Kennedy vs Churchill Leadership Style - Coursework Example

Leadership vs Management Leadership and management are not interchangeable due to a number of differences that exist between the two concepts. Leadership involves visionary approach whereas, management is a rather rationality based concept. Leadership requires creativity and agility in order to take benefits from the opportunities by changing the procedures and processes as required. Management, on the other hand, is based on persistent efforts to achieve a goal in the manner described without making frequent and huge changes which might risk the completion of normal procedures. Leadership is a process that requires personal power over positional powers, whereas, management is an authority provided by the designation given to a manager. Managerial tasks are usually structured, but leadership is associated with innovation and change initiation. Leadership can be understood through many approaches. Approaches comprise of core competencies and have quite a much variance between them. Approaches include understanding, both externally and internally, the changes in environment as well as answering and respecting all of the related mandates; transforming vision into strategies that are efficient and communication strategies and using them to fulfil goals, long term and short term; culture as well as purpose of the organization is to be understood and an efficient and appropriate usage of core values are made; developing partners and maintaining them are also leadership approaches (SADLER, 2003). Evolutionary Theory of Leadership According to this theory, people have their personal perspective regarding leadership and each perspective is usually different. The theory states that certain personality traits are seen by leaders, such as being influential (DAY & ANTONAKIS, 2012). . Psychological Theory Sociology and psychology have an impact on many theories of management as well as leadership. Hence it is true that many theories of the era are influenced by them. Functionalism and behaviorism are incorporated in the discipline of social sciences. Both of them stress on the theories of leadership. This theory gives utmost importance to the cognitive process and how it is effective for the whole world. It also emphasizes on the effects does it has on behaviors (HASLAM, REICHER & PLATOW, 2011). ‘Great man’ Theory This theory happens to be known as trait theory as well. This theory arose in the beginning of the twentieth century. Great man theory emphasizes and focuses on the universal traits of a leader. Every person is different and holds different qualities. Some particular leadership qualities may be possessed by some people while other may not have them. The famous and renowned philosopher Aristotle once said Some people are born to lead while other are born to be led. According to this theory, this is actually true and not everyone can end up becoming a successful leader and a leader who ought to set an example (NOHRIA & KHURANA, 2010). . Situational Leadership Situational leadership emphasizes that leadership contains two dimensions. The first being relationship or supportive while the second is the task or directive dimension. The skill and motivational levels of employees change as time passes by. Such change is a continuous process and cannot be resisted or stopped. One who possesses the quality of analyzing the situation precisely along with the commitment, hard work and competence of his employees is considered to be a good leader. He then evaluates his employees by considering both of the situations (CENTER FOR LEADERSHIP STUDIES (ESCONDIDO, CALIF), 1998). Distributive Leadership Distributive leadership, as the name suggests, proposes the idea of distributing the authority between leader and followers. This theory supports participative and supportive leadership behaviors and is flexible in dealings associated with the followers (SPILLANE, 2006). . Servant Leadership Servant leadership is another distinct way of leading. It goes beyond the traditional boundaries of leadership that created a fine line between leaders and followers, making communication and participation. This leadership style, unlike the traditional philosophy, considers leaders as servants who want to deliver, step ahead to serve and remain the first to give up on personal motives and concerns. The servant leader is a facilitator to serve others and their priorities over his own. The major features of this leadership include patience in listening, healing, persuasion, stewardship, empathy, awareness, foresight, conceptualization, assurance of other’s growth and encouraging community development (HAMMER, 2012). . Transformational Leadership Transformational leaders have the charisma which influences people and attract them towards the leaders. The charisma is not merely a physical trait but rather is an embedded part of a leader’s personality and behavior. However, it should be noted that charisma alone is not what transformational leadership is all about. Transformational leaders aim at the succession and progression of their followers with an urge to see the followers ahead of the leaders and encourage such followers who can actually achieve it. This leadership style requires morality and work of both the parties in order to make successful ventures of performance and vision achievements (BASS & RIGGIO, 2006). Winston Churchill Vs John F. Kennedy The leaders seem to be influential in their personality and appearance. Obviously these two are not the only traits we look for in a leader. Leaders are not bounded by the positional powers, they have a personal power that resides within them and controls the thoughts, acts and behaviors of others. Every person who has the ability to convince others is a leader. Leadership cannot be associated to a single area of life; it cannot be associated with a professional environment alone as well. Leadership plays its role in the society, where people tend to follow an individual for the inspirational qualities and uniqueness that individual holds. Hence leaders are basically those, who can inspire, motivate, change, innovate, grab attention and mold the views of others. The following paragraphs aim at providing an overview of the practical examples of two different leaders and their leadership styles. When researching and studying about leaders, some shining figures of history emerge and captivate the thoughts immediately. Adolf Hitler, Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela and John Kennedy are some famous leaders who can never be forgotten when leadership discussions are going on. For the purpose of understanding the importance and success of different leadership styles adopted by different people, this paper will include Churchill and Kennedy as the leaders who inspired and controlled people for a long time showing completely different behaviors and characteristics (Bbc.co.uk, 2014). Churchill is known as a transformational