All posts by MYORBITX

Leadership

Define Leadership and Exercise it – The Missing Key Success Factor in Change Management

How you define and exercise leadership in the present climate will be a significant determinant in your organisation’s fortunes – and especially in the context of change management.

Let’s define leadership: Leadership is the process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective. Leaders have a vision that they share with others. It is the leader who binds the organisation together with beliefs, values and knowledge… and who makes it more cohesive and coherent.

Leadership is also defined as a process that…motivates people to excel in the field in which they are working.

Is this you? Is this your direct up-line report?

So can leadership be taught?

Many would say that leadership qualities are not inborn but can be developed gradually through education and self-study. Personally I am not so sure about that.

The current assumption is that leadership can be taught. There are very many many courses, seminars and books on leadership and a big demand for training to develop leadership skills.

On the basis of my life experience and as I define leadership – it is my view that you can only teach leadership skills to someone who has the latent [and maybe unrecognised and unacknowledged] potential to be a leader.

Management skills can be taught to just about anyone of at least average intelligence and education [and in saying that I am not denigrating management]. However, a brief review of the differences between leadership and management suggests that leadership owes as least as much to “nature” as it does to “nurture”.

It may not be a popular thing to say but in my experience – most people would rather be led than lead. In my experience – the vast majority of people are followers and not leaders and very happy to remain so. Leaders are a very small percentage of the population maybe less than 1% and really strong leaders with the potential to really change things [for better or worse] probably less than 0.1%.

Leadership versus management – some useful points of comparison

– Leaders are apparent – Managers are appointed
– Leaders cope with change – Managers cope with complexity
– Leaders set direction – Managers plan
– Leaders press for change – Managers promote stability
– Leaders are visionary, inspirational and have eye to the future -Managers are operational, hands on, and based in the ‘now’
– Leading is concerned with future direction – Managing is concerned with uncertain conditions: implementation, order, efficiency and effectiveness
– Leadership is strategic – Management is operational
– Leaders set the direction – Managers develop the capacity to achieve the plan
– Leaders motivate and inspire – Managers control and problem solve
– Leaders need to ‘get on the balcony’ to spot operational and strategic patterns within the organisation – Managers get caught up on the field of action.
– Leadership defines the culture of the organisation – Management instills the culture in the organisation

Leadership in change management

Clearly both sets of skills are needed.

But so often in change management situations the emphasis is on the process and the management of the situation and not the leadership.

The leadership characteristics outline above are crucial for the fulfillment of a change programme director / leader role – leading [and being seen to lead and own] the whole change initiative.

How we define leadership, how we understand it and how we exercise it, is of paramount importance in the current economic and business climate as the quality of your leadership could be a major factor in determining your company’s fortunes – and especially in a change management situation. And this is where the properly applied leadership skills are exercised to best effect when employing the holistic and wide view perspective of a programme based approach to change management.

For more on this: “Define and exercise leadership”

Equip yourself to avoid the 70% failure rate of all change initiatives with the “Practitioners’ Masterclass – Leading your people through change, putting it all together and managing the whole messy business.”

Stephen Warrilow, based in Bristol, works with companies across the UK providing specialist support to directors delivery significant change initiatives. Stephen has 25 years cross sector experience with 100+ companies in mid range corporate, larger SME and corporate environments.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Stephen_Warrilow/361805

 

Leadership

Leadership Theories – What Does it Take to Be an Effective Leader?

There are more leadership theories than you can shake a stick at. Theories have evolved from “Great Man” and “Trait” theories to “Transformational” leadership – each with a different set of dynamics, contexts and focus.

Early theories tend to focus upon the characteristics and behaviours of successful leaders, whereas the later theories consider the role of followers and the contextual nature of leadership.

Here is an overview of leadership theories – but first here are 2 quick questions for you: (1) see if you can spot which applies to Genghis Khan and which applies to Mother Theresa; and (2) try to figure out which of these theories best describes the style you feel would be most appropriate for leading your change initiative?

(1) The Great Man theory – this was based on the belief that leaders are exceptional people, born with leadership qualities and are destined to lead. This theory reflects the male-oriented view of leadership which has predominated until the late 20th century.

(2) Trait Theory – is based around an extensive list of all of the qualities or traits associated with leadership.

(3) Behaviourist Theories – focus on what leaders actually do rather than on their qualities. Their different patterns of behaviour are observed and categorised as leadership styles.

