Tolstoy's Concept of Power and Leadership - Research Paper Example

Task Tolstoy's Concept of Power and Leadership Introduction According to Tolstoy, power is the relation that exists between a person and the others. The person involved in this context explains ideas and even theories to others but hardly takes part in those actions and justification. On the other end, leadership is driving unpopular initiatives in a populace. For instance, within an organization, it would require a person to identify a numbers of approaches that would be used for the purposes of making changes. This will depend on many aspects including freedom of the subordinates and the authority that the leader possesses. For instance, an authoritarian approach entails the power of the leader to make decisions on their own and then telling those that they lead instructions on what is to be done. Here, those being led have no chance of deciding on what they should perform. Another approach to the power and leadership issue consultative approach that involves consultation. Here, those in leadership positions consult a few people on some decision and actions that they would be taking. They also inform these people on the changes that would be likely to occur. This enables them to institute the right measures that would benefit a large number of people. In addition to the two most liked methods above, there is democratic approach where a team of people would be involved in decision making process. In this approach, the leader assists the group in forming structures and encourage those involved taking in decision making process. Of the three, democratic and consultative will be preferred more than authoritarian. This is because these two above give more responsibility to people than the authoritarian approach. The best leaders are those that lead, and when they are not involved in leading, they follow the leaders. Leaders who are motivated by not liking or wanting to follow will always insist on wanting to lead. This will result into failure and other related problems compared to the right person who would be in that position. Organizations require those in leadership positions to be motivated because such an action would facilitate achievement of results. There exist various factors that serve to motivate people within the organization at the top levels. At the above mentioned levels, there are various people are who include; managers, chief executive officers, directors and even supervisors. It is likely that such people may acquire their motivation from different aspects. Those aspects may be from within the organization or from outside the organization. The aspects above may be different but would serve the purpose of achieving a common goal.. This research paper looks at primary motivators for leading, correct mind set within the organization and characters of those leading. What motivates leaders? Desire to make differences At times, some of the staff members within the organization may be observant and identify areas of weaknesses. Such weakness may be impacting negatively on their efforts within the organization. This may be from within the organization, those in leadership positions or even those under leaders. It would be time spent on petty issues, meetings and taking too much time to accomplish inadequate results. Other aspects within the organization may include; confusion in carrying out tasks, poor ways of evaluating the executive, committees that achieve remarkably little, poor documentation of records and even poor appraisal and remuneration techniques. In the political arena, it may be poor governance that they would like to change. It may also be the structure of politics that they would want to change, and this will serve as a motivation factor to these people. The above situation may serve to motivate people who are determined to take a step towards leadership in organizations. This is because they feel that their efforts are being wasted by other people within the organization. This would make them initiate changes within the organization. For example, they may want to lead some sections of the firm, initiate changes in processes within the organization or even change the entire leadership process. In such situations, those involved may be so determined and may not be deterred in accomplishing their desires. They may be willing t make sacrifices that will be aimed at making the organization efficient and results will be achieved (Quaasteniet, 2012, 01). In the political world, it may result to exemplary leadership, allocation of resources and elimination of unproductive activities. Greed Greed is defined as unquenchable lust for making self gains. Greed has been identified as being among the greatest motivators of personal gains. For instance, greed was observed in leaders who advocated for apartheid rule in some countries. At times, greed has facilitated manufacture of dangerous weapons that may be used in fighting. Greed and lust for power may blind this aspiring to lead, and their refusal to deal with reality. Two outstanding examples of political leaders who were motivated by greed and lust for power are Hitler and Idi Amin. These two people destroyed human lives because they wanted to cling to power and amass wealth for themselves. The result was that inhumane actions were done on the citizens of such countries. The military personnel in these countries were used in carrying out execution of human lives. This was a sign of selfishness and self centeredness on the part of the leaders involved. Lust and greed for power can lead to genocides, removal of any opposition and intimidation aimed at attaining personal gains. It would also lead to violence, complete destruction of the rules of the land and discriminatory policies. Such actions are opposed by various international bodies on human rights and the being led. This may result into destructions and killings because citizens will result to demonstrations (Malan &Ben, 2001, 33). Ego, status and prestige In this context, decision and actions made are aimed at self interest and not for those being led. Leaders are inconsiderate when making decisions that regard the people that they are leading. Egoism may reflect immature leadership on the leader. It encompasses using anything offered for personal interest including those being led. The reader makes use the firm’s interest or those of others to achieve his or her personal gains. When it comes to status, the leader will be willing to prosper and go up whereas those that are being led are suffering. Those being