
Being honest but sensitive in the way that you give bad news or criticism.
Always doing what you say you will do - keeping your promises.
Working hard to become an expert at what you do technically, and at understanding your people's technical abilities and challenges.
Encouraging your people to grow, to learn and to take on as much as they want to, at a pace they can handle.
Always accentuating the positive (say 'do it like this', not 'don't do it like that').
Smiling and encouraging others to be happy and enjoy themselves.
Relaxing - breaking down the barriers and the leadership awe - and giving your people and yourself time to get to know and respect each other.
Taking notes and keeping good records.
Planning and prioritising.
Managing your time well and helping others to do so too.
Involving your people in your thinking and especially in managing change.
Reading good books, and taking advice from good people, help develop your own understanding of yourself, and particularly of other people's weaknesses.
Achieve the company tasks and objectives, while maintaining your integrity, and the trust of your people, and balancing the corporate aims with the needs of the world beyond.

Informing Yourself - Leadership Articles and Leadership Development Justification

Many articles appear in the press and trade journals about leadership; look out for them, they can teach you a lot.

Newspaper articles - particularly those that appear in the serious press - about leadership and management, organizational and business culture, are an excellent source of ideas, examples and references for developing leadership.

A journalist could have spent a week researching the subject, talking to leading business leaders, academics and writers, and preparing useful statistics. This is a valuable material. Learn from it, use it and keep it, because finding specific detail like this is usually quite difficult.

Serious relevant articles in the newspapers, trade press, or online equivalent, cost little or nothing, and yet they can be invaluable in developing your own ideas about leadership, and in providing compelling justification to organizations and managers for the need to adopt new ideas and different approaches to leadership development.

Particularly powerful are articles which describe corporate failings, many with huge liabilities, arising from poor leadership behaviour and decisions, and which appear in the news virtually every week. Recent history is also littered with all sorts of corporate disasters and scandals, and while these high-profile examples are of a grander scale than usually applies in typical organisations, the same principles apply - an organisation is only as good as its leadership - at all levels.

Business disasters and failures - be their natural environmental, financial, safety, commercial or people-related - are invariably traceable back to a failure in leadership, and so any boardroom that says "That sort of thing wouldn't happen to us.." or "Our managers all know how to lead without being taught.." is probably riding for a fall.

Finding specific examples of cost and return on investment relating to leadership development is not easy (measuring leadership 'cause and effect' is not as simple as more tangible business elements), which is why it's useful to keep any such articles when you happen to see them.

Certain leadership development organisations are sometimes able to provide ROI justification and/or case studies, which is another possible source of evidence for reports and justification studies.

Given the growing significance of corporate ethics and responsibility, we can expect to see increasing ROI data relating to 'Triple Bottom Line' and 'Corporate Responsibility'.

Traditional Leadership Roles - Jack Welch

How to Successfully Pin-Point Leadership Roles

Looking at what has traditionally worked in the past, Jack Welch, a respected business leader and writer proposes a few fundamental leadership principles that can help a leader successfully pinpoint their roles.

Welch's 10 Fundamental Leadership Principles

There is only one way - the straightway. It sets the tone of the organisation.
Be open to the best of what everyone, everywhere, has to offer; transfer learning across your organisation.
Getting the right people in the right jobs - is more important than developing a strategy.
An informal atmosphere is a competitive advantage.
Make sure everybody counts and everybody knows they count.
Legitimate self-confidence is a winner - the true test of self-confidence is the courage to be open.
The business has to be fun.
Never underestimate the other guy.
Understand where the real value is added and put your best people there.
Know when to meddle and when to let go - this is pure instinct.

Jack Welch also proposes that as a leader, your main priority is to get the job done, whatever the job is. He suggests that leaders make things happen by:

Knowing your objectives and having a plan of how to achieve them
Building a team committed to achieving the objectives
Helping each team member to give their best efforts

To be a great leader and successfully know how to direct a team, you must know yourself. Identify your own strengths and weaknesses, so that you can build the best team around you.

References and Further Reading

Slater, Robert. (2003). 29 Leadership Secrets from Jack Welch. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.

10 Misconceptions about Leadership

Avoiding Negative Leadership Characteristics

Equally important as following the common positive characteristics of good leaders, is avoiding commonly sighted negative characteristics.