(4) Situational Leadership – sees leadership as situation specific – where the style of leadership is adapted to the requirements of the context in which it is exercised.

(5) Contingency Theory – is a development of the situational theory – focusing on the situational variables which will determine the most appropriate or effective leadership style to fit the specific circumstances at that time.

(6) Transactional Theory – emphasises the importance of the transaction – or relationship – that takes place between the leader and the led. It focuses on the perceived mutual benefits derived from that relationship whereby the leader dispenses favours in the form of tangible and intangible rewards in return for the commitment, loyalty or [at least] compliance of his or her followers.

(7) Transformational Theory – The central concept here is change and the role of leadership in envisioning and implementing the transformation of organisational performance

(8) Servant Leadership – emphasises the leaders’ duty to serve his/her followers – leadership thus arises out of a desire to serve rather than a desire to lead. It is a practical philosophy which supports people who choose to serve first, and then lead as a way of expanding service to individuals and institutions. It encourages collaboration, trust, foresight, listening, and the ethical use of power and empowerment.

(9) Dispersed Leadership – an ‘informal’, ’emergent’ or ‘dispersed’ leadership, this approach argues a less formalised model of leadership where the leaders’ role is dissociated from the organisational hierarchy. Individuals at all levels in the organisation and in all roles can exert leadership influence over their colleagues and thus influence the overall leadership of the organisation.

(10) Primal Leadership – refers to the emotional dimension of leadership. The articulation of a message that resonates with their followers’ emotional reality, with their sense of purpose-and so to move people in a positive direction.

I know it is now fashionable and politically correct to vote for theories 6 – 10, and that for many years it has been fashionable to assume that inherited traits were far less important than learned and situational factors in those people fulfilling leadership roles. However, the science and study of behavioural genetics is gradually refocusing attention on the fact that far more is to do with our genes and our inherited traits and characteristics than has been assumed or accepted for several decades.

So I have to say that the latest research on genetics does appear to indicate what I have long believed – namely that leaders are born not made – so I would go for an element of theory 1 with Genghis Khan. I am not sure how appropriate the Mother Theresa number 8 style is for a business environment? But maybe elements of this are covered in 7 and 10?

Clearly, there are strengths in all of the types of leadership – but in the present turbulent climate, I personally will nail my colours to the mast and select a combination of type 7 and 10 – because transformational and primal leadership qualities applied in a change management context are ideally suited to the holistic and wide view perspective of a programme based approach to change management and, as such, would form key elements of successful strategies for managing change.

And, to ensure that you are employing successful strategies for managing change – that are appropriate to your organisation – you need to know how to apply: (a) these transformational and primal leadership styles, AND (b) how to apply the supporting programme management based processes – that will ensure that you avoid the catastrophic failure rate of ALL business change initiatives.

For more on this: “What is effective leadership?”

Equip yourself to avoid the 70% failure rate of all change initiatives with the “Practitioners’ Masterclass – Leading your people through change, putting it all together and managing the whole messy business.”

Stephen Warrilow, based in Bristol, works with companies across the UK providing specialist support to directors delivery significant change initiatives. Stephen has 25 years cross sector experience with 100+ companies in mid range corporate, larger SME and corporate environments.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Stephen_Warrilow/361805

 

Leadership

Instant Leadership Overnight

The Global Leadership Forecast 2008/09 researched 12,208 business executives and 1493 Human Resource professionals across 76 countries. Seventy-five percent of executives surveyed identified improving their leadership talent as their #1 priority for organizational success. But the vast majority of those same respondents have no idea of exactly what leadership is.

It is astounding that so many people, when asked to define leadership, can have so many varying answers. In fact, there are 350,000 books on Amazon with “Leadership” in the title. That’s 350,000 opinions on what leadership is. Confused yet?

What has become clear is that there is no universally accepted definition of leadership because leadership is not tangible. It is not something you can hold in your hand.

North America needs to stop thinking that Leadership is something that can be attained in a week-long course or by reading a book. Without addressing context, deep-seated opinions, beliefs and values, no one is ever going to become a leader.

Leadership is an attitude and a state of mind. It is not the accomplishment of a series of tasks. It is not a passing grade at some course. It is not a title. It is not something you achieve. It is a way you exist. It is how you carry yourself. It is how you choose to walk the Earth.

