STUDENT COPY

LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

Contents
Introduction
1. LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
1.1. What is leadership?
1.2. Leadership and management
1.3. Leadership and followership
1.4. Myths that hinder leadership development
1.5. What makes effective leader
1.6. Importance of leadership for good governance and development
Theories of leadership
2. LEADERSHIP THEORIES AND STYLES
2.1. Leadership Theories
2.1.1. Traits Theory
2.1.2. Great Man Theory
2.1.3. Behavioral Theory
2.1.4. The Situational Theory
2.1.5. Contingency Theory
2.2. Leadership Styles
2.2.1.Autocratic
2.2.1.Autocratic leadership
2.2.2.Democratic
2.2.2.Democratic leadership
2.2.3.Laissez-faire
2.2.3.Laissez-faire leadership,
2.2.4. Bureaucratic Leadership Style

1
 2.3. Contemporary views of leadership types
2.3.1.Charismatic
2.3.1.Charismatic leadership
2.3.2.Transformational
2.3.2.Transformational leadership
2.3.3.Servant
2.3.3.Servant leadership
2.3.4. Empowerment
2.4. Leadership skills and competencies
3. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
3.1. Meaning and implications
3.2. Forces for Organizational Change
3.3. Process of organizational change
3.4. Resistance to Change
3.5. Overcoming resistance
3.6. Managing Resistance to Change
3.7. Planned Change
3.8. Strategies for Planned Organizational Change
4. CHANGE AGENTS
4.1. The manager as a change agent
4.2. The organization as a change agency
5. TYPES OF CHANGE
5.1 Planned Vs Unplanned Change
5.2 Revolutionary Vs Evolutionary Change
5.3 Other kinds of Change
6 CONFLICTS AND CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
6.1 Meaning and Nature of Conflict
6.2 Sources of Conflict
6.3 Conflict Outcomes
6.4 Conflict Management
6.5 Analysis of the Conflict Situation
6.6 Conflict Stimulation
6.7 Conflict Resolution
6.8 Interpersonal Relationship Management

2
Chapter 1 LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

1. LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

People who do research on leadership actually disagree more than you might think about
what leadership really is. Most of this disagreement stems form the fact that leadership is
a complex phenomenon involving the leader, the followers, and the situation. Some
leadership researchers have focused on the personality, physical traits, or behaviors of the
situation affect the ways leaders act. Some have extended the latter viewpoint so far as to
suggest there is no such thing as leadership; they argue that organizational successes and
failures often get falsely attributed to the leader, but the situation may have a much greater
impact on how the organization functions than does any individual, including the leader
1.1. What is leadership?
Perhaps the best way for you to begin to understand the complexities of leadership is to
see some of the ways leadership has been defined. Leadership researchers have defined
by various scholars and researchers. Leadership in the following different ways:
Leadership as :
 Transforming followers, creating visions of the goals that may be attained, and
articulating for the followers the ways to attain those goals
 A creative and directive force of moral
 A leader's job is to create conditions for the team to be effective.
 A presence of a particular influence relationship between two or more persons.
 A process by which an agent induces a subordinate to behave in a desired manner
 Directing and coordinating the work of group members (Fiedler, 1967).
 An interpersonal relation in which others comply because they want to, not because
they have to.
 A process of influencing an organized group toward accomplishing its goals.
 Actions that focus resources to create desirable opportunities
As you can see these definitions differ in many ways, and these differences have resulted
in various researchers exploring very different aspects of leadership. One's definition of
leadership might also influence just who is considered an appropriate leader for studying.

3
 A general leadership as an army general. They might reason that the enormous
hierarchical power and authority of an army leader makes every order or decision a "have
to" response form subordinate. Thus, each group of researchers might focus on a different
aspect of leadership, and each would tell a different story regarding the leader, the
followers, and the situation

It is difficult to define the term leadership because it can be seen from different point of view
you may consider one or more of the following are terms which define leadership:-
 Leadership as a focus of group processes
 Leadership as personality and its effects
 Leadership as the art of inducing compliance
 Leadership as the exercise of influence
 Leadership as an act of behavior
 Leadership as a form of persuasion
 Leadership as a power relation
 Leadership as an emerging effect of interaction
 Leadership as an instrument of goal achievement
 Leadership as a differentiated role
 Leadership as the initiation of structure

Although such a large number of leadership definitions may seem confusing. It is important
to understand that there is no single acceptable definition. The various definitions can help us
appreciate the multitude of factors that affect leadership; as well as different perspectives
from which to view leaders. For example, in Bennis's (above) definitions, the world
Subordinate seems to exclude informal leadership. Fledler's definition emphasizes the
directing and controlling aspects of leadership, and thereby may de-emphasize emotional
aspects of leadership. The emphasis Merton place on subordinates' "wanting to" comply with
a leader's wishes seems to exclude coercion of any kind as a leadership tool. Further, it
becomes problematic to identify ways in which a leader's actions are really leadership if
subordinates voluntarily comply when a leader with considerable potential corrective power
merely asks others to do something without explicitly threatening them similarly, Campbell

4
used the phrase desirable opportunities precisely to distinguish between leadership and
tyranny.

