Tag Archives: Leadership Coaching

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

Leadership

Authentic Leadership – A Personal Philosophy

“I am your servant. I do not come to you as a leader, as one above others.”

These words were uttered by Nelson Mandela several years ago, and serve as an important reminder of how one individual maintained his dignity and integrity while being incarcerated for 27 years as a political prisoner in South Africa. Mandela’s own leadership journey continues to serve as an inspiration to people around the world. His ability to rise above the inhumane treatment from his jailers and others in positions of power at the time reflect authentic leadership.

The purpose of this article is to share some of what I have learned over 15 years as a student of leadership, and to challenge the reader to take the time in the weeks ahead to reflect on their own personal leadership and to ask themselves the question: Am I an authentic leader?

I have studied the question of what do we mean by the word ‘leadership’ over a long period of time. Is it something that each of us can develop, or is it the domain of only a few. Many writers on the subject argue that leadership can be learned. I’m not quick, however, to reject the older school view that leadership is something with which people are born. For example, it was Aristotle who made the comment: “From the moment of their birth, some are marked for subjugation, and others for command.”

Many of the contemporary thinkers on leadership reject that leaders are born. But I believe that this is what I’ll call the pendulum effect, in which people jump onto a new theory after abandoning an older one. Now, it’s argued that everyone can be developed into a leader.

I’ve identified an approach to address the issue of who possesses leadership in an organization or a community. It consists of two types of leadership: Big L and Little L. My personal view is that only a few of us will ever have the dynamic leadership behaviors and skills to lead organizations, private, public or non-profit, large or small, or the populace of a country, state or province. Only a few of us have what it takes to be a Big L leader.

What propelled people like Winston Churchill, Mohandas Gandhi, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, and Nelson Mandela to be world-class leaders? For those who are sports-minded, consider the great athletes like Bobby Orr, Billy Jean King, Wayne Gretsky, or Mohammed Ali. Or how about such vocalists as Aretha Franklin, Céline Dionne, or Beverly Sills?

These individuals possessed an innate talent and drive that propelled them to succeed. Why do some children at a very young age show an incredible skill in a certain discipline, yet other children work hard but only attain a certain level of proficiency?

To lead an organization, especially in today’s turbulent world, requires someone with unique abilities. Some of these can be learned. But there needs to be an inner drive and vision that causes that individual to want to lead others. This raises the issue of power and status, for which many people strive in their efforts to rise to the top.

Power can be an important component of effective leadership, provided it is used properly and for the right purposes. When top leaders abuse power by controlling and manipulating their subordinates, then these are not Big L leaders. They may be good managers, but when it comes to inspiring people and leading with integrity, they fall short of achieving this.

The late Peter Drucker believed that leadership must be founded upon a constitution. Otherwise, irresponsibility will result. He made the following powerful statement some years ago:
“I am amazed that today’s prominent writers on leadership do not seem to realize that the three most charismatic leaders in all recorded history were named Hitler, Stalin and Mao. I do not believe that there are three men who did more evil and more harm. Leadership has to be grounded in responsibility. It has to be grounded in a constitution. It has to be grounded in accountability. Otherwise, it will lead to tyranny.”

Drucker was an advocate for shared leadership. He believed in employee responsibility and the need for a “self-governing community,” where individuals and teams share in many managerial activities. This brings me to the concept of Little L leadership.

This is the leadership we see displayed throughout organizations and community. It is the day-to-day acts and behaviors that people at all levels engage in. However, there are those who just are not interested in showing leadership behaviors, or at least for the time being. That’s okay. Some of them will gradually come on board, while others will continue to want to be led by their peers and managers. This brings to mind a quotation from physicist David Bohm: “The ability to perceive or think differently is more important than the knowledge gained.”

This is a key point to remember when reflecting on our personal leadership styles and potentials.
It comes down to each of us being authentic in how we conduct ourselves. We need to strip off the facades we wear and own up to our weaknesses, limitations and warts. When we’re honest and open with ourselves and others, we gain greater confidence and self-respect, plus respect from others. Be true to yourself and others will be true to you.

I’ll share a personal example. When I was in my early 30s I was promoted to manager of a team of economists. While I had the technical skills and knew the work, I had zero management training. Because of my own insecurities and wanting to do a good job, I became a bit of a micro manager. That was until a couple of the young economists straightened me out. It took a while but I learned to eventually let go and share the leadership within my branch. I was still the managerial leader, but the people with whom I worked certainly took a lot of initiative and consistently demonstrated leadership in their own ways. There’s no magic formula or cookie cutter approach to this. Each of us has to find our own way. In my case, I had to fall on my nose a number of times.

Here are three questions you may wish to reflect on when it comes to developing your leadership skills:

1. What are my strengths and weaknesses? (Be honest with yourself)
2. What do I need to do to be more adventurous and risk-taking?
3. How can I inspire others to want to work towards a common purpose?

I’ll share one piece of advice, something I’ve learned: If you want to inspire others (an essential part of leadership), you need to be passionate about your cause.