The waters have been muddied in recent years by equating leadership with holding a top position in an organization. Leadership is not a position. Leadership is not something you do. But in the desperation that Corporate North America has to be number one, to be the best and to be the mightiest, a vacuum has been created and is now being filled with 350,000 opinions on what leadership is. In this vacuum, Corporate America has become so desperate for real leaders to follow, it has become self-anointing. And by becoming self-anointing, businesses have now sprung up promising to turn losers into leaders – for a price.

John Maxwell’s “21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” is fundamentally wrong. His book teaches some new-age North American leadership culture as though if you simply do all of the twenty-one things in his book, you too will become a leader. That’s pure bunk. Leadership can be learned but not by simply following twenty-one so-called “laws.” Maxwell has made a promise that if you follow the “laws” (and don’t question them – remember they’re irrefutable) in his book, you can become a leader. That is simply not true. You will never get people to follow you by simply checking off a list of traits. That definition of leadership is too cerebral.

The new leadership models are simply pandering to the masses in the same way “Get Rich Quick” schemes pop up when times are tough or in the same way a diet pill can slim down in two-weeks what took years to get fat. Corporate America has no patience and doesn’t want to do the hard work involved in becoming a true, authentic leader. It wants the quick-fix, instant-gratification, instant-leader pill and “make it snappy because I’ve got other things to do.”

A leader is not something you become in exchange for money. What is fundamentally wrong with Corporate North America is that there is a mistaken belief that you can have anything you want if you have the money to do it. And that includes being a leader. Money is not leadership. Power is not leadership. Fame is not leadership. Ruthless is certainly not leadership.

A parent is as much a leader as a CEO. The office whiner is as much a leader as his supervisor if people are following. The first person to loot a store during a riot is a leader if others follow. Osama Bin Laden is as much a leader as any head of state.

Leadership is NOT exclusive to the workplace. In fact, leadership has nothing to do with work. Leadership is a character trait, a state of mind, an attitude. How can you define an attitude?

People follow people they want to follow. There is no explanation for that. People who are considered natural leaders are people that others wish to emulate. The trick, however, is in following the person and not their results (i.e. money, power, fame). The Dalai Llama is a far better example of authentic leadership than Donald Trump. People follow Trump for his power and money when the world would be a different place if they’d follow the Dalai Llama. Trump is a leader as is the Dalai Llama.

What defines a leader? If Bin Laden and the Dalai Llama can both be considered leaders, then it is not a list of traits that form their make-up. It is the attitude they possess that causes others to follow them, to listen when they speak and to change the world for the better or worse. When Corporate America learns to follow decency instead of thirsting for power, then it will finally start seeing the real leaders emerge again. And once we figure out how to make money from “decency,” you can bet it will be the next big thing.

Kevin Burns, Author & Attitude Adjuster is a worldwide authority on Attitude. He is the author of seven books including his latest, “Go Ahead. Give Me Attitude!” He is an outstanding keynote speaker, worldwide columnist and international Blogger of influence. He is opinionated, blunt, direct, funny, thought-provoking, incredibly well-researched and usually right!

Kevin’s Web Site – http://www.kevburns.com

This article may be reprinted without cost provided the following is attached: Kevin Burns – Author and Attitude Adjuster. Adjusting Attitudes in Service Leadership, Engagement and Safety http://www.kevburns.com/blog

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Kevin_M._Burns/290659

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/2577890

Leadership

Team Building Maneuvers and the Team’s Leadership

Conquering the Challenge of “Change” through Team Building Maneuvers

Nothing is as upsetting to your people as change. Nothing has greater potential to cause failures, loss of production or failing quality. Yet nothing is as important to the survival of your organization as your people and their response to change.

Research tells us that 70 percent of all change initiatives fail (Source: Author Peter Senge, “The Dance of Change,” Doubleday Press, Toronto, Ont. 1999, p. 3-4). Beyond a doubt, the likelihood of your change initiative failing is overwhelming. Since 2004, I’ve studied, facilitated and taught change processes and experience tells me that change efforts fail for one, two, or all of the following three reasons:

1. Failure to properly define the Future Picture and the impact of the change.
All too often, the “change” initiative addresses the symptoms of current challenges and problems rather than the future the organization wants or needs to create. Change is about creating a desired future, not just correcting current problem/symptoms.

2. Failure to properly assess the current situation, in order to determine the scope within the requirements for change.
Organizations perpetually assess the current situation against current measures of performance. However, change is not the same as problem-solving or project management. Rather, managing change is about moving an organization strategically forward to achieve its vision of the future.

