Political Leadership - Research Paper Example

? Political Leadership of the of the In this research paper, the researcher will shed light on different aspects of political leadership. In the first part, the researcher create investigate theoretical background of political leadership and in the second part, political leadership will be analyzed from non-classical viewpoint. Role of extroversion as characteristics of a political leader will be discussed in the paper. Analyzing political leadership from democratic political environment will also be an important part of this paper. In the final part, the researcher will recommend three key responsibilities of a political leader in order to ensure liberty and prosperity of his/her countrymen. Table of Contents Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 Political Leadership- Extroversion 8 Democratic Political Leadership 11 Conclusion 12 Reference 14 Introduction “Men rise from one ambition to another: first, they seek to secure themselves against attack, and then they attack others” - Niccolo Machiavelli (1532, Chapter Xlvi) Was Machiavelli right? The answer to this question seems irrelevant but important fact is that even 500 years ago a person wrote the importance of leadership in political context. According to the above quotes, a leader arises from people who have the urge to satisfy his/her ambitions one by one and slowly becomes aggressor from defender. The researcher will not dare to analyze Machiavelli’s work but the researcher will show the courage to unearth some important facets of leadership in context to political environment. Although understanding the political leadership in the light of theoretical framework but the researcher will not miss the chance to analyze the topic from real life view point. Hence, throughout the research paper, the researcher will take a conjectural view on the topic and try to analyze the concept of political leadership with help of practical research work of previous research scholars. Political Leadership- A Conjectural View Shapiro (2007) has argued that very few researchers have tried to understand political leadership in method driven manner in contrast to problem-driven manner. These scholars have stressed on the importance of leadership which is the backbone of any government or political system. Shapiro (2007) has also pointed out that administration is a mere part of leadership because relying on administration solely makes a leadership style repetitive, predictable and vulnerable to macro environmental changes. To understand political leadership, one has to understand the multi-causal social processes which create the drive for leadership. Greenstein (2006) has defined political leadership as the subtype of human social leadership. An individual cannot define political leadership or grasp the normative prescriptions of political leadership without enquiring about values, power relations attitudes and action of leaders in cultural-institutional and historical context (Peele, 2005). In the political leadership, both leaders and followers pass through the casual but circular sequence of power exchange and motivation building (Walzer, 2007). However, Peele (2005) has argued that political leadership is a widely experienced phenomenon but understanding about the phenomenon is pretty much tacit in nature. For example, phenomenon such as war between countries, central human rights controversies, Olympic rivalries etc might act as situations which deal with political leadership. One thing is clear from the argument of research scholars that it is very difficult to create a standardized definition of political leadership due to involvement of both institutional and historical contexts. Ruscio (2004) has rightly stated that no political leadership concept is complete without the understanding its role on democratic government. For example, throughout the history of mankind, societies have asked for certain rules and procedures in order to create a practical framework which can represent the interest of democratic society. Presidencies, bureaucracies, cabinets, legislatures, electoral systems, advisory units are few examples for the representative framework for political leadership. Hence it can be said that the interaction and application between the above mentioned frameworks decide the context of political leadership (Elgie, 1995). Vigoda (2002) has pointed out that political leadership is influenced by array of aspects such as psychological disposition, style, party management, lobbying, local authority and public sector authority. According to Vigoda (2002), political leadership is needed in order to solve two different types of stress factor, 1- valuing social interest over personal interest and 2- maintaining productive exploitation of differences. Readers of this research paper might question that why the researcher has not yet provided a concrete definition of political leadership? Well, the fact is that definition of political leadership changes from country to country. For example, a political leader with a sentimental and compassionate is ideal choice in Indian context but the same leader would be viewed as failure in Russian cultural context. According to Vigoda (2002), Elgie (1995) and Peele (2005), a political must have characteristics such as, 1- a strong ethical character and personality which can synchronize with ethical-cultural character of subordinates, 2- a constructive agenda for solving a particular problem, 3- interpretive judgment to define a situation to followers and 4- the material or intangible technique to mobilize the support of followers. However, there is no doubt that political leadership has direct connection with military, law authority or ideological leadership hence it will not be wrong to assume that political leadership is modified version of social leadership. Grint (2005) has stressed on the fact that political leadership is extension of social leadership and a political leaders must have the power to move people for achieving a political goal. Blondel (1987) viewed political leadership as a unique power relation set which is exercised by individuals on national or international salient issues and it is subjected to preponderance complemented with ideologies and ethics. Definition of Blondel (1987) can be summarized as; “Political leaders exercise this power over an area comprising foreign affairs, defence, and the economic