Tag Archives: Leadership Coaching

Leadership

Business Leadership Development For Managers

Business leadership development plays an integral part in the metamorphosis of a good manager into a great one. Many believe the terms leadership and management to be synonymous, though nothing could be farther from the truth. They are as different as night from day, and a good leader might not make a good manager and vice versa.

However, business leadership development planning can be used to improve the capability of managers to lead and become competent in dealing with people and persuasion rather than position and power. A good leader will have followers as distinct from the subordinates of managers, yet the two need not be mutually exclusive: A good manager can become a good leader, and the development of leadership will not only enhance your ability to lead people and organizations, but also to lead yourself.

Leading oneself is a concept that many find difficult to visualize, but to lead others you must first be able to successfully lead your own life. You must be aware of your strengths and weaknesses, possess self-confidence, but also display humility and not only accept criticism but learn from your successes and failures. You need people to follow you, and not only motivate teams to get things done that need to be done, but also get them to want to do what has to be done. To persuade rather than to order, and to lead them to want to do the right things rather than to do things right.

Although a business needs both management and leadership, it is sometimes necessary to focus more on one than on the other. A business might have a good management structure but little leadership, so will tend to stagnate over time. On the other hand it might have plenty of leadership and energy behind it, but because of poor management is unable to convert that leadership energy into results.

As previously stated, then, business leadership and management are not mutually exclusive, and not only does a business need both but a leadership development program can be used to combine good management skills with good leadership capabilities. Leadership can be learned. The concept of the ‘born leader’ is outdated, and leadership can be defined as forms of behavior in terms of skills that can be learned. Leadership development involves changing a candidate’s behavior to acquire these skills, and achieve competence in leadership.

Being a good manager is not a prerequisite for a good leader, but neither is it a drawback, and the same person can possess both leadership and management skills. That is because both are learned and not innate in a person’s character, so that managers can be developed by their businesses or corporations into leaders. In fact, the best managers are also good leaders.

Nevertheless, good leaders have often been found to possess a higher than average drive and more than the normal share of positive qualities. These traits are also frequently found in good managers, although the competencies needed for leadership can be taught by means of a well designed leadership development program.

Waiting for a leader to emerge naturally is neither economical nor desirable, and certainly not an effective way of planning the leadership structure of a business. If we take a military example, more leaders come out of a military academy than are promoted on the field by virtue of displaying strong leadership potential.

Good leaders should communicate well with those they are leading. Their thoughts and perceptions can help others to follow them. They should also have a positive and confident attitude and be able to instill their confidence in others. With that confidence should also come commitment, and leaders should be able to commit to their actions – committing with confidence breeds confidence in others.

It has also been said that leaders should have high moral standards because people will not follow those they do not respect. Furthermore, good leaders do more than just supervise or manage their teams: they feel a sense of responsibility, and in return the team members know that their leader cares for them and cares for the business. This renders it easier for people to follow rather than be led.

Business leadership development is an important concept for businesses to take on board, and by taking on such a program, managers will find people following them rather than having to be managed. Managers can focus their management efforts on the processes and procedures, and employees will follow them to help convert their ideas and visions into reality. That’s leadership!

Further information on business leadership development is available on [http://www.successanddevelopment.info] where you will also find details of personal development programs and others that will benefit both yourself and your company.You can also get inspirational documentary films in the ‘Giving Back’ section.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Mohammed_Tanko/552699

Leadership

Develop a Leadership Philosophy

A leadership philosophy is a set of beliefs and principles that strongly influence how we perceive ourselves within an organization and those that we lead. It is an essential ingredient in forming our vision, goals and behavior within the organization that we lead.

First it is useful to define leadership. Leadership is the individual phenomenon of influencing others, inspiring them to do their best, Giving them purpose, guidance and motivation. The best leadership style is one that is adapted to the situation, otherwise known as situational leadership. Leadership is different from management as management does not have to involve inspiring or motivating others.

Most leaders in any role agree that vision, values, adapting to change, knowing oneself and others, professional knowledge and good communication are essential components of leadership. I believe that one of the most important elements of these is vision. Without vision a leader is lost.

