Three Types of Leaders - Essay Example

Leaders and Groups: Three Types of Leaders This paper is a reaction to the following quotation with which I agree: "The wicked leader is one whom thepeople despise. The good leader is one whom the people revere. The great leader is one of whom the people say: 'we did it ourselves". This is about the qualities and behaviors of leaders and point out some of the key points that allow a better understanding of leaders and leadership, how it is carried out, and why leadership is important. A simple definition of a leader is someone who motivates other people to do what s/he asks of them, usually to work towards a goal or objective. The three types of leaders described by the quotation above are characterized by how they motivate those they lead and the type of goal or goals towards which they lead others. In the case of a wicked leader, the manner of motivation and the type of goal are such that these are despised, or not liked, by the people. For example, the leader may use fear or unnecessary force that tramples on the freedom of the people. In the process, those who are led in this way work towards the goal because they have no better choice. Dictators like Hitler and Stalin are prime examples of the last century who led this way. And to add insult to injury, the goal - such as killing innocent people - may be equally despicable. So while they can be called leaders, the way they exercise it and the goals they have set were wicked. It would be enough that one of the two - either the means of motivation or the goal - is despicable to make the leader a wicked one. The good leaders are the opposite of the wicked leaders: the means used to motivate and the goals towards which everyone are led to work for are acceptable or not despicable. In fact, these may even be very good, so the people who are led this way end up loving and respecting their leader. The same can be said of great leaders, those whose people can say that they were the ones who did the work themselves. If this is the case, what is the difference between good leaders and great leaders Before considering what these differences are, it would be good to discuss the other similarities these two types of leaders share. First, good and great leaders have a good knowledge of human nature, of what motivates people and makes them do things, no matter how arduous they may seem. These types of leaders know how to inspire their people by appealing to the whole range of human qualities, desires, emotions, and aspirations they all share: doing a good job, being happy doing what they like, etc. Second, these types of leaders are good at communicating the goals they want everyone to achieve. They exhibit leadership qualities like patience, optimism, humor, discipline, and the ability to get things done, among other qualities, that make those they lead admire them, perhaps even look up to them as role models they can imitate and follow. However, where great leaders differ from good leaders is in the way great leaders make those they lead feel that they worked hard as a team and that their efforts were recognized. Great leaders are not afraid to praise and thank their people, raising them in front of others to highlight their unique contributions to the success the team accomplished. So, while people under good leaders were able to succeed because their leader was good, thereby focusing on the good qualities the leader possessed, those under great leaders acknowledge the same but are prouder of the fact that their efforts, acknowledged by their leader, made them better persons. An example of a great leader was Churchill, British Prime Minister during the Second World War, who by words and example led the British and their allies towards victory against a more powerful enemy and against overwhelming odds (Jenkins, 2001, p. 477). Another example was Lou V. Gerstner, IBM's CEO until 2002, who exhibited the same great leadership qualities in bringing the company back from the brink of business disaster (Gerstner, 2002). These great leaders are admired and the people they led were happy to have them as a leader. On Groups Galanes and Adams (2006, p. 6) discuss the importance of working with and through groups because in this day and age, knowing how to do so is the best way to get things done, especially in complex organizations. The basic reason why working with groups has become more important is the amount of information and skills that are needed to do a good job and the personal limitations that we all have. There is not enough time to know everything, and neither do we have the luxury of retaining all the knowledge needed to manage the complex tasks that needs to be carried out. The result is that throughout history, people have found it necessary to work together under a leader, or a team of leaders, to reach common goals. Another discovery of working with groups is synergy: that when people work together, they end up accomplishing much more than what each one could do on his/her own. This is the rationale behind work or project teams, where a group of specialists - software, hardware, finance, human resources, etc. - work together under a leader who has clear and complete authority to achieve a complex goal, such as designing a new customer management system. The task of the leader is to break down the goal into manageable bits, distribute these to the different specialists who work on these bits, and then piece them together into something useful in relation to the goal. Working with groups is difficult because people have different personalities (some even prefer working alone), or because they have different work styles (some love to talk while others love to think), but it is the leader's task to unite people of different backgrounds, preferences, and styles into a team. The pace of business growth and the nature of business competition in recent decades have been much more challenging, in some cases leading to downsizing, so the ability of leaders to manage their teams and limited resources is crucial in determining either success or failure. However, working in a group is not easy for anyone. Galanes and Adams (2006, p. 6) cite several problems as exemplified by the tongue-in-cheek quote that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. After reminding us that being part of a group (committee, task force, ad hoc unit, etc.) is a fact of working life for almost everyone, they remind us that knowing how to work with and for a group is a crucial skill that, like leadership, can be learned. People who prefer to work alone may go fast, but they would never go far. Even the young genius entrepreneurs like those who started profitable companies like eBay, Microsoft, and Google have come to realize that they could not do the work alone. They have to rely on other people from other fields, with their own unique sets of skills and specializations, to get things done. Otherwise, they would not be where they are now. Groups may seem less efficient, messing things up, demanding personal resources that we never thought we possessed, such as patience and learning to control our temper, or developing the ability to communicate and inspire, or sharing what we know and enjoying ourselves in the process. Sometimes, we have this misconception that others just slow us down and we could do a better job if the group is smaller or if we just work alone, but this is a subtle deception because given the complexity of the work we do, and given that we aspire to grow in our job and not be stuck where we are, we need to learn how to work with others in a group or a team. The higher we go up in the organization, the better we should be at working with others. Any human or social relationship, such as that which exists in working within a group, entails costs, but there are also benefits. Working with a group helps us to learn new things, not only those related to our personal qualities but also those related to what others know and can do. At the least, knowing how to work with others helps us gain new friends who can share with us what they know, making us richer - humanly and professionally - because of the experience. Reference List Galanes, G.J. & Adams, K.L. (2006). Effective group discussion: Theory and practice (12th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Gerstner, L.V. Jr. (2002). Who says elephants can't dance Leading a great enterprise through dramatic change. New York: HarperCollins. Jenkins, R. (2001). Churchill: A biography. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux. Read More