Historical or Contemporary Leader - Essay Example

This paper analyzes the figure of Mahatma Gandhi as well as his legacy as a leader. First of all, the definition of leadership which could have been formulated by this individual is explored. The next part of the paper is dedicated to his leadership philosophy as well as the experience that taught him to lead. In the following section the connection is drawn between certain aspects of Gandhi’s life and life of the author, namely the insight that violence is not able to accomplish anything. A significant part of the paper analyzes the elements which made this individual an exceptional leader such as his desire to start struggle even though the possibility of successful outcome was relatively low. It is also mentioned that Gandhi should be regarded as a pioneer of using non violent method is the primary method in gaining independence as the majority of the leaders before him relied on violence. The possibility of improvement is assessed in the next paragraph. The vulnerabilities of Gandhi are also explored together with the manner in which he tried to overcome them. The paper also provides insight into what the author learned why studying the legacy of this prominent leader. The rest of the paper features application of Kouzes and Posner view of leadership to Gandhi’s experience. It is argued that he employed all exemplary methods of leadership. It is also argued that the best theory that can describe his leadership is transformational leadership theory and the relevant evidence is provided. If one examines the life of Mahatma Gandhi, one will be able to see that he did not pay much attention to theoretical aspects of leadership. That is why he did not produce any comprehensive definition of it in writing. However, the way he interacted with his followers might be regarded as suitable way to explore what leadership meant to him. Thus, based on this observation, it is obvious that for Gandhi leadership was a unique relationship between people when one of them was directing the common efforts to achieve a particular goal. One should also keep in mind that leadership philosophy of this prominent individual consists of the following elements. First of all, it is appreciation and acceptance of truth: Gandhi does not want his followers to follow any illusions. The second element is to do one’s best and adhere to the principles regardless of the harsh consequences: this can be witnessed in his personal example when Gandhi was jailed because of organization of demonstrations. Finally, leadership was directed at a positive outcome: the change had to be beneficial for everyone. Surprisingly enough, but the roots of Indian independence movement should be sought in South Africa. Indeed, Gandhi went there as a young specialist and became particularly interested in helping the Indians in this country. Thus, it was he who contributed to emergence of Natal Indian Congress as a unified and powerful organization that was able to introduce changes into the contemporary state of affairs and fight effectively for the wellbeing of the Indians in South Africa. I think that the aspect of Gandhi’s legacy that I identify myself is the insight that violence will not bring any positive outcome. Just like him, I understood it only when I accepted the world to be unfair. For example, the Indians in South Africa could not oppose the government because any kind of direct opposition would be immediate put down. However, they elevated the conflict to a different level and the opponent was not ready for this. I also believe that direct confrontation can hardly help one find resolution. Quite the opposite: it will postpone the solution of the problem. As for the traits that made Gandhi an exceptional leader, one should mentioned the fact that he was involved in the conflict where the parties were not equal in terms of power, but he still managed to win (Nair, 1994). At the time the British Empire was one of the biggest states on the planet. In other words, there was little opportunity that it will let go one of its most precious territories. Nevertheless, Gandhi was not afraid to take this challenge and ultimately succeeded. It is quite obvious that this leader should be regarded as one of the pioneers of non violent resistance (Antonakis, 2004). It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that prior to him the majority of the leaders who wanted to fight for the independence of their country preferred violent measures. However, it was Gandhi who showed that non violence can be as much effective or even more effective. In spite of the fact that this approach has not be fully tested before, he decided to apply it and succeeded in doing so. Some might suggest that Gandhi could have been more effective as a leader. On the one hand, this is rather debatable since he ultimately was able to achieve exactly what he wanted. Therefore, any increase in effectiveness would simply deliver the same result, but faster. On the other hand, one may argue that his impact on the people could have benefited from a more detailed explanation of the course of action. For example, many people followed his because they thought that he knew the next step, but it is probably that even more would have followed if they knew themselves what the next step was. If one considers his vulnerability, one should note that Gandhi was a very polite and tactful man and it was rather difficult for him to take criticism that was directed to him personally. Keeping in mind that such method is commonly used in politics, it is obvious that at the time many of his opponents would employ this method. However, the leader in question was able to overcome the vulnerabilities which were mentioned above. Gandhi adhered to his principles of non violence and truth so much that everyone how would criticize him would be seen in a negative light. In other words, the Indian leader was able to create a creed that reinforced his image of a highly pious man; this reputation guarded him from any further attacks that were directed at him personally. While exploring the legacy of Gandhi I learned an important lesson: one