Public Sector Leadership - Assignment Example

Chief characteristics of servant leader? A servant leader is an amalgamation of numerous traits. These traits consist of inward abilities and outward expressions. The inward abilities include yearning for progress, yenning for providing the people with the best. The outward expression consists of practical steps that are based upon the desire and ideology that dwells deep in. The approach of two towards the goal determination and achievement is contrasting. The means to the ends are different and each takes a different stance towards the goal accomplishment. The choice of person for the goal accomplishment and the entire journey undertaking is also a mark of distinction between the two individuals. The leader may choose himself as the individual most suited to the job, the servant first in return would make the choice in due consideration of all the options, individuals and choices available to him and each of these would be done so in accordance with the due consideration of the goal accomplishment and objectives set forth against it. Servant leader maybe faced with situations that demand ducking out on situations and decisions. They at the same time may be demanded for making tough decisions. Prioritizing the tasks and determining the actions in lieu of the generic decisions may also come up as a task and challenge for the servant leader. Leader steps in first, asks other to take on the path prescribed. The servant in contrast, is in position and capacity to lead, yet lets others take the initiative and allow them following the path that would benefit them the most. The only effort and dedication they would contribute and utilize would be that of guidance, path direction correction, motivation, encouragement and counseling wherever the need may arise. The author” ” marks out the difference between the mindset that is driven by the privileges enactment first, against the one that is driven by the spirit of altruism and willingness to contribute in whatever way and capacity possible. A leader first puts the service part latter and prioritizes and prefers the privileges and dictating maneuvers first. A servant first and leader later takes the decisions based on critical analysis of the various factors. These factors apart from the ground situation, includes the rationale factor, the deterministic probability factor and all those factors that would strike logic. Further dissecting into the traits, circumstances and practical execution of the servant first phenomena, an individual does not need a specific environment or atmosphere in order to be certain and sure that they can deliver goods, rather initiative and self guiding principles is the key and core in this regard(Greenleaf, 2002). Other distinguishing feature of a servant leader individual includes the yearn to lead. It is characteristic of various individuals to rise up to the occasion only when the situation gets tough on them. This is a common characteristic that may be found both in the leader and servant leader. To what extent is this type of leadership relevant in UAE public agencies? United Arab Emirates depicts a multicultural and multi functional working environment. It serves as an attention spot for investors and workers from all over the world. The mega billion dollar multinational corporations and enterprises are in place. All these are administered and guided by the courteous and professional help of the local heads. A servant leader is defined as one who is not driven by the desire of remuneration at first, rather the input and contribution. Making contributions in whatever way possible through the best of knowledge and ideas defines the first actual realization and duty fulfillment trait of a servant leader. Confidence is shown in people designated and this is done through by appointing them in the higher echelons of decision making in the public sector and various other agencies. The servant leadership is visible in many places. The people are made the representatives, and decision making onus is allotted to them, which not only enables true representation but also harnesses their abilities and provides them a platform and means for excelling individually as well as providing the companies with means towards success and striving for higher excellence. The policies and kind of leadership that is in place is motivated around the public good and welfare, providing them improved opportunities towards progress and prosperity. The leadership so in place makes use of the direct means of reaching out to the masses and its customers. For this purpose investigative studies were performed and they constituted study of around 75 different organizations and representative companies (Awamleh, 2005). According to Robinson & Morgan, “Local Government as Polity Leadership” (in Additional Readings), what is the basic difference between their “polity model” and the NPG model. To what extent do you see their model as being relevant in the UAE? Explain why? NPG model according to the study and observation of Robinson & Morgan is based upon the principles of building trust and confidence amongst the stakeholders. A comprehensive and holistic NPG model takes into account the functioning methods that are a blend of both standard operating procedures as well as the confidence building measures. The context of application of procedures and measures between the different domains of N.P.G are defined in terms of vertical and horizontal level of application skill development. The polity model is supported on the pillars of state principles, directives and usage of law for practical actions. These actions are supported by the core principle of legal applications and practices. The N.P.G model is more loosely based upon the concept of trust, partnership, enterprise corporation and reliance on the means of communication and entire infrastructure setup. The legal constitutional domain may not be as prevalent in the NPG model as it is in the polity model. Various variables are compared and contrasted between the two models in order to get an insight of the actual outlook of each. These variables include manner of operation, the spread out network of each, the third variable is that of element of trust that has been mentioned and discussed above. The fourth variable discussed is that of relative subjectivity of the usage of each form of model. The element of making sure that the levy of tax is utilized in the proper place and proper domain makes up for the core responsible function of the polity model in the local government capacity of action (Isett et al. 2011; Provan and Kenis 2007). In terms of the centrality and hierarchy, the polity model is based upon a decentralized network and spread out structure. Each of these departments is well spread out and individuals maintain a proper say with regard to decision making. In the case of NPG model external broker may be part of the decision making chain. The scope of authority and the subsequent practices pursued by each model is also different in its outlook. NPG models have a more informal outlook with regard to the network within. The polity model in contrast has a more comprehensive and official structured working model pattern. Budget formulation is an important and integral part of any organization. NPG and Polity model both make use of different schemes of budget. These budgets patterns adopted by each vary with regard to the period and the capacity. Some other factors taken into account include the following: Resources concentration factor Subjectivity of the issues faced in the community Means of reaching out to the masses in any way possible. Tax enforcement measures and tax distribution is another area of differentiation between the two. NPG model is based on the view of ensuring that all the factors are taken into account. This demands for a more severe and effective scrutiny of the different domains involved. With reference to U.A.E: U.A.E depicts the presence and functioning of the NPG model in different sectors. This can be deduced from the overall presence and active participation of the government in the different domains. Providing funds, assisting the members with trainings, incorporating new ideas based on innovative creative mindset, encouraging the foreign investors, making the process of budgets and auditing more efficient, all these make the NPG model functional in U.A.E. U.A.E polity can be overall divided into the pure governmental organizations, the semi government structures and the purely private property and private corporations and enterprises .Decision making is also made in the light of N.P.G model. While the strict official structure is defined around traditional mode of operations that are characteristic of any government, the private organizations and the semi government institutions are focused around N.P.G. Building trust and confidence between different members in the U.A.E private firms, providing them with the local infrastructure such as security, support and safety of various kinds in the different parts of the country makes up for the good incorporation traits of U.A.E government. A fully integrated NPG model may not be visible in the all domains and departments of U.A.E. This is due to the fact that the NPG model is subjective in its usage and implementation. The official organizations are more likely to be based upon decentralization and official working methods in the light of law and legal proceedings. The NPG’s characteristic trait is trust developing factor, which is subject to private ownership and private industries, hence as a result NPG model can be incorporated only in certain areas and not in all the sectors of U.A.E government. References: Awamleh, R. (2005). A Test of Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles on Employees’ Satisfaction and Performance in the UAE Banking Sector. Journal of Comparative International Management. Cook, Brian J. & Morgan, Douglas F. 2014. The New Public Governance: A Regime Perspective. New York: Taylor & Francis. Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Paulist Press. Provan, Keith G. and H. Brinton Milward. 2001. “Do Networks Really Work? A Framework for Evaluating Public-Sector Organizational Networks.” Public Administration Review 61, no. 4: 414-423. Read More