led will be faced with hardships and would feel inferior because of poor governance (Jackson, 2010, 34). Prestige may be defined as irresistible power and feeling ease. Leaders feel valued and may want to be associated with those who are highly ranked in the society. Here, leaders will associate with the rich and be in the company of the able people within the society. They despise the lowly ranked people in the society. Followers are viewed as being poor and may even be mistreated by leaders. Such status, ego and feeling calm and being ranked above followers may contribute to people being motivated to be in power. It may serve to motivate people to seek power and leadership positions within societies. These leaders are guided by their own interests and would not consider the views of the majority when making decisions, and taking actions that touch people’s lives. Not wanting to follow others This is an unpleasant character within people who would want to be leaders. They only want to lead others and not be led by others. This may result to poor governance. Without followers, leaders may not exist in society. Therefore, leaders should also be willing to be led by others. In studying leaders, followers are taken into consideration and power and leadership will be established when there is a common goal to be achieved. Those leaders motivated by not wanting to be followers will not want others to lead them. They will for instance force their way into leadership instead of the right person. For instance, they will carry out activities and actions without consulting with others. The effects would be tragic and would result into loss of lives. In management, those under the leaders or managers are called subordinates, and they follow instructions given by the management teams. In this context, the leader/manager is deemed to be right always and rational within the organization (Lefebvre, 1997, 117). In the context of the military, such motivation would result into disagreements and actions that are self centered. Desire to have power and control over others Some people may be motivated by the desire to have power and control over others. Such leaders would enjoy ruling over others. In organizations, the leader of this kind would enjoy giving orders to the subordinates and direct work to be done. The most salient aspect in this case is that urge to have power and be overall in terms of decision making processes. There is no one to lead (by default) Absence of people who can lead may motivate others to aim to lead in the society. This would happen in areas that would be lacking resources or newly established. Here, people who become leaders may be inexperienced or be lacking the required skills in leadership. It would be a situation of trying whether it would work for those elected. Such leaders get into a leadership position in with minimal opposition or no opposition. At times, such leaders may not be accountable because no one will be there to look out for the wrongs done. Those people motivated by the situation of where no one is available to lead will carry out their actions without consulting, and may be lacking wisdom on the effects of their actions. The belief of some people that they are best suited for the role People believing that they are best suited for the role of leadership may serve to motivate them. This is from within them, and they would be determined to carry on leadership, and other related activities. This would be a strong motivation factor if the person of concern would be qualified; has exceptional skills and experience in leadership. Creating correct mind set Working in a high performance level requires those involved in such positions to be competent, apply new skills and implement new rules within the organization. Creating correct mind set entails changes on the part of the leader and those he, or she leads. In this context, the mind set created is based on accountability and the leader being candid. These two aspects are the core values of leadership and in political and organization issues. Being candid A true leader would be required to create openness within team members by encouraging them to speak out their minds about the business atmosphere. Tackling of conflicts head-on would be facilitated by the leader being at the forefront in encouraging dialogues. Candor requires that the leader to be open to his team members. He or she should be straight forward in carrying out his tasks within the organization. He should implement the application of dialogue within the team members. Openness within the members that he or she leads will be achieved if he or she is open to them and has cultivated that culture in them. Honey within the team members will be achieved if the leader if honest and has proved to be honest to the rest of the team members. This is achieved by allowing those that they lead to critique their performance and behavior. They should be willing to listen to those criticizing them change their behavior. They should accept that the criticized behavior is unacceptable within the organization because it would impact negatively on the organization. The leader should create an atmosphere that is free and accommodates confrontations. In addition to this, leaders should make those they lead to be know that they are free to give their opinions freely. Leaders should also be prepared to receive different ideas, criticisms, and reactions and even be willing to accommodate diversity. In this context, wary hidden agendas should be made candid and open (Guttman, 2008, 24). Here, if there is a conflict, it should be expressed and resolved without any problem. Depersonalized and fact based feedbacks are encouraged by candid leaders within organizations. This serves to improve performance within the organization and achieve satisfactory results. Accentuating accountability Accountability within the organization may be in two forms, which include; vertical accountability and horizontal accountability. Vertical accountability is represented by executives, managers and supervisors being accountable in their work. They must be result driven within their various sections where their results and those of subordinates must be taken into account. Here, every person is required to work and be successful from their section or end of work. This will sum up and present an aggregate success within the organization. There is horizontal accountability within an organization, and it encompasses people at the same level or position within the organization. For instance, it requires interaction