All considered, you may believe the definition provided by Roach and Behiling (1984) to be a
fairly comprehensive and helpful one. Therefore, you may define leadership as "the process
of influencing an organized group toward accomplishing its goals, "there is several
implications of this definition which are worth further examination as you practice leadership
and read move on leadership.

1.2. Leadership and Management:

In trying to answer, "What is leadership?" it is natural to look at the relationship between
leadership and management. To many, the word management suggests words like efficiency,
planning, paperwork, procedures, regulations, control, and consistency. Leadership is often
more associated with words like risk taking, dynamic, creativity, change, and vision. Some
say leadership is fundamentally a value-choosing, and thus a value-laden, activity, whereas
management is not. Leaders are thought to do the right things, whereas managers are thought
to do things right (Bennis, 1985; Zaleznik, 1983). Here are some other distinctions between
managers and leaders (Bennis, 1989):
 Managers administer; leaders innovate
 Managers Maintain; leaders develop
 Manager’s control; leaders inspire
 Managers have a short-term view; leaders, a long - term view.
 Managers ask how and when; leaders ask what and why.
 Managers imitate; leaders originate.
 Managers accept the status quo; leaders Challenge it.

Zaleznik (1974), 1983) goes so far as to say these differences reflect fundamentally different
personality types, that leaders and managers are basically different kinds of people. He says
some people are mangers by nature, other people are leaders by nature. This in Not at all to
say one is better than the other, only that they are different. Their differences, in fact, can be

5
quite useful, since organizations typically need both functions performed well in order to be
successful.

With regard to the issue of leadership versus management, we take a middle - of - the - road
position. We think of leadership and management as closely related but distinguishable
functions. The view of the relationship is leadership and management as two overlapping
functions. Although some of the functions performed by leaders and managers may be
unique, there is also an area of overlap.
Managing Leading
 Values results Values relationships
 Relates to positions Low regard for positions
 Takes few risks Takes large risks
 Somewhat impersonal Personal and caring
 Conforms to rules of others Not receptive to the rules of others
 Status quo – low innovation New ideas – high innovation
 Functional – analyze, evaluate, solve Non Functional – inspire, motivate

While these terms are not mutually exclusive, they do refer to a person's distinctive style and
approach. Even in a particular role, two people may approach it differently; one more like a
leader, the other more like a manager. The governor of one state, for example, may function
more as a leader, whereas the governor of another state may function more as a manager (and
not because there's anything different about the two states). It will be helpful to revisit those
concepts in the context of the international frame work.

6
Let's begin by reviewing some of the distinctions Benin's makes between leaders and
mangers.
Leaders Mangers
Innovate. Administer
Develop. Maintain
Inspire. Control
Long-term view Short-term view
Ask what and why Ask how and when
Originate Initiate
Challenge the status quo Accept the status quo
Do the right things. Do things right

Bennis is hardly along in contrasting leaders and mangers. Numerous other scholars echo the
idea of a basic distinction between leadership and management Kotter (1990), for example.,
described management in terms of coping with complexity, and leadership in terms of coping
with change. Kotter noted how managerial practices and procedures can be traced to the 20 th
century phenomenon of large organization, and the need to bring order and consistency to
their functioning. Renewed interest in leadership, on the other hand, springs form the
challenge of maintaining organizational success in an increasingly dynamic world.

Such differences are just what our framework is all about - interactions. In other words, the
differences between leaders and managers, or between leadership and management, involve
more than just differences between type of individuals. The differences extend to how such
individuals interact with their followers and the situations they confront. Let's explore how
these distinctions affect the other two elements of the frame work.

1.3. Leadership and followership:

Leadership is a social influence process shared among all members of a group. Leadership is
not restricted to the influence exerted by someone in a particular position or role; followers
are part of the leadership process, too.

7
Thus, the question what is leadership? Cannot be separated from the question what is
followers? There is no simple line dividing them; they merge.