leader. Transformational leaders are known to emboss and express their mission on the minds of the followers. This characteristic is evident in the Churchill’s leadership during the tough times of World War II. Transformational leaders create trust and enthusiasm by their communication skills and Churchill effectively created a hope and determination among the British populations of the transformation and change which was far-reaching. Transformational leaders are those who not only create a vision and communicate it but also, who build confidence and commitment to goals. Churchill envisioned the abolition of dictatorship and accumulation of power by the few heads of the society; and he made the vision clearly visible to the followers and the path paved for them to achieve the vision (Olsen, 2014). . Churchill was an inspirational leader rather than a charismatic one. People were not influenced by his mere presence and physical traits and/or his well-groomed personality but rather were more inspired by his thoughtfulness, communication skills and motivational speech. His manners and behaviors were in line with his vision to admonish the increasing threat of Nazi’s invasion in Britain. People were influenced by the concerns of Churchill towards saving the populations living in Britain with such efforts that visibly created a difference in people’s opinions, actions and views about the future (Winston-churchill-leadership.com, 2014). . President John F. Kennedy is a remarkable and unforgotten character in the history of leadership. Of all the leaders passed, Kennedy still strikes the mind first when leadership discussions are opened. Kennedy was in no sense an autocratic leader but rather exposed democratic leadership style. As the history and events suggest, Kennedy always took people’s opinion on the decisions that were under consideration (cleveland.com, 2014). His concern for and of people was a distinctive characteristic as people were never given a chance to take part in decisions that affected them the most. Hence, the way Kennedy involved people in his decision making, created a positive impact on the followers. Kennedy is, as a result, called as a servant leader. Kennedy was more responsive to the people’s needs and compassion towards their individualistic and mutual issues. Kennedy was determined and showed concerns towards building and upholding a community (UVA Today, 2014). Hence, the aim was not as definite and as specific as was for Churchill. The differences between these two leaders are evident at some spots but blurred or non-existent at others. Churchill was not inclined towards group decision making especially when the vision or objective was at stake. His main aim remained the most important factor for his actions and decisions. At the time of evacuation from Dunkirk, Churchill commanded to evacuate the able-bodied persons first and wounded be the last in the priority list of evacuation. The reason behind such a seemingly rigid and ruthless decision was to save more man-power with the country to combat the upcoming hurdles. To save the country and other people, Churchill made this decision which was tough but right in order to preserve the vision that was created. On the other hand, Kennedy was more inclined towards knowing what people want and expect. He took advises and opinions to make decisions on almost all matters. Such a behavior is inclined towards a more democratic approach to leadership than was Churchill’s. In addition, Churchill was not afraid of getting the right person on board regardless of the opposition of any person in the group when he felt the need to fulfill what he envisioned. He never gave it a second though when he found a wrong person on board and abandoned the person or transferred him from the position when he felt the need. On the other hand, Kennedy tried keeping his people satisfied and high on confidence and satisfaction (Linkedin.com, 2013). In conclusion, one can say that every leadership style has its distinct characteristics and traits but none can be called as a universal or ideal style for every situation. The situations, leaders, eras and people differ requiring the leadership styles or behaviors being changed accordingly. In addition, there are leadership traits which might be overlapping in two or more leadership styles; hence, the absolute distinction between two leaders is unreachable. Leaders, however, do differentiate as per the conditions they are faced with and people they have. ReferencesTop of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form BASS, B. M., & RIGGIO, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Mahwah, N.J., L. Erlbaum Associates. Bbc.co.uk, (2014). BBC - History - World Wars: Secrets of Leadership: Hitler and Churchill. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/hitler_churchill_01.shtml [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. CENTER FOR LEADERSHIP STUDIES (ESCONDIDO, CALIF.). (1998). Situational leadership. [Escondido, CA], Center for Leadership Studies. cleveland.com, (2014). Leadership, JFK-style, means doing the hard things: Rob Portman. [online] Available at: http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/11/leadership_means_doing_the_har.html [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. DAY, D. V., & ANTONAKIS, J. (2012). The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE. HAMMER, D. C. (2012). Servant leadership. [S.l.], Pacific Creek Books. HASLAM, S. A., REICHER, S., & PLATOW, M. (2011). The new psychology of leadership: identity, influence, and power. Hove, East Sussex [England], Psychology Press. Linkedin.com, (2013). JFK and the Absolutes of Leadership. [online] Available at: http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20131122185352-281874400-12-absolute-leadership-traits-of-john-f-kennedy [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. NOHRIA, N., & KHURANA, R. (2010). Handbook of leadership theory and practice: an HBS centennial colloquium on advancing leadership. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business Press. Olsen, J. (2014). Churchill: Leader and Statesman. [online] Winstonchurchill.org. Available at: http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/biography/biography/churchill-leader-and-statesman [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. SADLER, P. (2003). Leadership. London, Kogan Page Ltd. SPILLANE, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. UVA Today, (2014). Kennedy Adviser Discusses JFKs Leadership Style and Challenges, Says Obama Faces Greater Political Obstacles. [online] Available at: https://news.virginia.edu/content/kennedy-adviser-discusses-jfks-leadership-style-and-challenges-says-obama-faces-greater [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. Winston-churchill-leadership.com, (2014). Churchills Leadership: Decisive. [online] Available at: http://www.winston-churchill-leadership.com/trait-decisive.html [Accessed 24 Apr. 2014]. Read More