and social wellbeing of citizens, even culture and the arts” - Blondel (1987, 15). Political Leadership- Analytical View One common misconception exists among general people that only politicians can be classified political leaders but fact is that even legislative authority or particular institutional setting can work as political leaders. Tucker (1995) has pointed out that followership and stewardship are two basal planes for any political leadership model. Political leaders are incomplete without the bunch of followers and followers believe that their leaders can act as steward to move them through contingent period. Leadership–followership is the realities behind any political or social environment, where followers need the followers need the guidance of political leaders. Hay (2002) has rightly pointed out that leaders can affect the belief, demand, attitude and needs of followers because these two groups are reflectively transformed by the environment. A political leader has to perform the following task in order to motivate followers to obey his/her command; Interpreting the problem to followers Prescribing method to solve the problem Propagate personal viewpoint as the optimal solution for the emerging problem Mobilize followers through motivational and aggressive speeches Hay (2002) has stated that political leadership is more than collection of discrete sporadic individual acts and the concept is more of a coherent process to solve domestic and international political problems. Kellerman (2008) has argued that, greatness of the agenda and common knowledge about the agenda help a leader to connect followers with the agenda. For example, followers can follow a leader either driven by inner instinct or as a result of cultural socialization. Kellerman (2008) has given the concept of political entrepreneurship in order to define supply-demand equation of leadership. Let’s take the example of a country which is going through economic turbulence and inflationary pressure. In such situation, demand of the country would be a stable economic policy designed by the political leaders of the country which can resolve the economic turbulence and in such context; political leaders can meet the demand by supplying economic regulations which can address the problem. Hence it can be assumed that extrovert nature of a political leader plays vital role in engaging the followers with his/her vision statement. Extroversion also helps a political leader to take risks and motivate followers to follow the command. In the next section, the researcher will try to understand the influencing capability of political leadership from extroversion view point. Political Leadership- Extroversion Meta analysis done by Judge, Heller and Mount (2002) shows that extroversion is a crucial element in leadership style of a particular leaders because extroversion shows the positive emotion of leaders. Who can deny the fact that we love to see a political leader who is very much interactive with audience and expresses viewpoint in carefree manner to public. In such context, extroversion of a political leader can be linked with three behavioural characteristics, 1- having the sensibility to view situation in optimistic manner and adjust with macro environmental orientation, 2- showing the openness to new and innovative idea and 3- engage followers to personal charisma and excellent communication skill. Generally, extrovert leaders are gregarious and sociable when it comes to interacting with people. A political leader also meets different people in meetings, seminars, conference or public meeting, hence being gregarious and sociable definitely helps the leader to express viewpoints clearly to voters, party members and people. In other words, it can be said that extroversion helps political leaders to influence people, party members and voters. Judge, Heller and Mount (2002) have done statistical analysis in order to show how extroversion can improve the leadership skill of an individual. The regression analysis done by Judge, Heller and Mount (2002) can be depicted in the following manner; (Source: Judge, Heller & Mount, 2002) According to the above multiple regression model, extroversion and consciousness are strongly related to effectiveness of leadership style of a leader. It can be assumed that the degree of relationship increases with the increase of social interaction of a leader hence according to the research finding in these paper, political leaders should have some amount of extroversion as leadership behaviour in order to influence followers. Political Leadership – From Protagonist to Pragmatist After defining the political leadership, the researcher will try to understand the role of political leadership from general viewpoint instead of trying to understand it from individual viewpoint at given time period in history. The researcher will try to investigate how political leadership can be used to resolve conflicts or manage conflict in societies. Very few researchers have tried how political leaders to resolve conflicts or instigating violence. According to the limited knowledge of the researcher, apart from “Warrior Model” of leadership, there is hardly any leadership model which defines the link between political leadership and conflict management. Under the ‘Warrior Model’, political leaders follow principles such as 1- overcoming the conflict by predetermined plans, 2- result is more important than the means to achieve the result and 3- controlling the information flow, 4- knowing the people and their capabilities, 5- using resources to prepare buffer for the situation. However, many political leaders use above mentioned characteristics even during peace time. For example, the study will cite the example of Nelson Mandela who acted as political leader during freedom movement in South Africa or Mahatma Gandhi, who used political leadership skills to manage religious conflict between Hindu and Muslim in India for aligning them to freedom fighting movement during 1940’s. Nordlinger (1972) acknowledged the fact that political leaders show four types of behavior to resolve conflict such as, 1- mapping the external threat associated with the conflict, 2- ensuring economic well being of the major section of the society while managing conflicts, 3- using the political power to avoid bloodshed and suffering. Gone are the days when a particular political leader can act as protagonist to resolve