This does not mean leadership and followership are the same thing. When top-level
executives were asked to list qualities, they most look for and admire in leaders and followers,
the lists were similar but not identical (Kouzes & Posner, 1987). Ideal leaders were
characterized as honest, competent, forward looking, and inspiring; ideal followers were
described as honest, competent, dependent, and cooperative. The differences could
become critical in certain situation as when a forward looking and inspiring subordinates
perceives a significant conflict between his own goals or ethics and those of his superiors.
Such a situation could become a crisis for the individual and the organization, demanding
choice between leading and following.

Second a particular leadership scenario can be examined using each level of analysis
separately.

1.3.1. The leader This element primarily examines what the leader brings as an individual to
the leadership equation. This can include unique personal history, interests, character
traits, and motivation.

Leaders are not all alike, but they do tend to share many common characteristics. Research
has shown that leaders differ form their followers, and effective leaders differ from ineffective
leaders, on various personality traits, cognitive abilities, skills, and values. Another way
personality can affect leadership is though temperament, by which we mean whether the
leader is generally calm or is instead prone to emotional outbursts. Leaders who have clam
dispositions and do not attack or belittle others for bringing bad news are more likely to get
complete and timely information form subordinates than are bosses who have explosive
tempers and a reputation for killing the messenger.

Another important aspect of the leader is he or she achieved leader status. Leaders who are
appointed by superiors may have less credibility with subordinates and less loyalty form them
than leaders who are elected or emerge by consensus form the ranks of followers. Often,

8
emergent or elected officials are better able to influence a group toward goal achievement
because of the power conferred on them by their followers. However, both elected and
emergent leaders need to be sensitive to their constituencies if they wish to remain in power.

More generally, a leader's experience or history in a particular organization is usually

important to her or his effectiveness. For example, leaders promoted form within an
organization, by virtue of being familiar with its culture and policies, may be ready to "hit the
job running," in addition, leaders selected from within an organization are typically better
known by others in the organization than are leaders selected from the outside. That is likely
to affect, for better or worse, the attitude others in the organization are wiling to give the
leader, if the leader is widely respected for a history of accomplishment, then he or she may
be five more latitude than a newcomer whose track record is less well known. On the other
hand, many people tend to give new leaders a fair chance to succeed, and newcomers to an
organization's informal rules, norms, and "ropes" before they make any radical or potentially
controversial decisions.

A leader's legitimacy also may be affected by the extent to which flowers participated in the
leader's selection. When followers have had a say in the selection or election of a leader they
tend to have a heightened sense of psychological identification with him or her, but they also
may have higher expectations and make more demands on her.

1.3.2. The Followers.

Followers. It is known that followers are critical part of the leadership equation, but
their role has not always been a appreciated. For example, one can look at history and
be struck by the contributions of extraordinary individual leaders. Even the major
reviews of the leadership literature show that researchers have paid relatively little
attention to the roles followers play in the leadership process. However, we know that
the followers' expectations, personality traits, maturity level, levels of competence, and
motivation affect the leadership process too

The nature of followers' motivation to do their work is also important workers who share a
leader's goals and values, and who feel intrinsically rewarded for performing a job well, might

9
be more likely to work extra hours on a time-critical project than those whose motivation is
solely monetary.

Even the number of followers reporting to a leader can have significant implications. For
example, a store manager having three clerks working for him can spend more time with each
of them (or on other things) than can a manager responsible for eight clerks and a separate
delivery service; chairing a task force with 5 members is a different leadership activity than
chairing a task force with 18 members. Still other relevant variables include followers' trust
in the leader and their confidence (or not) that he or she is interested in their well-being.

Changing Roles for Followers Now, more than ever before, understanding followers is
central to understanding leadership. That is because the leader-follower relationship is in a
period of dynamic change. One reason for this changing relationship is an increasing pressure
on all kinds of organizations to function with reduced resources. Reduced resources and
company downsizing have reduced the number of managers and increased their span of
control, which in turn leaves followers to pick up many of the functions traditionally
performed by leaders. Another reason is a trend toward greater power sharing and
decentralized authority in organizations, which in turn creates greater interdependence among
organizational subunits and increased need for collaboration among them. Furthermore, the
nature of problems faced by many organizations is becoming to complex and the changes are
becoming so rapid that more and more people are required to solve them.

