Description of Leadership Processes - Assignment Example

Book Review: Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership by: In “Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership” (1995), Howard Gardner (with the collaboration of Emma Laskin) describes the processes of leadership, using eleven recent exemplars – Margaret Mead, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Robert Maynard Hutchins, Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., George C. Marshall, Pope John XXIII, Eleanor Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, Jr., Margaret Thatcher, Jean Monnet, and Mahatma Gandhi – to support his contentions. Gardner attributes leaders’ success to their ability to purvey a vision that captures the mind and spirit of followers and colleagues and gives them a vision for change; he refers to this vision as each leader’s “story”. Gardner ‘s objective (p. xi) is not to teach methods or characterize traits that will enable ordinary people to become leaders, or enhance the abilities of existing ones. Instead, his goal is to examine leadership and leaders, the events occurring around them, and leaders’ significant contributions that distinguished them from ordinary individuals. Each leader’s life is instructive in its own way. Each understood followers’ needs and effectively conveyed a story relevant to those needs, in order to influence behavior, thoughts, and feelings. Gardner affirms that “Leaders achieve their effectiveness chiefly through the stories they relate” (p. 9). The means used to communicate their stories are as diverse as the leader’s knowledge and talents: Leaders in the arts characteristically inspire others by the ways they use their chosen media of artistic expression, be they the phrases of a sonata or the gestures of a dance; scientists lead through the manipulation of the symbol system favored in their domains, be they the mathematical equations of theoretical physicists or the anatomical models of neurophysiologists (p. 9). Effective leaders’ stories are not merely ordinary narratives. “…It is stories of identity – narratives that help individuals think about and feel who they are, where they come from, and where they are headed – that constitute the single most powerful weapon in the leader’s literary arsenal” (p. 43). In order to achieve acceptance by colleagues in a recognized domain, the leader must create a story within that domain (p. 13). Gardner classifies leaders by the degree of innovation of their stories: the ordinary leader relates to the group’s traditional story; the innovative leader takes the traditional story of the group and recreates it; but the truly visionary leader creates a new story (p. 10). Whether traditional or innovative, leaders’ stories must compete to prevail: The stories of the leader-be they traditional or novel-must compete with many other extant stories and if the new stories are to succeed, they must transplant, suppress, compliment, or in some measure outweigh the earlier stories, as well as contemporary oppositional counterstories (p. 14). Gardner’s chosen leaders related their stories by one or a combination of two means; direct and indirect leadership. “As a rule of thumb, creative artists, scientists, and experts in various disciplines lead indirectly, through their work; effective leaders of institutions and nations lead directly” (p. 13). The two forms of leadership have significantly different effects on the world: Direct leadership is more tumultuous and risky, but in the short run, it can be more efficient and more effective….Indirect leaders have the advantage of more time for reflection and revision; and often their impact proves more enduring if slower to emerge (p. 294). In Chapter 2, Gardner discusses the ways in which human development influences leadership: Two parallel social processes are at work during the early years. The child develops an increasingly complex and differentiated sense of self as an individual; and the child comes to feel an affinity to older individuals in particular, and to one or more social groups in general (p. 25). When conflict ensues, children, like adults, must resolve their identity issues. Gardner explains that the five-year-old has a sense of self and of others as members of the group (p. 25). The beliefs, associations, and attitudes learned in these years will last for the rest of the child’s life: Yet, in an uncomfortably large number of cases, one may say that the five-year-old has already made up his or her mind. The theories and scripts of the young child are already consolidated and, in the absence of compelling circumstances that are repeated frequently, the growing individual shows little inclination to change (p. 28). By the age of ten, a child recognizes various social groups and is aware of conflicts that exist among them. Adolescents understand groups’ faults, and sometimes choose to become a member of more than one group; they often commit themselves wholeheartedly to causes, and may even risk death to support them (p. 54). Unlike other young people, the future leader creates his/her own principles and directs the behavior of others in the chosen domain or social group: Both the indirect and direct leaders I studied seem from an early age to have stood apart from their contemporaries. They have felt that they were special and, at least in some cases, capable of feats beyond those achieved by normal individuals (p. 33). Gardner also discusses followers, who are often individuals in search of a cause. When they find an attractive leader, they will make the necessary sacrifices to support the leader’s story. Other