conflicts due to evolution of multi layered political environment. Hence, a political leader has to be pragmatic in order to be flexible to adjust with different political situation and guide the part and country to a peaceful process. In modern world, political leaders extensively use negotiation process to resolve conflicts. Research scholars such as Miall, Ramsbotham and Woodhouse (1999) have stated that a successful political leader doesn’t have superhuman capability to resolve conflicts but they have the ability to stick to a particular agenda and motivate followers to believe on the outcome of the agenda. Hence, it can be surmised that modern political leaders rely more on pragmatic approach rather than protagonist approach when it comes to conflict management. Democratic Political Leadership Gastil (1994) has argued that political leadership plays vital role in a democratic nation and coined the term democratic political leadership. Gastil (1994, p. 956) defined democratic political leadership as, “"behavior that influences people in a manner consistent with and/or conducive to basic democratic principles and processes, such as self-determination, inclusiveness, equal participation, and deliberation." According to the scholar, democratic leaders show the tendency to distribute responsibilities, empowering the followers and aiding deliberation. One can question that how a political leader can empower people or even distribute responsibilities among people of the country? Well, any leadership has either prescriptive or descriptive elements, for example, one can distinguish between leadership styles of Adolf Hitler and Martin Luther King Jr. With due respect to German history, it can be said that Hitler was leader due to his positional power as head of Germany but his genocide or holocaust policy made him an amoral and unethical leader. On the other hand, Martin Luther King Jr was the example for democratic political leader who had the urge to engage his followers in important decision making process. It is evident from the discussion that Hitler was a descriptive leader while Martin Luther King Jr was prescriptive leader. However, one must understand that power is neither good or bad thing by itself but nature of power depends on the indentation of users who use it. Hence, when political leaders use their positional power in ethical and legitimate manner in order to bring common good for people in the society then the leadership style can be classified as democratic political leadership. Gastil (1994) has suggested that the democratic political leaders should give equal importance to all the section of the society. For most of the country in the world, a particular political party comes to power by winning election hence they are answerable to people for their actions. In many cases, it has been observed that the ruling party in the country show ignorance to minority section of the society and create policies which can hurt the interest of minorities. In such context, attitude of the ruling party is against the principles of democratic political leadership. Hence, it can be said that a democratic political leader should be free from political, economical or racial biases in order to earn respects from all parts of society. Conclusion It is evident from the above discussion that responsibility of a political leader differs along with the political environment of a country. For example, behavior of a democratic political leader significantly differs from an autocratic leader. The researcher is begging pardon of the readers for emphasizing more on democratic aspects of leadership in contrast to other aspects. But, it was a matter of personal choice for the researcher and the researcher believes that democratic political leadership is flexible enough to fit into modern business environment. As Patten (2001) has defined liberty as the central principal of democracy hence a political leader needs to follow the three principles in order to ensure liberty and prosperity of countrymen; 1. The leader should allow the people of the country to follow their own interest and should not try to control lives of people through surveillance. 2. As part of individual autonomy, the political leader should create equal opportunity for every countryman and ensure a balanced competition to optimize resources. 3. The political leader should acknowledge the inevitability of diversified opinion and factionalism in order to increase participation of people in the political system. Reference Blondel, J. (1987). Political leadership. London: Sage. Elgie, R. (1995). Political leadership in liberal democracies. London: Macmillan Press. Gastil, L. (1994). A definition and illustration of democratic leadership. Human Relations, (47.8), 953-975. Greenstein, F. (2006). Plumbing the presidential psyche: Building on neustadt and barber’, in Larry Berman (ed.). The art of political leadership: Essays in honor of Fred I. Greenstein. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 17–26. Grint, K. (2005). Leadership: Limits and possibilities. New York: Macmillan. Hay, C. (2002). Political analysis: A critical introduction. New York: Palgrave. Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A metaanalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–41. Machiavelli, N. (1532). The prince. Florence: Antonio Blado d'Asola. Martin, W. (2000). Leaders of transition. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Nordlinger, E. A. (1972). Conflict regulation in divided societies. Harvard: Center for International Affairs-Harvard University. Patten, S. (2001). Democratizing the institutions of policy making: Democratic consultation and participatory administration. Journal of Canadian Studies, (35.4), 221-39. Peele, G. (2005). Leadership and politics: A case for a closer relationship? Leadership, (1.2), 187–204. Ruscio, K. (2004). The leadership dilemma in modern democracy. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Shapiro, I. (2007). The flight from reality in the human sciences. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press. Tucker, R. C. (1995). Politics as leadership. (2nd ed.). Columbia MO: University of Missouri Press. Vigoda, E. (2003). Developments in organizational politics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Walzer, M. (2007). Thinking politically: Essays in political theory, ed. David Miller. New Haven: Yale University Press. Read More