Burt Nanus, a noted consultant in leadership, vision, and strategic planning for business, government, and non-profit organizations is a Professor at the University of Southern California. Nanus writes that vision must be idealistic and a “mental model of a future state of the organization.” He asserts that vision must be appropriate and include standards of excellence, purpose, and direction. Organizational vision must be ambitious, easily articulated, and well understood.

Forming a mental image of where you want your organization to be and what it should look like in the future is essential before you plan, decide and direct others on how to get there.

Before directing others on how to attain that vision it must first be communicated, shared and understood by all within the organization. Ensure that the vision is clear, unambiguous, energetic, imaginative, inspiring, achievable and relevant to the organizations goals.

Values
Values are crucial to organizational success. Leaders know what they value and recognize the importance of ethical behavior. The best leaders practice both values and ethnics in the workplace.

People don’t know what they can expect in a leader if leaders never identify their values. If leaders identify and share their values, living the values daily will help to create trust.

As a leader, choose the values and the ethics that are most important to you, the values and ethics you believe in and that define your character. Then live them visibly every day at work. Living by your values is one of the most powerful tools available to you to help you lead and influence others.

Adapting to Change
Adapting to change can make the difference between organizational success and failure. It is essential you have a philosophy that embraces change. An organization that is resilient is one that can effectively innovate, adapt and perform in the face of adversity.

To cope with change ensure you have a clear focus around purpose and goals. Be flexible and open to new approaches, encourage a climate of learning and creativity and a culture of trust and cooperation combined with good communication.

Knowing oneself
True leaders posses the ability to analyze their own motives and decisions and make accurate judgments about their behavior. These judgments can result in constructive improvements in how they relate to others and help identify unhelpful reactions or traits.

Perhaps you have a tendency to control or dominate based on a fear of failure; perhaps you have a fear of conflict and a desire to appease others; or an excessive competitiveness that leads to distrust. Knowing yourself better will help you improve and make adjustments that will make you a more effective leader.

Knowing others
Knowing others is important to situational leaders who adopt different leadership styles depending on the situation and person they are dealing with.

Continue reading →

Leadership

Behavioral Leadership

Behavioral leadership is not really a type of leadership. Instead, it is the study of the kinds of actions and behaviors that make up what we can call a leadership style. This field of study relies on inter-disciplinary approach to understand the phenomenon of leadership and how leaders can effectively engage their followers.

Behavioral leadership is different from situational leadership, which tends to focus on the effectiveness of leadership styles depending on the various stimuli that can be found in the environment of the leader and the organization.

This is a kind of social science study because it does not rely on “hard” sciences to achieve understanding. Rather, it looks at case studies and quantitative approaches occasionally so as to look at the behaviors exhibited by leaders in various times and situations.

Among those who advocated behavioral leadership are Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt and Ralph White. They started doing this back in 1939 with the publication of their work on the influence of leadership performance and styles. Based on their research, they identified three leadership styles based on the behavior of the leaders.

1) Authoritarian leadership style. This kind of leaders makes decision alone and they do not involve others. They give orders and expect to be followed 100% of the time. The leader also prescribes the right way of doing it and is aloof from the followers.

2) Democratic leadership style. There is more participation and consultation in this kind of leadership. The democratic leader relies on group discussions and inputs from knowledgeable experts. The choices are arrived at based on consensus or voting. This works best in a setting where people know each other and they are fairly assertive of what they want to happen.

3. Laissez faire leadership. The group rules in this kind of situation! The leader has abandoned his leadership and just let his people do their own thing. This is dangerous in situations that require hands on assistance from the leader. But in situations where every member of the team is capable and can be considered an expert, this leadership style can easily work!

These types of leadership can be easily implemented in various situations in the organization. You just have to be sensitive to the situation and needs of your organization. If you just apply one over another because it is your preference, you become rigid. More than that, you also become unstable. And that will be a source of weakness in your leadership and in your organization. Choose carefully. The style of leadership is secondary to achieving the vision and the goals of your organization.

