July 2011 Archives

Last Week's Definition: The process of developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of individuals in a group to accomplish a significant community goal, while employing appropriate emotional and strategic approaches in varying situations in order to work towards the overall goal in an ever-changing global society.

This Week's Definition: The process of taking initiative to develop
effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of individuals in a group to accomplish a significant community goal, while employing appropriate emotional and strategic approaches in varying situations in order to work towards the overall goal in an ever-changing global society.

Analysis of the differences in the definitions: The only change I made in this week's definition compared to last week's was the phrase "taking initiative" because I've realized that is a major component that has been missing from my definition. "Even more important, neither of them leaves himself out of the equation in his assessment of his team. In both cases, their willingness to 'go first'... made a difference" (Kegan, Lahey, 2009). The act of stepping up and making the first move is what separates leaders from followers. Those who lead are the ones who act first, they set the example (whether it be a good or bad one) while those who follow wait for someone else to move first and show them the way.

Reference:
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2009). "We Never Had a Language for It" Immunity to Change: How to overcome it and unlock the potential in yourself and your organization (pp. 61 - 84). Boston: Harvard Business Press.

Last Week's Definition: Having the talent of developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal, while being able to employ appropriate emotional and strategic approaches in varying situations in order to work towards the overall goal in an ever-changing global society.

This Week's Definition: The process of developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of individuals in a group to accomplish a significant community goal, while employing appropriate emotional and strategic approaches in varying situations in order to work towards the overall goal in an ever-changing global society.

Analysis of the differences in the definitions: The first change I made was including the word 'process' in the beginning. "Leadership is viewed as a process rather than a position" (Astin, Astin, 1996) was a phrase that stuck with me this past week. Looking at my own experiences in leadership, I can't help but notice this is a key aspect that is often overlooked. In our society I think we tend to look at the 'who' in leadership rather than 'what' leadership actually does. What position I hold says nothing about what I accomplish. I have also realized that the levels of leadership we ought to focus on is that of individual, group and community (Astin, Astin, 1996), rather than a hierarchy such as President, Vice President, Manager, etc. Understanding how individuals can contribute to a group and how that group can contribute to society with its goals is the ultimate objective of leadership, and thus ought to be included in its definition.

Reference:
Astin, H. S., & Astin, A. W. (1996). A social change model of leadership development: Guidebook (version III) (pp. 4 - 27). Los Angeles: University of California Los Angeles Higher Education Research Institute.

Last Week's Definition: The talents of employing appropriate emotional approaches in varying situations and developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal.

This Week's Definition: Having the talent of developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal, while being able to employ appropriate emotional and strategic approaches in varying situations in order to work towards the overall goal in an ever-changing global society.

Analysis of the differences in the definitions: This week I have updated/expanded my definition and it can be noticed that it has been re-arranged also. The arrangement reflects a branching out of the different qualities listed in my definition. The first fragment represents what I believe to be the base of leadership, and from there the qualities become accessories or branches of that central trunk (imagine a tree).
I also added a couple things this week. I added "strategic approaches" in addition to emotional because it is up to leadership to develop and guide the strategies needed to achieve the goal of the organization, and the strategy varies depending on the circumstances. A leader should have the ability to view any situation from the "dance floor" and the "balcony" (Heifetz, Linsky, 2002) to determine what stategy is best for the overall scene. That scene is always changing, and always growing. Leaders understand that there is a "permanent crisis" (Heifetz, Grashow, Linsky, 2009) always present in the background and that "hunkering down" with quick fixes will not bring the organization into tomorrow.

References:
Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). "Leadership in a (permanent) crisis." Harvard Business Review, 87(7), 62-69. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=keh&AN=41997981&site=ehost-live
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). "Get on the balcony." Leadership on the Line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading (pp. 51 - 74). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Last week's definition: The talents of employing appropriate emotional approaches in varying situations and developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal.

This week's definition: The talents of employing appropriate emotional approaches in varying situations and developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal.

Analysis of the differences in the definitions:
As can be noticed, this week my definition has not changed from last week's. Going back to my comments in week two about Hitler and the connotation of leadership, I stand by what I said earlier - just because someone is a leader does not mean they do good things. While most of us really want to incorporate ethics in the definition of leadership, I do not believe ethics has a place in the overall definition. If we are talking about good leadership then indeed, I think a good leader must understand and be able to handle right vs. right situations (Kidder, 2003) and especially right vs. wrong situations. However, in order to exhibit leadership in it's most basic, and unfortunately even in it's most effective manner, it is not necessary that one have a functioning ethical compass.

Reference:
Kidder, R. M. (2003). "Overview: The ethics of right vs. right." How Good People Make Tough Choices (pp. 13 - 29). New York: Simon & Schuster.

First, I would like to revise/clarify last week's definition. I had not intended to disregard the initial definition of 2 weeks ago. Last week's complete definition should really be: Leadership is the talent of coordinating strengths of many people and effectively addressing a situation with the appropriate emotional approach in order to reach a significant overall goal.

This week, I would like to hone in on an important fact that I have considered about leadership: It's all about relationships. A leader is not an isolated being, at least, they shouldn't be. They are meant to be at the center of their organization or domain (Kyle, 1998). Stability does not come from the top, it comes from the center. This means an effective leader is involved in multiple areas of his or her domain, and uses the "Power of Presence" to unite the many people they coordinate and work with them. When a leader distances himself or herself from those people by working from the top, a me-versus-them effect can happen, and then important work does not get done. The recent Minnesota government shutdown is a very real example of this.
Another way relationships play an important part in leadership has biological origins. Recent studies have revealed a type of neuron in the brain called mirror neurons (Goleman, Boyatzis, 2008). These neurons mirror what other people do and we subconsciously make connections with others based on their actions and emotions. This can be useful for a leader to know and understand this phenomenon because they can project a healthy attitude that others will emulate.
Incorporating this into my progressing definition, this week leadership is: The talents of employing appropriate emotional approaches in varying situations and developing effective relationships to coordinate the strengths of many to accomplish an overall goal.

References:
Goleman, D., & Boyatzis, R. (2008). "Social intelligence and the biology of leadership." Harvard Business Review, 86(9), 74-81. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=keh&AN=33983120&site=ehost-live
Kyle, D. T. (1998). "The sovereign: The power of presence." The Four Powers of Leadership: Presence, intention, wisdom, compassion (pp. 159 - 191). Deerfield Beach, FL: Health Communications Inc.