Leadership is the ability of an individual, group, or organization to influence, or guide other individuals, teams, or organizations. Leadership is a contested term. Specialist literature debates various viewpoints on the concept, sometimes contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) North American versus European approaches. Some U.S. academic environments define leadership as "a process of social influence in which a person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common and ethical task". In other words, leadership is an influential power-relationship in which the power of one party (the "leader") promotes movement/change in others (the "followers"). Some have challenged the more traditional managerial views of leadership (which portray leadership as something possessed or owned by one individual due to their role or authority), and instead advocate the complex nature of leadership which is found at all levels of institutions, both within formal and informal roles. Studies of leadership have produced theories involving (for example) traits, complexity, collective intelligence, situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision, values, charisma, and intelligence, among others.
Historical views The Chinese doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven postulated the need for rulers to govern justly, and the right of subordinates to overthrow emperors who appeared to lack divine sanction. Pro-aristocracy thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's "blue blood" or genes. Monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction (see the divine right of kings). On the other hand, more democratically inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent. In the autocratic/paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them "emotionally attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies".
Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on 'right living' relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a tradition of filial piety. Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline. Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. The exercise of humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust leads to folly. Dependence on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result in cruelty. When one possesses all five virtues together, each applied appropriately to its function, one can truly be a leader. Machiavelli's The Prince, written in the early-16th century, provided a manual for rulers to acquire royal authority and found lasting regimes. Prior to the 19th century, the concept of leadership had less relevance than today's society expected, and obtained traditional deference and obedience to lords, kings, master-craftsmen, and slave-masters. The Oxford English Dictionary traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as 1821, when the term referred to the position or office of a designated leader. The abstract notion of "leadership" as embodying the qualities and behaviors associated with leaders and influencers developed only later during the 19th and 20th centuries – possibly traceable from 1870 onwards. Historically, industrialization, opposition to the ancien regime, and the phasing out of chattel slavery meant that some newly developing organizations (nation-state republics, commercial corporations) evolved a need for a new paradigm with which to characterize elected politicians and job-granting employers – thus the development and theorizing of the idea of "leadership". The functional relationship between leaders and followers may remain, but acceptable (perhaps euphemistic) terminology has changed. Starting in the 19th century, the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. One response to this denial of élitism came with Leninism – Lenin (1870–1924) demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, which was to bring into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat. Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship of divinely-provided resources – human and material – and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan. Compare this with servant leadership.
Theories Anecdotal and incidental observations aside, the serious discipline of theorising leadership began in the 19th century.
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