10 Things to Avoid as a Successful Leader

Not Listening: Listening is important to building a loyal and faithful team. Everyone needs to be part of the process and the bigger picture.
Dismissing ideas other than your own: Don’t make employees feel like they are pitching to you, encourage them to brainstorm alongside you. Understand their potential and give credit where it is due.
Accepting Experience over potential: Note that some of your best talents will come from passionate individuals. Take advantage of their enthusiasm and their fresh outlook on the industry.
Ego: Release your ego and focus on becoming an inspirational figure. Look out for your team because if you are without their full support, you will get nowhere.
Overworking: Set an example for your team and learn how to take a break. Make sure your mind isn’t always focused on one thing -work. It could cause a negative atmosphere and your team may also think they have to follow suit and work all hours.
Lack of empathy: Leaders must do their best to remove obstacles so a team can prosper.
Under-prioritising leadership development: Create a growth plan for your team and encourage them to become leaders within their departments. Give them a personal goal and build their enthusiasm.
Being too conservative: Have faith in yourself and your team. Missing opportunities could be a detriment to your organisation. Create excitement by using your gut and have an open mind, you never know what opportunities may come your way.
Assigning blame: Take responsibility for team failures, because they are your responsibility. It is your responsibility to find a solution.
Inconsistency: Don’t confuse your team with misdirection. Use your ethics and vision to define the ultimate goal and stick to it.

Interesting Leadership Quotes

Here are some of our favourite leadership quotes. Poetic quotes especially, some dating back hundreds of years, illustrate the fascination that leadership has held for academics, scholars, poets and leaders of note throughout history. They also help to define leadership in its many and various forms.

"People ask the difference between a leader and a boss.... The leader works in the open, and the boss in covert. The leader leads and the boss drives." - Theodore Roosevelt
"The marksman hitteth the target partly by pulling, partly by letting go. The boatsman reacheth the landing partly by pulling, partly by letting go." - Egyptian proverb
"No man is fit to command another that cannot command himself." - William Penn
"It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit." - Harry S Truman
"I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow." - Woodrow Wilson
"What should it profit a man if he would gain the whole world yet lose his soul." - Mark, 8:36
"A dream is just a dream. A goal is a dream with a plan and a deadline." - Harvey Mackay
"Ideas are like rabbits. You get a couple, learn how to look after them, and pretty soon you have a dozen." - John Steinbeck
"I keep six honest serving-men, They taught me all I knew; Their names are What and Why and When, And How and Where and Who." - Rudyard Kipling, from 'Just So Stories', 1902
"A dwarf standing on the shoulders of a giant may see farther than the giant himself." Didacus Stella, circa AD60 - and, as a matter of interest, abridged on the edge of an English £2 coin
"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful." - Samuel Johnson
"The most important thing in life is not to capitalise on your successes - any fool can do that. The really important thing is to profit from your mistakes." - William Bolitho, from 'Twelve against the Gods'
"Out of the night that covers me, Black as the pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods may be, For my unconquerable soul. In the fell clutch of circumstance, I have not winced nor cried aloud: Under the bludgeonings of chance my head is bloody but unbowed . . . . . It matters not how strait the gait, how charged with punishments the scroll, I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul." - WE Henley, from 'Invictus'
"Everybody can get angry - that's easy. But getting angry at the right person, with the right intensity, at the right time, for the right reason and in the right way - that's hard." - Aristotle
"Management means helping people to get the best out of themselves, not organising things." - Lauren Appley
"It's not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred with the sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes up short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy cause and who, at best knows the triumph of high achievement and who at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt
"Behind an able man there are always other able men." - Chinese Proverb
"I praise loudly. I blame softly." - Catherine the Great
"Experto Credite." ("Trust one who has proved it.") - Virgil
"Leadership is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize your own leadership potential." - Warren Bennis
"Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles." - John Kotter, from Leading Change
"The art of mobilising others to want to struggle for shared aspirations." - James Kouzes and Barry Posner, from The Leadership Challenge.
"Leadership is a process that involves: setting a purpose and direction which inspires people to combine and work towards willingly; paying attention to the means, pace and quality of progress towards the aim; and upholding group unity and individual effectiveness throughout." - James Scouller, from The Three Levels of Leadership, 2011.
"And when we think we lead, we are most led." - Lord Byron, from The Two Foscari, 1821.
"Ah well! I am their leader, I really should be following them!" - Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin, from Histoire Contemporaine by E de Mirecourt, 1857 - Ledru-Rollin was a main instigator of the 1848 French Revolution and apparently said these words when struggling to make his way through a mob.
"He that would govern others first should be master of himself." - Philip Massinger, from The Bondman, 1624.
"Never trust a lean meritocracy nor the leader who has been lean; only the lifelong big have the knack of wedding greatness with balance." - Les A Murray, from Quintets for Robert Morley - a meritocracy is a government of people selected according to merit - 'lean' in this sense means offering little substance or reward or nourishment - 'big' in this sense means big-hearted, strong and generous.
"We were not born to sue, but to command." - William Shakespeare, from Richard II, I.i - 'sue' here is the older French-English meaning 'follow after'.
"No-one would have doubted his ability to rule had he never been emperor." Tacitus, from Histories, c.100AD - written of Emperor Galba.
"A committee is a group of the unwilling, picked from the unfit, to do the unnecessary." - Richard Harkness.
"The Vice-Presidency isn't worth a pitcher of warm spit." - J N Garner.
"Ninety-nine per cent of adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. It's the other lousy one per cent that gets all the publicity and gives us a bad name. But then, we elected 'em." - Lily Tomlin.