3. Failure to effectively manage the transition of moving from the present to the future.
Experience demonstrates that failure to effectively manage the transition/transformation need is the leading cause of failure for strategic change initiatives. The change itself is not the problem. Change is an event; it is situational: deciding to implement a new system, target a new market, acquire or merge two organizational cultures (Source: Author William Bridges, “Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change,” Addison Wesley, Don Mills Ont., p.3). The problem occurs with what happens within the gap between the present and future, after the “change” and before you get to “there.” The reality of change is that change is about people not structures – people are the reasons for stop gaps in change initiatives!

Failure to successfully execute often comes from seeing the change as solely structural, so once the new system is designed and ready for implementation, the new organization is agreed upon and the doctrine papers are signed to legalize the “deal,” everyone, including the CEO, walks away from what is considered (prematurely) a “done deal.” This is a mistake that goes on all too often like a broken record. History is full of examples of organizations and teams that failed when experiencing changing environments (most of them are now extinct). The secret to successfully managing change, from the perspective of the people within the organization and their teams, is “definition” and “understanding.” To make it clear, I’ll explain them in subsets.

Definition and Understanding for the “WHAT” in Teams

It is important to understand that not everyone who works together or in close proximity is a member of a team. This concept is a misnomer for a lot of people. A clear explanation of a team is a group of individuals who are interdependent with respect to intelligence, information, transferable skill sets, resources, and tools and who seek to combine their efforts to achieve a shared-vision towards a common goal. A team, for instance, is either building or falling apart. An essential aptitude for true team building and the maneuvers they require is leading the team into building on a continuous basis. Team building maneuvers lead a group into higher levels of team spirit, cooperation and interpersonal communication. Building teams is the process of developing on the team-dynamics and interpersonal relationship of the people that come together to make-up the unit. Team spirit either grows or it dies based on the dynamics of the unit.

Teams have specific characteristics that should be addressed:

– Teams must be constructed to achieve a shared-vision for a shared goal.
– Team associates are interdependent regarding some common interests; teams are the instrument of sustained and enduring success in leadership and management.
– Teams use strategic thinking, acting, and influence – associates each possess the authority to manage their own stimulus for change.
– A team is a type of group, but not all groups are teams – team leaders know this to be true.
– Teams are formed to best facilitate learning and peak performance while operating in a socialist environment.
– Team associates are not responsible to “self,” but to their team and its mission; their obligation is to guide the unit to find its voice, while strategically and flawlessly executing.
– Teams learn to navigate positive transition to disseminate authority and power for change – and, they understand when it is a “must” to move into greater levels of performance (the difference between ordinary and extraordinary high performance teams).

The difference between ordinary teams and high performance teams are its people and their abilities to overcome the fear of change. High performance teams place a focus on the people who drive the overall performance within the system: “how do you define a high-performance team?” A high performance team is a group of people who are led by an exception leader, ALL having complementary skills, who understand roles and goals, and who are committed to achieving those goals through a shared-voice, as one unit or body, to demonstrate strategic and flawless execution measures for overcoming changing environments.

This team format learns quickly how-to work together toward mutual goals using their individual skills to support one another regardless of the situation they are engaging or any amount of resistance to change from a fear of the unknown or an expectation of loss or failure.

The “alpha” of the high performance team’s resistance to change is how they perceive the change. The “omega” is how well they are equipped to deal with the change they expect. The team member’s degree of resistance is determined by whether they perceive the change as good or bad, and how they expect the impact of the change to be on the entire unit. Their ultimate acceptance of the change is a function of how much resistance the team member has and the quality of their coping skills and their support system. The job role of the team leader is to address their resistance from both perspectives by helping each member reduce it to a minimal, manageable process level. The success of the response depends on the leader’s ability to lead by example, their level of trust from the members on the team and their ability to persuade the members to overcome their resistance so the unit can move ahead. When the leader is able to communicate a low threat level and/or limited risk, the member’s perception will be one of trust for engaging the objective. Simply, it will all come down to the leader’s relationship with the team; hence, the success of the team not only depends on its members, but also on the leadership they follow.