These trends suggest several different ways in which followers can take on new leadership
roles and responsibilities in the future. For one thing, followers can become much more
proactive in their stance toward organizational problems. When facing the discrepancy
between the way things are in an organizational and the way they could or should be,
followers can play an active and constructive role collaborating with leaders in solving
problems. In general, for most countries throughout history, in their first face-to face
meeting, which would set a tone for their future working relationship, subordinate (follower)
disagreed with several proposals favored by boss leaders (frank and open disagreement, of
course, is often the sign of a constructive relationship, and that is most likely the way the

10
counsel was both given and received). Perhaps more significantly, both felt obligated to
different courses of action and to different groups of stakeholders.

So just what was the situation here? It was the constitutionally mandated nature of their
authority relationship. It was the interpersonal context of one person giving unpopular
feedback or advice to someone else. It was the very real pressure being exerted on each man
independently by different constituencies having different agendas. It was all these things,
and more. Leadership, here as everywhere, involves the leader, the followers, and the
complex situation they real part of.

Leader -follower- Situation interactions Leaders create environments within which

followers' innovations and creative contributions are welcome. Followers feel a stake in
shaping something new, not just maintaining a status quo. Leaders also encourage growth
and development in their followers in ways broader than what we might call mere job training
(e.g., encouraging a follower to take on something really new, something that would stretch
the follower but may involve failure on the task; or taking on a developmental experience not
directly tied to the follower's present job requirements). Leaders generally are more interested
in the big picture of followers' work and tend to assess their followers' performance less
formally and less in terms of specific criteria than managers, and more in terms of holistic,
personally and through more personal and intangible factors (e.g., through inspiration, or the
reward of jus being able to work with the leader, or on a particular project). Leaders redefine
the parameters of tasks and responsibilities, both for individual followers and for the entire
group. In that sense, leaders actively change the situations they are in rather than just
optimize their group's adoption to it. They are forever "moving outside the constraints of
structure", such redefinitions also may occur through taking a long-term rather than a shorter-
term perspective, through accentuating critical values or ends, or by marshalling energy to
cope with some new threat.

Manager-Follower Situation interactions

Managers are more likely to emphasize reutilization and control of followers' behavior. This
might be expressed in terms of greater emphasis on making sure followers conform to polices

11
or procedures (" dong it the way we've always done it") or in a tendency to assign narrower
rather than broader tasks for followers to perform. It might be expressed in lesser degrees of
decision-making discretion or autonomy given to followers, as in a manger's tendency to
review details of work for them. Manager's tendency to review details of work for them.
Mangers tend to assess their followers' performance in terms of explicit, fairly specific job
description. Managers motivate followers more with extrinsic, even contractual
consequences, both positive and negative. Managers tend to accept the definitions of
situations presented to them. They might be unlikely, for example, to reorient a group's task
or mission in a whole new direction; or to change the whole culture of an organization. When
managers do change things, they would be more likely to affect change officially, through
control tactic such as developing new policies or procedures.

In some situations, leaders are successful and managers are not, but in other situations the
opposite is true. Consider, for example one of Bennis's prototypical leaders: an inspiring
individual having a vision of major institutional change that can be achieved only though the
energy and creativity of committed followers. Such an inspiriting individual may be
thwarted, nonetheless, unless his other followers share their value-based vision. If they are
motivated primarily by economic incentives and are satisfied with their present lot, then the
leader may fail to achieve her vision. The whole idea of interaction is that the effectiveness of
any particular leader approach can be understood only in the context of certain follower and
situational conditions. To return to Bennis's distinctions, managers emphasize stability
whereas leaders emphasize change. Managers emphasize consistency and predictability in
follower behavior (doing what's execrated, doing things right), whereas leaders emphasize
change followers. That may mean transforming them or getting them to do more than the
thought they could or thought they would.

Leadership is Both a Science and an Art

Saying leadership is both a science and an art emphasizes the subject of leadership as a field
of scholarly inquiry, as well as certain aspects of the practice of leadership. The scope of the
science of leadership is reflected in the number of studies.

12
However, being an expert on leadership research is neither a necessary nor a sufficient
condition for being a good leader training program in leadership, and some scholars in the
field of leadership may be relatively poor leaders themselves.

Leadership is both rational and Emotional

Leadership involves both the rational and emotional sides of human experience. Leadership
includes actions and influences based on reason and logic as well those based on inspiration
and passion. We do not want to cultivate leaders like commander Data of Star Trek: The
Next Generation, who always responds with logical predictability. Because people differ in
their thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams, need and fears, goals and ambitions, and
strengths and weaknesses, leaderships situations can be very complex.