Get FREE articles and tips on transformational leadership from M Rasing’s social entrepreneurship blog.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/M_Rasing/182627

 

Leadership

The Difference Between Transactional and Transformational Leadership

Leadership is very important for a person as well as for an organization. Without leadership, the organization (and the individual, too) is like a boat without a rudder. It will be aimless and will just follow the flow of the powerful forces in the organization.

But leadership takes on different forms in an organization. One way of looking at it is by classifying between transaction and transformational leadership. Another is by looking at formal and informal leadership. Formal position and authority matter less than influence. Influence is raw power within an organization. A person who has influence does not need formal authority to tip the organizational balance towards himself.

Leaders who do have formal authority and leadership position may simply use transactional leadership for their subordinates and followers. This kind of leadership works in certain situations. Especially if the leader is but in transition and does not have to invest much time in the development of the people under him. Transactional leadership is not long term. It is short term. The key word here is transactions! The leader does not expect any “return business” with the people he is dealing with.

Transformational leadership, on the other hand, is a very different kind of leadership. It takes into account the motivation and the situation of the followers and subordinates. It primes up people for repeat business and continuous improvements!

As a leader, would you rather use short term transactional leadership or the long-term-impact transformational leadership? While I would advocate transformational leadership off-hand, the best leadership style depends on your circumstances and the organizational goals and objectives.

The important question to ask then is, how can you study the organizational context so as to understand the kind of leadership that is suited to it? Ask your people. Is there good morale in the organization? Or is it full of complaints and murmuring? Are the people happy to be part of the organization? Or are they simply waiting for one paycheck after another?

You also need to look at the performance of the organization. You can conduct an evaluation or even an internal audit of your organization. This way, you can assess the strengths and the weaknesses of the organization. Based on that, you can make important decisions as to the style of leadership suited for the organization.

There is no right or wrong styles of leadership to be used in an organization. What matters is how you use one style of leadership to accomplish your goals as a leader.

Transformational leadership is not rocket science! GET FREE LEADERSHIP COACHING from M Rasing’s leadership blog, http://www.mightyrasing.com.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/M_Rasing/182627

 

Leadership

Leadership Myths and Demons

We think we understand leaders and leadership. And I suppose to some extent we do. But we also work with a lot of leadership mythology-curious ideas developed over time like urban legends-and demons-either blaming leaders for evil in the world or looking upon leadership with suspicion.

Leadership myths are pervasive and persistent. What makes them troubling is that people who believe them usually fail to reach their leadership potential-and they sometimes hold others back as well. The myths and demons get in the way like barriers on an obstacle course.

Consider these myths:

 

  • Leaders are born.
  • Leaders are men.
  • Leaders are wealthy.
  • Leaders are especially charismatic.
  • Leaders are White.
  • Leaders are superb communicators.
  • Leaders are just managers who have more power.
  • Leadership is authority.
  • Leadership is hierarchical or positional.
  • Leadership can’t be taught.

 

You may be able to cite single examples for all of these statements, but one example does not make a law. On the other hand, one example to the contrary will invalidate what someone thinks is a law and we can point to plenty of exceptions. None of these statements may be generalized to all leadership in all times and cultures.

For example, I’ve never met a leader who hadn’t been born, so proclaiming “Leaders are born” like it’s a breakthrough discovery is silly. But many people still believe leadership attributes and skills are instilled at birth and that’s it. If you didn’t get the leadership gene from the stork, so the argument goes, you’re never going to be a leader.

This idea is reminiscent of the feudal perspectives of the Middle Ages all the way back to the divine right of kings. But claiming leaders are born and never “made” doesn’t stand the test of experience.

Leaders are men, and wealthy men at that. Oh really? Joan of Arc was neither a man nor wealthy. Same can be said for Harriet Tubman and Mother Teresa. Have a disproportionate number of leaders been men and have many leaders been wealthy? Sure. But this historical fact says more about lack of access for women in certain times and cultures than it does about innate ability. And more than one wife has led from behind the scenes when her husband, the elected or expected leader, wouldn’t or couldn’t lead. Ask Mrs. Woodrow Wilson.