Definition and Understanding for Accepting “CHANGE” on Teams and Organizations

Now, we’ll look at how teams can manage change and fear, and overcome them both to perform at its peak as a unit, and pronounce its leadership style to permeate peak performance across an entire organization. The “alpha” here begins by looking at change as an emotions state that is synonymous with fear. Fear stipulates an uncomfortable emotional response to potential threats and a way of life. It is a basic survival mechanism that occurs in response to specific stimulus of future events, such as worsening of a situation or continuation of a situation that is unacceptable. It needs to be addressed by the leadership personnel in as much detail and as early as possible. Leadership must be able to provide updates as things develop and become clearer if any chance is possible for overcoming the fears that are the precursor for change.

“Definition” is a two-way street. In addition to defining a problem that causes fear, team leaders need to get their members to a point that they feel comfortable defining the reasons behind their resistance. “Understanding,” the “omega” here is also a two-way street. Team leaders must be prepared to clearly explain to their members what is changing and why. They must also be clear about the member’s reluctance. Here are a few things that the team leaders must be aware of:

– Team leaders must not try to rationalize the issues, but focus on opening and maintaining clear channels of communication with their team members so they understand what is coming and what it means to them and the unit.
– Team leaders must be able to help their member gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation at hand, both the positives and negatives.
– Team leaders must inform their members what the change will be, when it will happen and why – what is not changing and how the anchors on the team (the characteristics, such as “trust” that holds the team together) will be affected as they face the winds of uncertainty and change.
– Team leaders must be able to understand the specific fears of each member. What their concerns are and how strongly they feel about the potential outcomes, both the positives and negatives (do they perceive it as a good or a bad thing?).

The Bottom Line: Definition and Understanding

Conquering the challenge of “change” through team building maneuvers requires innovation, creativity and some good old fashion “leadership.” People yearn for ideas (big and small ones) and think that if they just had that one “right” idea for the team or organization, success would surely come. Certainly, we can all do things to be more creative, but having ideas isn’t the biggest, or even first, source of our challenges.

Think about it this way. You’ve experienced what is believed by you to be the greatest workshop ever attended, so you go back to the workplace to integrate what you’ve learned – only, you never do. You’ve thought about trying a new approach to your meetings, but never did. You’ve had a great idea that never went anywhere. You’ve had an idea for a new process, but failed to introduce it to other the leaders. The list can go on and on and you’ll see that there’s no shortage of ideas or creativity that is stopping you. What is stopping you is fear, the fear of change or the fear of failure. Either way you look at it, fear is the stimulus that stops great people from doing great things – the action that is required for successful progress in life and in the workplace.

Change and Failure (Breakdown)

Failure and success are the outcomes of change. No matter how you look at them both, they each have a constant that cannot go unnoticed, “leadership.” We cannot succeed at higher levels of performance if we maintain status quo, but inherent in change is the possibility that we might fail or experience a breakdown in process. So any discussion of the “fear of change” or the “fear of failure” needs to start with a discussion on transition and transformation. While there are downsides and risks involved in change (including the risk of failure) think of all of the positives that can come from change:

– Process Improvement to Leadership and Management,
– Overall Employee Performance Increases,
– Team Development, Transition and Transformation,
– Greater Satisfaction (Individual) – Personal Proficiency,
– Organizational Renewal – Professional Mastery, and
– Marketplace Expansion, and much more.

And these are just a few. The next time you feel the fear of failure, think about how you feel about change and how it impacts your level of fear. All change involves a certain amount of uncertainty and ambiguity and those two conditions provoke anxiety. This is a reason to hold onto the past for lessons learned; it’s familiar, and as the adage goes, “better what you know versus whet you don’t know.” So, although change has the ability to promote new systems, structures, organizations and teams, people will always conform to the “same old~same old,” unwilling to let go of the past. That is why looking at the positives and keeping an open mind is so critical to the success of experiencing change.

Structuring Failure and Success (Breakthrough)

One individual’s failure is another individual’s success; it’s all based on a decision that “must” be made at some point. Sun Tzu, arguably the greatest military strategist that many still follow, had his say on success and failure: “Consideration and analysis of The Five Elements, “Dao” – Moral Unity, “Tian” – Weather Condition, “Di” – Geographical Condition, “Jiang” – Leadership Quality, “Fa” – Discipline and Organization Structure, a must know for all commanders. Victory to those who understand and no victory to those who does not. The Five Elements will determine success or failure of conducting war.”

Here’s an explanation of Sun Tzu’s statement through comparison and an analytical lens. The Five Elements will reveal the factors of success and failure of all battle, namely: Moral Unity, Weather Condition, Geographical Condition, Leadership Quality, Discipline and Organization Structure.