A full appreciation of leadership involves looking at both these sides of human nature. Good
leadership is more than just calculation and planning or following a "Checklist," even though
rational analysis can enhance good leadership. Good leadership also involves touching others'
feelings; emotions play an important role in leadership too. Just one example of this is the
civil rights movement of the 1960s. It was a movement based on emotions as well as on
principles. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., inspired many people to action; he touched people's
hearts as well as their heads.

Aroused feelings however can be used either positively or negatively, constructively or

destructively. Some leaders have been able to inspire others to deeds of great purpose and
courage. On the other hand, as images of Adolph Hitler's mass rallies or present-day angry
mobs attest, group frenzy can readily become group mindlessness. 800 of his flowers
volitionally. It should be apparent that leadership involves followers' feelings and non
rational behavior as well as rational behavior. Leaders need to consider both the rational and
the emotional consequences of their actions.

13
1.4. Myths the Hinder Leadership Development

Few things pose a greater obstacle to leadership development than unsubstantiated and self-
limiting beliefs about leadership.

Therefore, before you begin examining what leadership behind leadership development are in
more detail, you will consider what leaders are not. You will examine several beliefs (we call
them myths) that stand in the way of fully understanding and developing leadership.
1.4.1. Three Leadership Myths
i. Myth: Good Leadership is all common sense: At face value, this myth says one
needs only common sense to be a good leader. It also implies, however, that most if
not all of the studies of leadership reported in scholarly journals and books only
confirm what anyone with common sense already knows.

The problem, of course, is with the ambiguous term common sense. It implies a common
body of practical knowledge about life that virtually any reasonable person with moderate
experience has acquired. A simple experiment, however, may convince you that common
sense may be less common than you think. Ask a few friends or acquaintances whether
the old folk wisdom "Absence makes the heart grow fonder" is true or false. Most will
say it is true. After the ask a different group whether the old folk wisdom "Out of sight,
out of mind" is true or false. Most of that group will answer true as well, even though the
tow proverbs are contradictory.

A similar thin sometimes happens when people hear about the results of studies
concerning human behavior. On hearing the results, people may say, "who needed a study
to learn that? I knew it all the time. "However, several experiments showed that events
were much more surprising when subjects were told the outcome. What seems obvious
after you know the results and what seems obvious after you the results and what you (or
anyone else would have predicted before hand are not the same thing. Hindsight is always
20/20.

14
ii. Myth: Leaders Are Born, Not Made: Some people believe being a leader is either
in One's genes or not: others believe that life experiences mold the individual, that no
one is born a leader. Which view is right? In a sense, both and neither. Both views
are right in the sense that sorts of behavior, including leadership. Yet both views are
wrong to the extent they imply leadership is either innate or acquired; what matters
more is how these factors interact. It does not seem useful, we believe, to think of the
world as composed of two mutually exclusive types of people, leaders and non-
leaders. It is more useful to address the ways in which each person can make the
most of leadership opportunities he or she faces.

It may be easier to see the pointlessness of asking whether leaders are born or made by
looking at an alternative question of far less popular interest are college professors born or
made? Conceptually, the issues are the same, and here, too, the answer is that every
college professor is both born and made. It seems clear enough that college professors are
partly "born" since (among other factors) there is a genetic component to intelligence, and
intelligence surely plays some part in becoming a college professor (well, at least a minor
part"). But every college professor is also partly "made." One obvious way is that college
professor depends partly on what one is "born with" and partly on how that inheritance is
shaped through experience. The same is true of leadership.

iii. Myth: The only School you learn leadership from is the School of Hard Knocks:
Some people skeptically question whether leadership can develop through formal
study, believing instead it can only be acquired through actual experience. It is a
mistake, however, to think of formal study or from real-life experience, it is better to
ask what kind of study will help students learn to discern critical lessons about
leadership from their own experience.

15
1.4.2. Seven Common Leadership Myths You Should Know About:
 A position will make me a leader
 If I am not hearing anyone complain, everyone must be happy
 I can lead everyone the same way 
 Leaders must be extroverts 
 Leaders can’t show vulnerability 
 Leaders have all the answers
 Great leaders are always in the spotlight 
 Great leaders are born, not made 
1. Myth # 1 A position will make me a leader 

Leadership is a skill that can be developed in any position. You don’t need to be in any
particular position to be a “leader”. Because leadership is something that is made up of
qualities, becoming a leader is attainable in any job that you have throughout your life. 

