Leadership and Governance - Essay Example

LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE by Student's Name Course Code and Name Professor’s Name University Name City, State Date of Submission According to Romano, 2004, when a new problem is faced by a society the normal course of action taken is introducing a new legislative process which seeks to protect the said society from a similar future reoccurrence. However, for this to happen it is important to ensure that the right structures are in place. There are factors that affect the quality of leadership and governance in a certain organization, it is important that these are overcome in the best way possible for the desired result. No matter the sphere, good governance is important and can also increase the faith of the public in the political environment et al. In most times the resources presented for achieving a certain objective are not enough, it is only through good governance that the welfare of the society can be promoted with equity. The governing body should also be able to instil faith and trust in the community by being ethically and morally sound and also through being more confident in their endeavours (Daily & Huang, 2001). There are four principles which are essential for good governance: transparency, accountability, responsibility and fairness (Crowther & Aras, 2008). The governing body has to be as transparent as possible for the sake of the community that it is governing. There are times when the actions taken by the governing body are not the expected ones but are definitely going to benefit the community more than the harm it. Unless a member of the community is shown the bigger picture then it might be impossible to convince them that it is the right course of action. They also have to be accountable for the resources that have been placed under their care. A proper governing body should also be able to accept responsibility of its actions (Smith and Rayment, 2010). It is not always that the desired result is what comes true. On the contrary a majority of times the outcome might be totally different, the governing body should be able to accept responsibility and come up with a solution to the new problem rather than blame others for what has happened. They should also embrace equity since we are all human first. If they use the available resources for the benefit of those who are better off than others then the less fortunate will always be down trodden. There are factors that will determine the quality of governance that a governing body will be able to provide (Maahfoodh 2013). One of them is how they embrace change. In as much as there are previous strategies that might have worked before, the situation changes and might prove the strategies to be less effective. For instance, in an organization there are times when people have to be laid off, strategy plans have to be changed or there has to be some reengineering done. The external and internal cognitive and emotional drivers will shape the behaviour of the organisation. Change ensures that the service provider uses the available resources to bring out the best result they can (Todnem 2005). For instance, if an organization sends messengers to errands on foot it might be cheaper in the short run, however, they might be costly in the long run. The governing body should embrace change and purchase bicycles for them. This might be expensive in the short run but effective and more efficient than walking in the long run. They should not only embrace change but also change that is more beneficial than is useless. Another factor that determines the quality of governance and leadership is the reliability of the governing body. Unless they can be depended on by the people they are serving, then there will be little or no cooperation from the society they are serving. The governing body can only be as good as the kind of people they are representing. There are social implications in governing any kind of body since it deals with people and emotions. A good governing body also has to go out of its way to make sure that the community it is serving gets more than it is obliged to (Kramar & Jones, 2010). One of the ways it will achieve this is through corporate social responsibility. These are activities which do not benefit the governing body directly but does so to the immediate society. For instance an organization donating food to orphans is corporate social responsibility. This will benefit the service providers indirectly in the sense that it will have healthy people to get labor from. However, the governing body does not have any obligation towards doing that. This will make the people view the body positively and also be open to working with it for a better future. Also a good governing body should be responsible in taking care of the environment. This will make sure that energy sources are not depleted unnecessarily. If the organization in subject produces carbon gases into the air and does it the wrong way it will result into worsening the greenhouse effect globally. Also there might exist some people or organizations that could be using some of what other organization wastes. For instance a factory might be dumping their wastes into resources like a river which provides water for other organizations or people downstream. The pollution will result into the other organizations lacking the necessary resources and also the people lacking water. Quality governance and leadership will ensure that the wastes are disposed off efficiently and without affecting the environment negatively. This will ensure that the productivity of the society as a whole is at its maximum. For the governing body to be more sustainable there has to be change in the organisational culture (Ashley, 2013). The communities are run by people who have different wants and desires for the community as a whole. There is a common reason that drives the majority to pursue what they want from the community. If the governing body is driven by selfish ambitions like enriching themselves and their friends, no matter how good the governing system is it will be useless. Unless the objective of the body for the community is clearly defined then it will be defined by the kind of leadership that is available. The strategies should also be defined as time goes by especially if they are long term (afbis.com). This is because of both external and internal factors. A lot of things change in the community and the governing body, the leadership for one. If the outgoing leader was selfish then reviewing the strategies will determine whether or not you are still in the right course and also how far behind you are in the schedule. It will also show the incoming leadership what to concentrate on and what not to. Also if the incoming leader is interested about development of infrastructure whereas the previous one focused on the people more, then revising the strategies will ensure that the best outcome is met by the governing body as a whole. It is also almost impossible trying to achieve a goal different than that which you desire. Although good leadership and governance is lacking in our society, it is very essential. The quality of governance can is defined by four principles: accountability, reliability, responsibility and transparency. A lot of governing bodies which have lost their credibility over tie have done so due to either of these reasons. One of the major determinants of the quality of leadership is the kind of culture embedded in the governing body. If many people want the job for enriching their selves then the level of development that you are expecting is not what you will get. References List Andrew Griffiths and Joseph A. Petrick. 2001. Corporate architectures for sustainability. Bonnie F Daily and Su-Chu Huang. 2001. Achieving sustainability through attention to human resource factors in environmental management. Elena Ashley. 2013. Organizational Change and Development. Governance models and quality leadership African universities. 2012. Retrieved from: http://cees.mak.ac.ug/research/projects/governance-models-and-quality-leadership-african-universities.html Grant Jones and Robin Kramar. 2010. CSR and the building of leadership capability. Guler Aras and David Crowther. 2008. Governance and sustainability. Jonathan Smith and John Rayment. 2010. Globally Fit leadership: four steps forward. Leadership, politics and social change. 2012. Retrieved from: www.afbis.com/analysis/leadership.htm Rune Todnem. 2005. Organizational change management: A critical review. Zahari Mahfoodh. 2013. Factors Affecting Governance, Management and Quality Assurance in Higher Education Read More