Moral Unity determines the cohesiveness between the ruler and his subjects, the leader and his followers, the general and his soldiers. Ultimately, to achieve full support by fellowman, putting aside life and death matters and share the view of the ruler’s is the goal of Moral Unity. Only when a view or decision is fully supported, can orders be carried out smoothly by the team.

Weather Condition such as summer/winter and drought/flood will have significant affects on how plans are executed. When weather is an element that no one has any control, the best strategy will be take full advantage of the conditions when able. Going against the force of nature may prove rewarding when one overcomes, but it usually spells destruction.

Geographical Condition here refers to distance of near/far, terrain/mountainous/flat regarding the battle space, wide/narrow the battle field and whether the location chosen to engage the battle favors attack/defense.

This will limit the size, type and performance of the troop. The same for business – this will also determine the team’s reaction to the mission and the amount of resources – people, process and management of initiative that will be required to win.

Leadership Quality (my favorite) concerns the general/commander’s leading capability. There are five qualities of a good leader: “wisdom, trustworthiness, benevolence and deportment, courage (both physical and emotional) and sternness (temperament).” These five qualities will affect the leading capability of a commander, his culture and climate for organizational behavior effectiveness within the environment and the efficacy and value of his command being carried out by the people under his leadership.

Discipline and Organization Structure is the system of open communication and the vehicles used to do so – how each level within the organization manages and leads the people and process, including logistics. It requires a fair, consistent and clear communication to everyone. Communication is the greatest resource in all of life, not only in organizations, but in all we set out to accomplish. Effective communications is leadership’s greatest tool to win its people, systems, processes and management of functions.

As The Five Elements are inter-related, no leader can either ignore or fail to understand the constructive/destructive nature of each element. Victory will overcome “failure” and “success” will fall upon those who analyze and clearly understand The Five Elements. Therefore, by asking who offers fairest reward and punishment, whose troop, team or organization is best trained and led, whose equipment and resources are more efficient and plentiful, who can deliver and communicate order/leadership smoothly, effectively and thoroughly, who has better geographical/weather advantages (culture and organizational climate), who has more resourceful leaders and followers – teams, whether the appointed leader/leadership is wiser, more strategic in their thinking, tactical in their approach to engage and has virtue… the winner is clear, defined and understood.

Constructing it all to Enhance Leadership for Teamwork as an Essential Goal

What am I referring to in the term “Leadership for Teamwork?” Organizations can try to influence leaders to work as a team, but only leaders themselves can make it work. Why should you want to be a team-oriented leader, and how can you take steps to make it happen, even when the status quo is not favorable? A strong motivator to becoming a better cohort with your leaders-colleagues-peers is to take stock of what “not” collaborating is costing you during the tough times (and, even the not so tough times).

As you attempt to lead others and yourself, it is important to keep in mind your quintessential intention to enhance, deepen and strengthen the spirit of “we are absolutely on the same team, sounding with one unified voice, and committed to achieving the same outcome/ Future Picture for one another.” Integrate the improvement of the quality of leadership for effective teamwork into your objective, strategy and tactics. Include it in the vision and mission and ensure that all members across each level of the organization understand and can communicate it without fail. It must not “only” be written on a fancy picture and placed on the wall (the all too common inspirational). It must run like blood through veins and become as important as the air we breathe.

Express your value of Leadership for Teamwork and team fortitude by ensuring that the cost factor is not as important in the decision to remain on a continuum to train organizational behavior, transformational leadership, strategic execution and team building maneuvers as the decision to make all allocations to do so. The cost of not doing it, even when things are tough, offers a far more potential for failure.

If you overlook Leadership for Teamwork and effective team building maneuvers by focused exclusively or excessively on the outcome you want teamwork to accomplish, you’ll place your team and organization in a position to neglect the means to your end and eliminate the solution-centric outcomes in your future. This would be like a U.S. Marine purposely neglecting to adequately care for his weapons while on the battlefield.

How you think about each individual and team in the organization is the most critical aspect in Leadership for Teamwork. By leading your own thoughts, you begin leading in the most significant way. So discipline yourself to think about those you are responsible for leading as members of your team, and not as your problems, adversaries or competitors. You have to “mentally embrace” them as for you, and not against you, particularly when they demonstrate difficult conduct. This is the truest form of selflessness that, in most cases, is forgotten.