Leadership isn’t associated with a job description but is something that’s developed and in
turn, gives you the tools to effectively manage projects or groups of people. Being a CEO of a
company or a business owner doesn’t mean that this individual is a true example of
leadership. Moreover, being promoted doesn’t mean becoming a leader. Leadership is rooted
in qualities and abilities, not a job title. 

As Kirstine Stewart, an Executive Committee Member and Head of Shaping the Future of
Media at the World Economic Forum, says in this Super manager episode:

Altitude is not the only measure of success. You can choose to be a leader in whatever work
you do, at whatever level, because ‘leadership’ is a mindset.”

2. Myth #2  If I am not hearing anyone complain, everyone must be happy 

If you’re not hearing complaints, don’t be so quick to assume that everyone is happy. Even if
all of your employees are happy, there is always room to learn, to grow and to evolve as a
team. 

16
A good leader consistently asks good questions that prompt team members to provide
feedback that’s going to culminate valuable insights. Next time, rather than assuming that
silence means accordance, think about ways that you can dig deeper and gain some honest,
candid feedback from your employees, counterparts or managers. 

Often people are intimidated or shy to come forwards with issues that they are facing. That’s
why effective leaders make themselves approachable, open and free of judgement so that their
team feels comfortable coming to them. 

3. Myth #3 I can lead everyone the same way 

Just as certain leadership strategies work more effectively for the business, different
leadership styles work more effectively for your team members. Leadership is all about
motivating others to enjoy their job and to do their job effectively. As Sara Varni, CMO at
Twilio said in the Super managers podcast:

“What motivates you as an employee might not motivate your team members. Getting down
to what truly motivates each employee is really critical if you want to drive optimal results
across that entire team.”

Everyone has different learning styles and responds uniquely to different management styles.
Leading people in diverse ways means that you are proactively determining how you can
utilize different people’s talents effectively so that you can meet organizational goals and
objectives. 

Great leaders take personalized approaches to managing their team members so that they can
yield the greatest results in terms of productivity and efficiency. When going
over performance reviews or during one on one meetings, it’s a great idea to ask your
employees how they’re best managed and what will enable them to be the most productive in
their role.

17
4.  Myth #4 Leaders must be extroverts 

A lot of people think that you have to be an extrovert to be a leader but this is simply not true!
Extroverts are thought to be outgoing, confident and comfortable in social settings. While
these are great characteristics, it doesn’t mean that they’re absolutely necessary for you to be
a good leader. 

In fact, being extroverted or introverted has more to do with how individuals process
information. Extroverts may be more likely to work through problems by discussing them out
loud and seeking the advice from other people. More often than not, introverts process their
ideas, thoughts and conflicts internally and tend to be independent thinkers and workers. This
internal pondering and independence are qualities that will actually make for a great leader. 

Carefully considering your position more independently from others can provide a real
advantage in the business world. Just because you’re not so comfortable in crowds and your
favorite pastime isn’t spent socializing, it doesn’t mean that you’re not fit to lead. Don’t sell
yourself short!

5.  Myth # 5 Leaders can’t show vulnerability 

It’s a huge misconception that leaders can’t show vulnerability. Some people may think that
taking responsibility for a shortcoming, changing direction, using the advice from others or
admitting a mistake is a sign of weakness. This is a truly unhealthy belief to have and when
we hold ourselves to such unrealistic standards, it creates pressure, which turns into stress and
what feels like failure when we can’t meet our own expectations of ourselves.

Effective leadership means owning up to mistakes so that you can learn from it! Good leaders
want to hear feedback from their team members, whether it’s positive or constructive
feedback so that they can continue to learn and grow as leaders. 

18
Nobody has all of the answers, and this is something that true leaders know. At the end of the
day, we’re all human. More important than having all of the answers is to listen and support
your employees as best as you can. 

Ask your direct reports to call you out on the things you’d like to work on. 
“In some cases, with some of the people that report to me, I ask them to help me with my
deficiencies or the things that I’m naturally bad at. I tell them that I want to work on them and
I try to get them to help me with some of those things and call me out,” says David Cancel
(CEO at Drift). 

6. Myth # 6 Leaders have all the answers 

To be an effective leader, you need to have a strong understanding of your own limitations
and recognize that teamwork is essential to the success of the organization. There’s always
room to learn and grow and often leaders gain the most valuable insights from their team
members who are closer to the processes where there are improvements that can be made. It
truly takes a diverse team to innovate and think of new ways to achieve common goals. 

