China is on pace to become the global leader in renewable energy (Worldwatch 2015). Iran’s Supreme leader refuses access to military sites and scientists (Euronews 2015). Wife of Islamic State leader Abu Sayyaf captured in Delta Force raid that killed her husband (News Limited 2015).
Strewn throughout the media, the word ‘leader’ is being used to describe a wide variety of people and organizations. These ‘leaders’ are often self-proclaimed, or described as such for some political or social benefit. To be called a leader is to be isolated from the masses, to be seen as more valuable, more capable. I am sure the morale boost in the American army increases greatly when an ISIL ‘leader’ is killed in combat. To use the word ‘general’ or ‘captain’ in place of ‘leader’ makes the threat seem more structured, and the target less valuable. There is this sense that commanders admirals and other authority figures can be replaced, they are merely components of a greater whole. Whereas leaders are those who inspire and empower, and as such, calling the higher powers of an enemy army ‘leaders’ makes them special. When they are gone, they are gone forever.
More permanent change is often more celebrated, such as birth, marriage, graduation. Calling someone a leader is almost like advertising, a shiny coat on an otherwise dull affair, drawing in people’s attention.Is the word leadership being used as it should? It is really truly valued? Or has this phrase been reduced in importance to sit with other words such as ‘ultra’ and ‘perfect’ or titles such as ‘the honourable’?
The disparity between what the word is used for and what it should mean has been covered in a variety of session at university as well as in books on leadership theory. The common view on this matter is quite simple; exercising authority and leadership are opposing activities, in fact leaders do not exist, leadership is a verb not a job (Heifetz et al. 2009). Leadership is not about meeting or exceeding your authorizer’s expectations; it is about challenging some of those expectations, finding a way to disappoint people without pushing them completely over the edge (Heifetz et al. 2009).
At first I was very open to the idea. A simple dichotomy, it was so neat and tidy, there were those who exercised leadership and diverged from the status quo, and those who exercised authority and maintained it. This view was particularly appealing to people like me; the young and energetic, the protestors and activists, those who would sometimes find themselves fighting against authority just for the sake of it. In this way, the wild youth are almost encouraged to stand up and practice leadership, to disrupt the status quo, to fight against the nemesis of authority. Examples were thrown around, Stalin was an authority figure, Nelson Mandala practiced leadership. A policeman is an authority figure, an innovator practices leadership.
Leadership was out there, away from the formal authority which politicians and policemen possess, and informal authority which celebrities and venerated individuals have (Heifetz et al. 2009). However, Glenn L Barnes, the Chairman of Ansell who came to talk to us about leadership, particularly leadership in business, thought of leadership differently. He claimed that leaders possess all the traits of authority figures, exempt that they have the will to “step down from their position when it is best for the company.”
Realizing that there were differencing views on the subject spurred the start of my disagreement with the models I had been given. After discussing my ideas with some friends I decided to make my own ‘bigger’ and ‘better’ leadership theory.
Music: Piano Concerto No. 2 Sergei Vassilievitch Rachmaninov
References:
Worldwatch Institue 2015, China on Pace to Become Global Leader in Renewable Energy 2015, viewed 23 May 2015, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5497
Euronews 2015, Iran’s Supreme Leader refuses access to military sites and scientists, viewed 23 May 2015, http://www.euronews.com/2015/05/20/iran-s-supreme-leader-refuses-access-to-military-sites-and-scientists/
Strewn throughout the media, the word ‘leader’ is being used to describe a wide variety of people and organizations. These ‘leaders’ are often self-proclaimed, or described as such for some political or social benefit. To be called a leader is to be isolated from the masses, to be seen as more valuable, more capable. I am sure the morale boost in the American army increases greatly when an ISIL ‘leader’ is killed in combat. To use the word ‘general’ or ‘captain’ in place of ‘leader’ makes the threat seem more structured, and the target less valuable. There is this sense that commanders admirals and other authority figures can be replaced, they are merely components of a greater whole. Whereas leaders are those who inspire and empower, and as such, calling the higher powers of an enemy army ‘leaders’ makes them special. When they are gone, they are gone forever.
More permanent change is often more celebrated, such as birth, marriage, graduation. Calling someone a leader is almost like advertising, a shiny coat on an otherwise dull affair, drawing in people’s attention.Is the word leadership being used as it should? It is really truly valued? Or has this phrase been reduced in importance to sit with other words such as ‘ultra’ and ‘perfect’ or titles such as ‘the honourable’?
The disparity between what the word is used for and what it should mean has been covered in a variety of session at university as well as in books on leadership theory. The common view on this matter is quite simple; exercising authority and leadership are opposing activities, in fact leaders do not exist, leadership is a verb not a job (Heifetz et al. 2009). Leadership is not about meeting or exceeding your authorizer’s expectations; it is about challenging some of those expectations, finding a way to disappoint people without pushing them completely over the edge (Heifetz et al. 2009).
At first I was very open to the idea. A simple dichotomy, it was so neat and tidy, there were those who exercised leadership and diverged from the status quo, and those who exercised authority and maintained it. This view was particularly appealing to people like me; the young and energetic, the protestors and activists, those who would sometimes find themselves fighting against authority just for the sake of it. In this way, the wild youth are almost encouraged to stand up and practice leadership, to disrupt the status quo, to fight against the nemesis of authority. Examples were thrown around, Stalin was an authority figure, Nelson Mandala practiced leadership. A policeman is an authority figure, an innovator practices leadership.
Leadership was out there, away from the formal authority which politicians and policemen possess, and informal authority which celebrities and venerated individuals have (Heifetz et al. 2009). However, Glenn L Barnes, the Chairman of Ansell who came to talk to us about leadership, particularly leadership in business, thought of leadership differently. He claimed that leaders possess all the traits of authority figures, exempt that they have the will to “step down from their position when it is best for the company.”
Realizing that there were differencing views on the subject spurred the start of my disagreement with the models I had been given. After discussing my ideas with some friends I decided to make my own ‘bigger’ and ‘better’ leadership theory.
Music: Piano Concerto No. 2 Sergei Vassilievitch Rachmaninov
References:
Worldwatch Institue 2015, China on Pace to Become Global Leader in Renewable Energy 2015, viewed 23 May 2015, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5497
Euronews 2015, Iran’s Supreme Leader refuses access to military sites and scientists, viewed 23 May 2015, http://www.euronews.com/2015/05/20/iran-s-supreme-leader-refuses-access-to-military-sites-and-scientists/
News Limited 2015, Wife of Islamic State leader Abu Sayyaf captured in Delta Force raid that killed her husband, viewed 23 May 2015, http://www.news.com.au/world/wife-of-islamic-state-leader-abu-sayyaf-captured-in-delta-force-raid-that-killed-her-husband/story-fndir2ev-1227359660758
Heifetz, R Grashow, A Linsky, M 2009, The practice of adaptive leadership, Cambridge Leadership Associates, Boston, Massachusetts.
No comments:
Post a Comment