An effective and easy tool to form the greatest disciplines in Leadership for Teamwork is for everyone to do his best to interpret the behaviors of others, however dissonant, as a sign of a core challenge or initiative that needs immediate attention. It’s important to realize that behaviors are a form of communications to address Leadership for Teamwork and this action can transform bad feelings of resentment into positive organizational behaviors and gratitude. Our President Barack Obama, the 44TH of the United States, used similar techniques to successfully win the elections to lead the American people; “CHANGE and Leadership for Teamwork!” His message rings true around the world and is also being used to bring communities and Governments (also forms of teams) together in ways that at one time, would never have been thought of. Marcus Aurelius said, “Accept the things to which fate binds you, and love the people with whom fate brings you together, but do so with all your heart.”

Continue reading →

Leadership

Theoretical Leadership Philosophies

he purpose of my writings is to assist people with personally developing themselves to lead a healthy life mentally and physically. With the advancements of technology the deliverables of communicating information has been more prevalent than ever before.

The fact of the matter is; we indeed live in what we call the “information era”. Information is being provided in various forms such as: displays, social networks, iPods, blackberries, various creative technological gadgets, PC’s etc. Never before has there been such a phenomenal movement of people paying to purchase information. Information is being treated as a product and people are in search for answers to their bewilderment.

If you are seeking answers to those issues that cause delays to your progress then you are looking for certain qualities that will separate you from the followers. That being the case; it is important to review those variables that will elevate you to that higher level of leadership and success personally, professionally and financially. I mean let’s face it; though money and finances are not “everything” it sure does help to make things happen for those you would like to help and lead. Let’s assume for a moment that you are the type of person that chooses to be successful for the purpose of being one who does have intent to help others. If you are that type of person, then finding the right information to equip you with the theoretical knowledge to help others must be gathered.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way let’s take a look at what is the make-up of a leader. I don’t believe that one has to be a hero or a trend setter just to be a leader. I also don’t believe as some have said the “Great Man” theory in leadership. You see times have changed and leadership comes in all shapes and sizes. Leadership today has no gender requirement; nor cultural perquisites of some sort. Years ago it was unheard of to observe female leaders in high ranking positions in the military today it is not far from the ranks of colonel, and generals and women in high levels in the private sector to the public sector such as the Supreme Court, Governor’s and U.S. Senators.

I am with the contention that the information era will produce a new sector of theory based leadership; that will be part of the current terms and theory leadership philosophies. It will now have to be included along with the theory of “trait leadership theory”. In others words were the traits of our leadership skills “inherited”? If so, then why do we at times have people who may have inherited certain leadership skills yet aren’t leaders? While we can grapple with the various leadership theories in place along with the variables connected with them; we nevertheless must review the other leadership theories bestowed upon us such as “Contingency leadership theory”. Again, the issues of information input; in theory formulation involves variables such as methods, skills of people being led (followers), and the surrounding circumstances, i.e. what is the situation.

Contingency theory is manifested through setting determination and/or environmental; one must ask who the best leader for a particular situation is? My information era leadership theory again is at the helm of playing a role in the basket of leadership theories and one that must be included in scholarly dialogues. In my view there are not many separating issues between contingency leadership theory and “Situational leadership theory”. The similarities lie with the matters of the various forms of decision making processes.

The information era leadership theory will reap most of its benefits by collaborating with what is called the “Behavior Leadership Theory”. This is a leadership theory that has the philosophy that leaders are taught to be leaders not born with it but rather tutored along to become leaders.

If we analyze the situation closely we can identify that the information era leadership theory will be most helpful to “participative leadership theory”. Participative leadership theories depend on information and are a perfect fit for the two to collaborate for the purpose of leadership development in applying it to decision-making processes. This is the leadership style of participation, openness, all ideas are good ideas and leave no stone unturned. Participative leadership theory and information leadership theory are a perfect fit for a positive progressive and explosive leadership manifestation.

If you would like more from Dr. Richard C. Baiz, D.B.A. on Personal and Leadership Development [http://www.leadershipinstituteofsuccess.com] and his Leadership Institute click on the the link provided: [http://www.leadershipinstituteofsuccess.com]. Dr. Baiz is a Doctorate in Business Administration. He is a College and Corporate Personal and Leadership Development Instructor and Coach. Dr. Baiz is also an expert in the field of Organizational Development and Management and gets his clients top notch successful results.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Dr._Richard_C._Baiz,_D._B._A./196924