As opposed to having all of the answers, efficient leaders solicit regular input from their team
members and consider all ideas and suggestions brought forward. When leaders admit their
mistakes, they can empower their group to execute on the organization’s vision through their
own knowledge and experience. 

You may not know all of the answers but someone else may have the solutions that you’re
looking for, which highlights the importance of collaboration!

7. Myth #7 Great leaders are always in the spotlight 

Leadership has absolutely nothing to do with the spotlight. True leaders don’t feel the need to
be front and center because their qualities that make them good leaders are inherent and don’t
need to be showcased in front of a large audience. 

19
Rather than being fixated on public recognition, good leaders focus on results. In fact, when
you’re able to step away from the limelight, you will experience an easier time focusing to
bring your company to new heights. This myth, like many others, is counterproductive
because it insinuates that you and your ego can take on the role of leading your group solo.
The reality is that any great leader takes their ego needs away from themselves and works
with the other talented individuals in their group to achieve collective success that everyone
can be rewarded for. 

Great leaders take blame and pass along the credit.

1.4.3. Other Myths that distort the truth about leadership:

Myth #1: Leadership is a rare skill.

Nothing can be further from the truth as this skill is present and demonstrated in almost
everyone in one environment or another. While great leaders and recognition of tremendous
leadership feats may be rare, everyone has leadership potential. More importantly, people may
be leaders in one organization (i.e., professional societies, social organizations) and have quite
ordinary roles in another (i.e., within one’s work environment). The truth is that leadership
skills are present at varying degrees in almost everyone. The degrees to which we develop
those skills and apply them to the environments that matter to us determine the degree of
leadership that will be realized.

Myth #2: Leaders are charismatic.

Some are, most aren’t. Charisma is a useful tool but, in some cases, it is the result of effective
leadership, not the other way around. When charisma is coupled with character, those who
have it are granted a certain amount of respect and even awe by their followers, which
increases the bond of attraction between them.

Myth #3: Leadership exists only at the top of the organization.

Leadership, leaders, and leadership opportunities, both formal and informal, exist at every
level of the organization. The larger the organization, the more formal leadership roles it is

20
likely to have in order to address the needs at varying levels and functions of the organization;
however, in smaller organizations there may actually be more opportunity to experience
various types of leadership requirements.

Myth #4: Leaders have all the answers.

The best leaders I know surround themselves with bright people and seek input in areas where
they need expertise, fully recognizing there are limits. Great leaders are eager to gain input
and are not afraid to admit when they do not know something.

Myth #5: Your team is there to serve you.

As a leader, you and the team are to serve the “vision” as it relates to the good of the
organization, constituents, shareholders, and all stakeholders. The best leaders set the example
with selfless leadership demonstrated though a servant attitude, thinking about the vision first,
the team second, stakeholders third, and finally themselves. This is servant

Throw away all of your predispositions and prejudgments because anybody can be a leader.
Forget about all of these common myths that you’ve heard! Good management means that as
a leader, you empower others to acquire leadership skills as well. 

Real leaders work towards teaching team members to take over their role so that one day,
when they’ve moved up or they’ve moved on, the organization can still function successfully,
with business operating as usual, in their absence. 

Leadership is an acquired set of skills that are attainable for anyone, so long as you feel
motivated and enthusiastic about taking on some extra responsibility and stepping up to the
challenge. 

1.5. What makes effective leader?

What Makes an Effective LEADER?

21
 Worried that you’re not a born leader? That you lack charisma, the right talents, or
some other secret ingredient? No need: leadership isn’t about personality or talent. In
fact, the best leaders exhibit wildly different personalities, attitudes, values, and
strengths—they’re extroverted or reclusive, easygoing or controlling, generous or
parsimonious, numbers or vision oriented.
So what do effective leaders have in common? They get the right things done, in the
right ways—by following eight simple rules:
 Ask what needs to be done.
 Ask what’s right for the enterprise.
 Develop action plans.
 Take responsibility for decisions.
 Take responsibility for communicating.
 Focus on opportunities, not problems.
 Run productive meetings.
 Think and say “We,” not “I.”
Using discipline to apply these rules, you gain the knowledge you need to make smart
decisions, convert that knowledge into effective action, and ensure accountability
throughout your organization

I. GET THE KNOWLEDGE YOU NEED:

NEED:
i. Ask what needs to be done.
When Jack Welch asked this question while taking over as CEO at General Electric,
he realized that dropping GE businesses that couldn’t be first or second in their
industries was essential—not the overseas expansion he had wanted to launch. Once
you know what must be done, identify tasks you’re best at, concentrating on one at a
time. After completing a task, reset priorities based on serialities.
ii. Ask what’s right for the enterprise.
enterprise.
Don’t agonize over what’s best for owners, investors, employees, or customers.
Decisions that are right for your enterprise are ultimately right for all stakeholders.
II. CONVERT YOUR KNOWLEDGE INTO ACTION:
ACTION:
Develop action plans.