Leadership Reading List

A list of recommended reading for our Leadership course

This is not an exhaustive list of the reading for this course, nor are you expected to cover all of the material. Use these sources for further investigation into topics you are intrigued by or are looking for clarification on.

Adair, J. (1973). Action-Centred Leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Adair, J. (1983). Effective Leadership.
Bernard Bass. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations.
Barrett, Richard. (2006). Building A Values-Driven Organization. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006. Print.
Blake, R. and Mouton, J. (1964). The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co.
Bolman, Lee G, and Terrence Deal. (1991). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991. Print.
Buchanan, David A and Huczynski, Andrzej. (1991). Organizational Behaviour. New York: Prentice Hall, 1991. Print.
Burns, J, M. (1978). Leadership.
Drucker, Peter F. (1974) Management. New York: Harper & Row, 1974. Print.
Fielder, F, E. (1964). A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press. 1964.
Fiedler, F. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness.
French, J and Raven, B (1958/59). The Bases of Social Power
Galton, Francis. (1998). Hereditary Genius. Bristol, U.K.: Thoemmes Press, 1998. Print.
Gensler. (2005). These Four Walls: The Real British Office. Gensler, London, 2005.
George, Bill. (2003). Authentic Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Print.
George, Bill, Andrew N McLean, and Nick Craig. (2008) Finding Your True North. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008. Print
Grace, Bill. (1999) Ethical Leadership. Center For Ethical Leadership. Print.
Greenleaf, Robert K. (1991). The Servant As Leader. Indianapolis, IN: Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1991. Print.
Greenleaf, Robert K et al. (2002). Servant Leadership. New York: Paulist Press, 2002. Print.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal 23 (5): 26–34. 1969.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K (1982) Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources,
House, Robert J. (1996). Path-Goal Theory Of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, And A Reformulated Theory. The Leadership Quarterly 7.3 (1996): 323-352.
Keith, K. The Case for Servant Leadership.
Kennedy, C. (1991/2002) Guide to the Management Gurus.
Kouzes, James M, and Barry Z Posner. (1987) The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987. Print.
Kotter, John P. (2013). Management is (Still) Not Leadership. Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2013/01/management-is-still-not-leadership. 18 Jan 2016
Kotter, John (1996) Leading Change,
Kotter, John P. (1990). A Force For Change. New York: Free Press, 1990. Print
Lewin, K. Leadership Behaviour paper, Journal of Social Psychology, 1939.
Lewin, K.; Lippitt, R.; White, R.K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology 10: 271–301.
Lubit, R. (2002) The Long-Term Organizational Impact of Destructively Narcissistic Managers.
MacLeod, D. Clarke N. (2009). Engaging for Success: Enhancing performance through employee engagement. London: BIS.
MacLeod, D and Christopher B. (2008). The Extra Mile. Harlow, England: Prentice Hall /Pearson Education, 2008. Print.
Northouse, P. (2010) Leadership Theory and Practice.
Purcell, J. (2003). Understanding The People and Performance Link. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2003. Print.
Scouller, J. (2011). The Three Levels of Leadership: How to Develop Your Leadership Presence, Knowhow and Skill. Cirencester: Management Books 2000. ISBN 9781852526818.
Sipe, J. and Frick, D. (2009) Seven Pillars of Servant Leadership.
Slater, Robert. (2003). 29 Leadership Secrets from Jack Welch. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.
Stogdill, Ralph M. (1948). Personal Factors Associated With Leadership: A Survey Of The Literature. The Journal of Psychology 25.1 (1948): 35-71. Web.
Tannenbaum, R and Schmidt, W. (1973). How to Choose a Leadership Pattern. Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/1973/05/how-to-choose-a-leadership-pattern.
Tuckman, Bruce W. (1965). Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin 63.6 (1965): 384-399. Web.

Video: Lead Like The Great Conductors

Lead like the great conductors

An orchestra conductor faces the ultimate leadership challenge: creating perfect harmony without saying a word. In this TED talk, Israeli conductor and business consultant Itay Talgam demonstrates the unique styles of six great 20th-century musical conductors, illustrating crucial lessons for all leaders, in both business and life.

Video: Becoming a Great Leader

What it takes to be a great leader

There are many leadership programs available today, but chances are, these won't help. In this talk, business consultant Roselinde Torres describes 25 years observing truly great leaders at work, and shares three simple but crucial questions would-be company chiefs need to ask in order to thrive.

https://tinyurl.com/mr46ba3a

суббота, 31 августа 2024 г.

Micro vs. Macro Management What's the Difference?

Tamer El Gendy

Micro Management:

Examples of micro management include:

Macro Management:

Examples of macro management include:

четверг, 25 июля 2024 г.

Leadership Styles, Models and Philosophies. What Is Leadership?