should always believe in oneself even if the conditions are terrible. In other words, one should never give up regardless of the situation. When I assess the state of affairs in India when Gandhi started his political activism, I am surprised that everything was able to turn the other way around. In other words, just like many people at the time, I could hardly image that Indian would ever be free again and that the British rule can be overthrown. However, Gandhi was not afraid to start his unequal fight for freedom. Now, it may be important to analyze the experience of this legendary individual with the help of five practices of exemplary leadership. The first strategy that Gandhi used was to model the way (Kouzes & Posner, 2014). For example, he did not simply state that he wanted India to be a free country: he showed the specific way to gain its independence step by step. For example, his Salt March was aimed at monopoly of the government over salt and caused a significant damage to the governmental control over India. He also contributed to the emergence of shared vision. Thus, he wanted all his followers to image the free India, an independent country that was able to develop without any external influence. One would make no mistake suggesting that Indian liked this image and it was the ultimate goal that everyone tried to achieve. In other words, Gandhi was able to find a common platform that would unite Indians, often divided by religion, castes or regional differences. In other words, this image of new India was shared by all the natives. Gandhi also challenged the process in which the leaders before him tried to gain independence. It would be a mistake to argue that his person was the first leader who fought for liberation of India. However, unlike those leaders before him Gandhi completely altered the manner in which he wanted to gain independence for his country. That is why “fighting” would not be the right word for his activity since he rejected any violence and believe that by doing so he will be able to achieve success. Moreover, he enabled others to act which contributed to the cumulative effect. For example, during the above mentioned Salt March Gandhi produced a little bit of salt, but this was not restricted to him: everyone was invited to follow his example. In other words, he showed people the way and expected them to follow it which turned the followers from passive observers to active liberators. What is more important is that participation in the non violent resistance movement was open for everyone and did not require any specific effort. Finally, Gandhi encouraged the hearts of his followers by stating that the victory that his country gained was achieved thanks to the combined efforts of the people, not his own. In other words, everyone who participated in the marches or demonstrations and tried to follows the guideline set by Gandhi could be proud that liberation occurred thanks to this person’s efforts. This means that every person who interacted with this leader knew that any contribution, no matter how small it was, brought the common victory closer. Finally, it may necessary to apply one of the leadership models to the experience of Gandhi. One would make no mistake suggesting that the best theory that can be applied in this situation is transformational leadership. One of the fundamental elements of this kind of leadership lies in the fact that the followers are encouraged to develop a new perception of reality and the future in order to implement the change (Northouse, 2004). This is true in the case of Gandhi: he acted as if he was hundred percent sure that success is inevitable. In addition to that, there are many factors that can be identified in his experience that shows that transformation leadership can explain his actions rather well. For example, it is beyond any doubt that Gandhi possessed a considerable amount of charisma. Even now, long after his death he inspires people and his voice is heard. In other words, his charisma was able to transcend time and affects the contemporary people as it affected people long ago. Moreover, Gandhi used inspirational motivation a lot. Thus, he expected his followers to do their best and fully trusted them. This resulted in the fact that people who participated in demonstrations and marched did not want to upset their leader and truly did their best. So, the positive outcome of their actions accumulated and ultimately manifested in something that everyone was eager to achieve which is independence. Therefore, people were not only motivated, but inspired to make further steps. What is more important is that the experience of Gandhi possesses strengths that are traditionally associated with transformational leadership. For example, the ideas that were spread by him had intuitive appeal to the followers. Indeed, Gandhi did not persuade people, but presenting some sophisticated arguments: he spoke words that were understood by everyone. In addition to that, the relationship between him and the followers should be perceived as the central platform of interaction that contributed to the emergence of the result. In other words, it is his cooperation with the people of India that made this country independent again. On the other hand, the experience of Gandhi features limitation of transformational leadership as well. For example, while this individual did provide some clear instruction with regard to immediate actions, the overall plan that he followed was not clear. This means that people had to rely on him as he was the only person who knew what to do. In addition to that, the success of Indian independence movement is closely connected to Gandhi personally and could have been hardly replicated. References Antonakis, J. (2004). The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2014). The five practices of exemplary leadership: United Kingdom. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Nair, K. (1994). A higher standard of leadership: Lessons from the life of Gandhi. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Northouse, P. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Read More