22
 Devise plans that specify desired results and constraints (is the course of action legal
and compatible with the company’s mission, values, and policies?). Include check-in
points and implications for how you’ll spend your time. And revise plans to reflect
new opportunities.

i. Take responsibility for decisions.

decisions.
Ensure that each decision specifies whose accountable for carrying it out, when it must
be implemented, who’ll be affected by it, and who must be informed? Regularly
review decisions, especially hires and promotions. This enables you to correct poor
decisions before doing real damage.
ii. Take responsibility for communicating.
Get input from superiors, subordinates, and peers on your action plans. Let each know
what information you need to get the job done. Pay equal attention to peers’ and
superiors’ information needs.
iii. Focus on opportunities, not problems.
problems.
You get results by exploiting opportunities, not solving problems. Identify changes
inside and outside your organization (new technology goes, product innovations, new
market structures), asking “How can we exploit this change to benefit our enterprise?”
Then match your best people with the best opportunities.

III. ENSURE COMPANYWIDE ACCOUNTABILITY:

ACCOUNTABILITY:
i. Run productive meetings.
meetings.
Articulate each meeting’s purpose (Making an announcement? Delivering a report?).
Terminate the meeting once the purpose is accomplished. Follow up with short
communications summarizing the discussion, spelling out new work assignments and
deadlines for completing them.
General Motors CEO Alfred Sloan’s legendary mastery of meeting follow-up helped
secure GM’s industry dominance in the mid-twentieth century.
ii. Think and say “We,” not “I.”
Your authority comes from your organization’s trust in you. To get the best results,
always consider your organization’s needs and opportunities before your own.

23
1.6. Importance of leadership:
WHAT MAKES LEADERSHIP IMPORTANT IN THE WORKPLACE?
An effective leader of a team has a variety of traits and characteristics that encourage team
members to follow him or her. Team leaders naturally possess certain qualities, such as
compassion and integrity, or learn leadership skills through formal training and experience.
Being an effective leader can instill confidence in the team as well as contribute to the growth
of the department through improved team productivity. The following examines why
leadership is important in the workplace and how employees can develop leadership skills.

 Provides focus and drives the team forward.

A leader provides focus to the team by clearly defining
goals and explaining objectives so that every member on the team understands the end
goal they are working to achieve. They also keep the team on track and moving
forward by setting and enforcing deadlines. One way that an effective leader does this
is by checking on each team member’s progress and helping them resolve any issues
before they become big problems.
 Empowers team members to work at their full potential.
A good leader knows the skills and capabilities of his/her team members and is able to
assign them tasks that take advantage of their strengths. A leader also encourages
communication and builds relationships among team members so that they may work
successfully and learn from one another. In addition, a leader knows how to motivate
and encourage his/her team members to do their best work through acknowledgement
and praise.
 Takes responsibility for decision-making.

24
 When the team is unable to make a choice between multiple decisions, a leader steps
up and makes a decision for the whole team so that work is not delayed. They do this
by having a good balance of emotional and logical reasoning, in order to make an
impartial choice that benefits the project and the team. At the same time, they take
responsibility for the decisions they make and do not shift the blame onto their team
members when something goes wrong, but instead work to fix the problem.

REFERENCES
 Shackleton, Vir; Business Leadership; Root ledge, London, New York, 1995
 Stephen R. Robins, Organizational Behavior, Concepts, Controversies and
applications, 7th Edition, 1996.
 Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worle;(2009) Organization Development &
Change, South-Western Cengage Learning
9th Edition
 John R. Schermerhorn, Jr., James G. Hunt, and Richard N. Osborn; (2002)
Organizational Behavior, 7th edition ;John Wiley & Sons, Inc
 Kondalkar V.G. ; (2007)Organizational
Organizational Behavior ; New Age International (P) Ltd.,
Publisher
 Stephen P. Robbins, Timothy A.; (2013) Organizational Behavior 15th ed . Pearson
Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Tudor Rickards and Murray Clark;; (2006) ; Dilemmas of Leadership ; Routledge; 2
Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
 Sandy Blaha David Rippe; (2009 )The Five Leadership Competencies: Secrets to
Successful Leadership Succession A White

25