potential followers are more discriminating in their choices. Gardner identifies four factors critical to effective leadership. Leaders must have a tie to their community (or audience), in order to be attuned to members’ needs and concerns, and thus to represent their common ideals. Second, leaders must have a sense of the rhythm of life; effective leaders know when to take time to reflect and understand changing events, thoughts, and strategies. Third, leaders must have an evident relation between stories and embodiments – that is, they must personify their stories. Finally, choice is central to leadership. The leader is not thrust into his/her cause by threat or fear, but by his/her own choosing (pp. 36-38). The effective leader must choose the correct issues to address for each audience. Many leaders are good at convincing opponents groups that they are really on the same side (p. 49). The key issues to communicate are ultimately not points of fact, but rather of feeling: “When it comes down to it, the argument that carries the day may well be the one that exerts the strongest affective appeal, rather than the one that triumphs on debating points” (p. 48). Having established a conceptual framework for leadership, Gardner proceeds to examine the lives of his selected leaders. Here are some of the high points: Anthropologist Margaret Mead had a privileged childhood, with many opportunities to develop her social, artistic, and intellectual talents. She initially studied psychology, but after meeting the renowned German-American anthropologist Franz Boas, she decided to emulate him. Upon graduation, she was embarked on fieldwork in Samoa. Although the prevailing belief was that “adolescence was a biologically programmed period of life, with ‘storm and stress’ as inevitable handmaidens of puberty”, Mead found that childhood and adolescence in Samoa were not the same as in Western societies. Returning to America, she wrote Coming of Age in Samoa – a book that became famous among her professional colleagues as well as the general public, and challenged the prevailing theory of adolescence (p. 72). As Mead continued to study and write about human development and sexuality in the South Pacific, she developed as both a direct and indirect leader. Self-confident among her colleagues, she was often seen as a person who had to dominate every exchange; but the way in which she related her story enabled her to influence her own profession as well as outside audiences. Robert Oppenheimer is considered the mastermind behind the development of America’s atomic bomb. Like Mead, he was born into a wealthy family, and benefited from his social status. Fascinated by physics, he wrote extensively on both relativity and quantum mechanics; he taught at both the University of California at Berkeley and the California Institute of Technology. Despite his scientific brilliance, his career was inhibited by his personality; he was extremely reserved and took measures to avoid conflict. Gardner states, “My own guess is that the single greatest obstacle to Oppenheimer’s immortality as a pure scientist was his lack of scientific nerve – an ambivalence about taking risks or assuming controversial stances that eventually compromised his leadership capacity” (p. 93). Still, Oppenheimer’s personal and intellectual gifts led to his selection as the scientific leader of the Manhattan Project. He immediately adopted a direct leadership style, proficiently coordinating all aspects of the project while addressing quality-of-life issues in the project’s isolated sites near Santa Fe and Los Alamos. He thus made a successful transition from indirect leadership in his intellectual domain to direct leadership of the greatest project of its time. Alfred P. Sloan, Jr. had a modest background. After earning a degree in electrical engineering, he went to work for a roller-bearing company in New Jersey. Sloan advanced to become the firm’s general manager, and the firm prospered under his leadership. When General Motors Company bought Sloan’s company, the deal included a position for Sloan on G.M.’s executive committee. (p. 134). At General Motors, Sloan gave the firm’s divisions greater autonomy and responsibility for their own profits (p. 137). His achievements earned him the presidency of General Motors, and with it national prominence. As both a direct and indirect leader, Sloan influenced the car-buying public as well as G.M.’s workforce: “From this platform, Sloan conveyed a definite identity story to the thousands of employees” (p. 140). General George C. Marshall was a strategic thinker from his youth, and decided early on that he wanted to be a professional soldier (p. 151). He attended the Virginia Military Institute, excelling in history. According to Gardner, “He was certainly not a scholar or an intellectual, and he would not have been considered academically intelligent; his strengths lay more in the sphere of ‘personal intelligences,’ in well-considered judgments about people and events” (p. 151). President Franklin Roosevelt appointed Marshall as army chief of staff as World War II began in Europe. “It would fall on his shoulders to prepare the army for the largest military effort in human history and then to assume the major role in planning the campaigns to defeat the Axis enemy” (p. 154). Marshall had to prepare the American public as well as the military for war. He was successful in relating his story in the simplest and most effective manner (p. 156). Pope John XXIII (born Angelo Guiseppi Roncalli) was the oldest son in a poor family of thirteen children. Choosing a life in the Roman Catholic Church