I recall watching a PBS program a few years ago that looked at the head surgeon of an emergency room in a large US city. As you can imagine, an ER can be an extremely hectic and stressful place in which to work. People have to know their duties and understand the interdependency of their efforts.

What struck me most about watching the surgeon (a middle age Black man) was his calmness in dealing with highly stressful situations in the midst of chaos – multiple victims of car accidents and victims with gunshot wounds. As he stated to the journalist: “My staff look at me to keep it together. If I lose it, they lose it.” When his shift finished, where did he go? Home? No, he went to do volunteer work with inner city Black children. For me, this man showed exemplary leadership. But this prompts the question: was this Black man born as a natural leader, or did he develop his leadership skills over time?

Each of us needs to see our personal quest for leadership as one that first starts with the discovery of who each of us really is. We need:

To know ourselves,
To hear ourselves,
To tell the truth to ourselves,
To be honest with ourselves.

Once we address these questions and reexamine our values and beliefs, we’ll be ready to move forward in our leadership journey. Yes, leadership skills can be learned. But the first step is a process in which we look inside ourselves.

This journey is a very personal and private one. We may or may not to wish to share with others along the way. However, one thing needs to be clear and that is every leader must go though it.

Authors Kouzes and Posner express this beautifully when they state:
“You can’t elevate others to higher purposes until you’ve first elevated yourself….You can’t lead others until you’ve first led yourself through a struggle with opposing values….A leader with integrity has one self, at home and at work, with family and with colleagues. Such a leader has a unifying set of values that guide choices of action regardless of the situation.”

Continue reading →

Leadership

The Role of Leadership in Business Success

The role of leadership in achieving business success is indisputable. Great leaders who create great businesses are “made” not “born”. You know why? True leadership is learned; it is not automatic. To answer the question whether leaders are made or born, great theorist, Mr. Bass, postulated the all time Bass Theory of leadership (1989 &1990). He said that there are three theories of leadership.

Firstly, the Trait Theory, which says that some personality traits may lead people naturally into leadership roles. Secondly, Great Event Theory, which believes that a crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion. And thirdly, the Transformational Theory, which says that people can choose to become leaders and learn leadership skills. This third theory is the bases for this article.

In other words, you don’t have an excuse to say you are waiting to locate your leadership traits before you can become a leader or wait for a crisis situation to arise before you assume leadership role as the Great Event Theory asserts; but that you choose to become a leader by learning leadership skills as the Transformational Theory stipulates.

You see, we are all born with leadership potential wrapped in us. But it is our responsibility to develop it, nurture it, and birth it out. It won’t just come out on its own. It requires your attention to develop it and it is about you choosing to become a leader.

A philosopher once said that there are five domains of leadership: self-leadership, leading another person, leading a group, leading an organization or business, and finally, leading a nation. If you look critically at the five domains as outlined above, you can see vividly the progressions that one undergoes to become a leader. You cannot lead others talk less of leading an organization if you cannot lead yourself.

All that your business is today and all that it will become tomorrow will be as a result of your state of leadership in directing the course of the business. As Warren Bennis, a leadership expert said, “A business short on capital can borrow money and one with poor location can move; but a business short on leadership has little chance of survival.”

What is leadership? What does it mean to be a leader? And how does leaders and leadership impact on business or organization? Let’s begin by looking at definition of leadership. Leadership is an influence relationship between leaders and followers who intend real changes and outcomes that reflect their shared purposes.

Leadership involves influence, it occurs among people, those people intentionally desire significant changes, and the changes reflect purposes shared by leaders and followers. An important aspect of leadership is influencing others to come together around a common vision. Thus, a leader is a visionary who influences, motivates, communicates, and energizes the followers to do what ordinarily they may not be willing to do themselves.

The impact of leadership in building a successful business is quite enormous. Firstly, leaders make things happen—They are the catalyst for business success; they challenge the status-quo; they are vision-driven; they think differently. Secondly, leaders manage through times of change—They determine direction; they are goal-setters and goal-getters; they move organizations from where they are to where they need to be. And thirdly, leaders are revolutionaries—They face reality and mobilize appropriate resources; they encourage others to do the same; they leave a footprint that cannot be erased.

These are the Jack Welch of the 21st Century who turns a dying business to a multi-billion dollar business. In his quest to better define the roles leaders plays in their business or organisation, Leadership expert, John Maxwell, stipulates the five levels of leadership: The positional leader, the relational leader, the result oriented leader, the people development leader, and finally the respected leader. The big question now is: what level of leader are you in your business?

Elvis Ukpaka provides impact-FULL Leadership, Self-Improvement and Business Development training and coaching solutions to high profile individuals and organisations. His reputation for helping people achieve peak performance at work, and in life, derives from a burning passion to deliver unparralleled value, by empowering his audience to actualise their potentials to become successful leaders and high performers.

To gain access to more of Elvis’ tested wisdom and insight, on how to achieve peak performance – and leadership – that gets the NEEDED results, go to http://www.elvisukpaka.com, to signup for his Peak Performance Leadership Newsletter. You can reach Elvis directly via Email: elvis@elvisukpaka.com or Phone: 234-802-367-1070.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Elvis_Ukpaka/324568