between managers of different sections and departments. It also requires the working members to interact and be accountable within their section of work. Therefore, accountability within an organization is an aspect that encompasses everyone including subordinates. Those in leadership should encourage and instill accountability within their organizations. In addition to the staff members wanting to achieve their personal goals within the organization, they should also be motivated to work together for a common goal. Those in a leadership position should strive to build peer-to- peer responsibility within the organization. In addition to this, bardolatry accountability should also be established within the working environment. Correct mind set within leadership requires openness and accountability (Love, 2004, 128). Tolstoy's Concept of Power and Leadership makes use of the examples of Bagration’s hurrah’ and Petya’s at Shamshevo. In this context, he looks at two things; spontaneity versus compulsion. Petya is compelled to kill a group of Frenchmen and nothing would stop him from achieving this aspect (Forsyth, 2010, 255). On the other hand, Bagration is reluctant and waits for the crack of the first French short. These two people represent leaders in power because they give instructions to others. Bagration is portrayed as a good leader. He listens, and he is not quick to give orders. In fact, he talks less and takes much of his time to listen to what he is being told. He does not bring up any plan that is not his own. The actions taken are meant to benefit the whole group and not him. Therefore, he is not self centered and does not work for to attain self or personal gains. He has been portrayed as being candid and would not hinder anything that would benefit his troops (Clay, 1998, 112). He understands that the people he led and the outcomes of his leadership would be more beneficial than any personal gains that would be made in the whole situation. He renounces his personal wishes because he is a principled leader, and not self centered. Another character that is looked at is Ferapontov, a leader who is portrayed as working on false assumptions. His personal wishes are shallow and harmful because they are founded on false assumptions. He ignores basic clues about the outcome of his actions. He is portrayed as a person whose thinking and actions are based on personal gains. He is not candid at all and does not seem to be accountable for any actions taken by his group members. According to Tolstoy, military leaders who have no concern for the people but themselves are inimical leaders. They are concerned with their own reputations, theories, pride, and dignity. For instance, Alexander orders Kutuzov to advance his troops out of the royal pique. This is a reflection of leaders being compelled to follow personal interests and the results obtained are tragic to the people involved in the exercise. Civilian leaders are also faced with the same situation of choosing to act for their personal interests or those of the people that they are leading. Wise leaders will maintain their egos in check and remain open at all times. On the other hand, the foolish will only reflect their self interests and imposing measures that would be tragic to other people while they would be safe. Compulsion has been termed as a foolish act and is always harmful to people. According to Tolstoy, spontaneous behavior can lead to wisdom because it is based on instincts. In addition to this, he adds that instincts are found within all human beings and would instill wisdom in people. Good leadership would encompass unselfishness whereas, corrupt leaders are selfish. Selfishness is self centered and cannot initiate prosperity in any way within leadership (2011, 187). This aspect is brought out by the example of Princess Mary and Natasha. Success of the two is dependent on the other person and, the two must work together. This would be a solution to those leaders who would hate to be followers of others. They must understand that leaders and follower exist, and that the two must be present for a society to be complete. Some of the examples of wisdom within the works of Tolstoy include; peasants who took part in digging trenches out of their own will at the battle of Borodino and Prince Andrew allowing two girls to take plums from their house. The other example is that of Pierre impulsively saving the life of Ramballe by knocking Makar’s shotgun away from him. On the other hand, Ferapontov together with his solders have been portrayed as a self centered people after stealing flour. Conclusion Spontaneous involvement has been reflected as the first step towards wisdom. This step is paramount and allows people to abandon their preconceptions and drop schemes that we would be have in mind. This will enable people to become aware of the relationship between living and dying. Tolstoy brings out the aspect of truth in itself and reflects the resurrection of Russia and compares that with generations on earth. A child for instance would live in another generation after the parents have died. Tolstoy makes use of controlling opposites such as inadequate versus sterling and wise versus foolish. In his works, he gives an example of smart and incompetent leaders and some of the actions they undertook and the results of their actions. Most of his example reflecting opposing sides are military based and make use of troops. Works Cited Clay, George R. Tolstoy's Phoenix: From Method to Meaning in War and Peace. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press, 1998. Print. Forsyth, Donelson R. Group Dynamics. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print. Guttman, Howard M. Great Business Teams: Cracking the Code for Standout Performance. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Internet resource. Jackson, Jackson. Social Stratification, V.1: Sociological Studies. England: Cambridge U.P, 2010. Print Lefebvre, Eric R. J. The Monk Manager and the Road to Abbey Management: Essays in Organization Theory and Managerial Practice and on the World of Work. Leuven [u.a.: Acco, 1997. Print. Love, Jeff. The Overcoming of History in "war and Peace". Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004. Print. Malan, Faan, and Ben Smit. Ethics and Leadership in Business and Politics. Lansdowne: Juta, 2001. Print. Quaasteniet, Paul. Creating the desire for change Retrieved on 2nd March 2012 from: Wogaman, J P. Christian Ethics: A Historical Introduction. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011. Print. Read More