at an early age, Roncalli kept a low profile and – despite different views – avoided overt dissent from the conservatism of the Church of the time (p. 170). He apparently did not create the impression that he desired leadership or that he possessed strong leadership skills. When Pope Pius XII died, the Cardinals saw Roncalli as a safe choice who “…would be liked by lay Catholics and pose no threat to their main concerns: the power of the Vatican curia and the hegemony of the established church doctrines” (p. 173). In fact, as Pope John XIII, Roncalli almost immediately began to initiate dramatic changes in the Church. He convened the Second Vatican Council, opened lines of communication for all church leaders, invited leaders of other faiths to attend its deliberations, and greeted them on equal terms. He knew all this would create disagreement among the church fathers, but that would only further his goal of welcoming open discussion and debate (p. 175). Pope John was both a direct and an indirect leader, although following his death there were still many who questioned his effectiveness. Eleanor Roosevelt, President Theodore Roosevelt’s favorite niece, was born into wealth and status (p. 185). She showed leadership qualities at a very young age, although once she married Franklin Delano Roosevelt she devoted her efforts primarily to his career. After World War I ended, two events pushed her towards a more independent role: First, she discovered her husband’s affair with Lucy Mercer; and three years later, Franklin Roosevelt was stricken with polio (pp 188-189). Eleanor Roosevelt devoted herself to public service, working energetically for causes from health to housing to women’s rights. Her story as a direct and indirect leader “…was that a woman could become a major participant in liberal democratic politics; and she more perfectly embodied this story with every passing year” (p. 190). Roosevelt was also a strong voice for equality for black Americans. Following her husband’s death, she became a member of the first U.S. delegation to the United Nations, where she continued to fight for human rights. Martin Luther King Jr., the son of a Baptist minister, was a gifted student who attended Morehouse College at the age of fifteen. Articulate and charismatic, King became the first president of the Montgomery Improvement Association, formed to promote the Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott (p. 205). On the night of his selection, he gave a speech to boycott participants: “The well-received appearance in front of thousands of his fellow citizens was clearly a defining moment for King” (p. 206). With his visionary message, King soon became one of the most prominent leaders of the national civil-rights movement (p. 208). He was effective in promoting black voter registration, and in fighting discrimination and segregation. His stories of the power of nonviolent protest and peaceful resistance continue to resonate throughout the world. Margaret Thatcher, the daughter of a grocer, studied chemistry at Oxford University but was more interested in politics. She went on to earn a law degree; and shortly after she married a well-to-do businessman, she was elected to the House of Commons (p. 228). Thatcher quickly impressed her constituents and her political allies with her poise, self-reliance, preparedness, and articulateness. She was soon appointed Secretary of State for Education, and eventually rose to become leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister. Thatcher’s clearly stated goal was to restore British pride and to reverse the socialistic politics of the postwar era (p. 241). As Prime Minister, Thatcher acted decisively to further this agenda: She placed individuals who were loyal to her and to her policies in the most important cabinet positions, particularly in the areas of economics and finance. An instinctive activist, she involved herself deeply-some would say intrusively-in all of the departments and programs (p. 231). Thatcher ignored criticism and counsel, and often found herself on the defensive. “Racial tensions were exacerbated, and Thatcher showed little understanding of, or sympathy for, the poor people and the immigrants who suffered from her policies” (p. 232). This selective empathy became her trademark: Within Britain, Thatcher also took an “us/them” view. Those with whom she had sympathy were small businesspeople, self-made individuals, and those who worked in the engineering and technical spheres. Those whom she considered enemies were government bureaucrats, members of labor unions, and those who worked at universities and/or considered themselves members of intelligentsia (p. 235). In sum, Margaret Thatcher was a strong and effective, but also very divisive leader, with a well-articulated story that radically changed her country. Gardner is, of course, far from the first to investigate leaders and leadership. However, in Leading Minds he has gone beyond others in identifying and exploring the “narrative” component of leadership. The story that a leader tells and embodies need not be something new and innovative; the leader’s story (like Margaret Thatcher’s) can be one of returning to traditional values of the real or imagined past. What is key is that leadership, in Gardner’s view, is at base emotional; the leader is able to influence others because s/he understands their needs and desires, and can find, create, or adapt a story that resonates with them. References Gardner, H., Laskin, E. (1995) Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership BasicBooks, 10 East 53rd Street, New York, NY 10022-5299 Read More