Leaders aren’t leaders unless they exude charisma. Wrong again. President Calvin Coolidge was a smart man, but charisma certainly isn’t a word associated with his memory. Charisma isn’t essential. Non-charismatic “Silent Cal” still got a few things done.

Leaders are as different in personality and gifts as the leaves in a forest of trees. Gifted Native American speakers Tecumseh and later Chief Joseph were leaders in a lost cause, and they weren’t White. Neither was Martin Luther King, Jr., an orator of the first rank and the most important leader of the American Civil Rights Movement. The biblical Moses, arguably one of the greatest leaders who ever lived, at least initially struggled with poor communication skills.

Leaders are just hyped-up managers. No, leaders may be good managers, and some managers may possess leadership skills. But leaders are more than just managers with more clout. Leaders lead, and managers, well, they manage. We need them both.

Leadership isn’t just for those who possess formal authority, have amassed power, or hold a position. Talent and tenacity trump titles any day. That’s one lesson from the American Revolutionary War. Ragtag colonists took nearly eight years to do it, but they succeeded in chasing the Redcoats and chastening the King. Women without power or position-yet leaders-from Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Susan B. Anthony, worked throughout the Nineteenth Century to secure American women’s right to vote, finally granted in 1920 in the Nineteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Even “title-less” leaders get things done.

Consider these demons:

 

  • Leaders are robber barons.
  • Leaders are anti-democratic.
  • Leadership is Machiavellian, i.e. manipulative.
  • Leadership is tyrannical.
  • Leadership is intimidation or coercion.
  • Leadership is controlling, dictating.
  • Leadership contradicts service or “servanthood.”

 

For some reason, our ideas about leadership get twisted up with our image of “bad guys” and their desire to conquer the world. Lex Luthor in the Superman movies. Adolph Hitler in real history. Some people can’t seem to think about leaders without wincing. In this view, leaders are self-promoters, “politicians” who can’t be trusted. Only “the people” will ultimately be in the right.

Some of this attitude toward leadership is fostered by American democratic culture. We haven’t fully trusted a leader since we threw off England’s King George and our George left the first presidency.

Some of this suspicious attitude is justifiable. A few leaders haven’t deserved the allegiance and power they commanded or usurped, and some leaders have left lasting bitterness in their wake. Richard Nixon is America’s highest profile recent example. And historically, the world has certainly endured evil leaders-from the Old Testament King Jehoram, about whom it was said, “He passed away, to no one’s regret,” to Genghis Khan to Nero to Pol Pot to Saddam Hussein to Kim Jong-il. Sadly, the rogue’s gallery is full.

Dishonest, anti-democratic, manipulative, tyrannical, coercive, and dictatorial demagogues are the bad people. Yet their record shows us morally questionable individuals holding leadership positions, not a record of something intrinsically irredeemable about leadership in general.

Leadership is a tool. As free moral agents human beings can use leadership for good or for evil. Leadership always gets back to character.

As people who can choose, we can choose to lead. None of these common myths or demons ultimately hold water and none of them should stop anyone from becoming a leader if desire and opportunity calls for it.

Part of what makes leadership so fascinating is that leaders come from all walks and byways of life. No one is excluded. For this we can be grateful to God and to a democratic and open country where individuals matter.

Tom Brokaw described an entire generation as leaders. He noted in his book The Greatest Generation that America is losing several thousand per day who survived the Great Depression and World War II. This generation was the “greatest” because they answered the call time and again. They led by example, commitment, and participation. These men and women took the measure of their challenges and in some cases gave “the last full measure” to defend what they believed in.

The question we now face is who will take the Greatest Generation’s place of leadership? It can be you, and false mythologies and demons shouldn’t get in your way.

Dr. Rex Rogers is President, SAT-7 USA, the American advancement arm of SAT-7, a Christian satellite television organization based in Cyprus, which reaches 22 countries across 7 time zones via four channels in Arabic, Farsi, and Turkish. He is former president, Cornerstone University, and writes a column, “Good News from the Middle East.” Contact him at w http://rexmrogers.com/ or http://www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Rex_Rogers/180433