How Can We Train Leaders If We Dont Know What Leadership Is?
Article: How can we train leaders if we do not know what leadership is? - Barker
- problem: Leadership is usually not defined, there are multiple definitions (skill, ability, role, action,etc…), the focus on the leader rather than upon the process of leadership
- new revolutionary paradigm: transforming leadership
- definition leadership: leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing, by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political and other resources in a context of competition and conflict in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers
- key points: o leaders admonition that the nature of the goals is crucial,oriented toward an end value o process is reciprocal and it happens within a context of competition and conflict
- other points. o Leadership focuses on the knowledge, skills, abilities and traits of the leader whoch are presumed to be the most successful in getting followers to do wha the leader wants them to do
- Since this proposition it has been reduced to slogans, equated with economic success and manipulating people, associated with authority and know we know little if anything more about this topic
- Almost every definition of leadership if in school or from practitioners, focuses on the most important knowledges, skills, abilities, and traits of the leader which are most successful in getting followers to do what he wants
- Many writers don’t even define leadership, they rely completely upon a very old paradigm of leadership that is beginning to conflict with the realities of the modern world
- Very old paradigm of leadership is beginning to conflict with the realities of the modern world
The social construct of leadership
- Rost found out that the word leadership is defined in contradictory ways and that everything the definitions of leaderships are confusing. The reason for this is that old ideas are used to describe new phenomena.
- feudal paradigm:
- problem: Leadership is usually not defined, there are multiple definitions (skill, ability, role, action,etc…), the focus on the leader rather than upon the process of leadership
- new revolutionary paradigm: transforming leadership
- definition leadership: leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing, by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political and other resources in a context of competition and conflict in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers
- key points: o leaders admonition that the nature of the goals is crucial,oriented toward an end value o process is reciprocal and it happens within a context of competition and conflict
- other points. o Leadership focuses on the knowledge, skills, abilities and traits of the leader whoch are presumed to be the most successful in getting followers to do wha the leader wants them to do
- Since this proposition it has been reduced to slogans, equated with economic success and manipulating people, associated with authority and know we know little if anything more about this topic
- Almost every definition of leadership if in school or from practitioners, focuses on the most important knowledges, skills, abilities, and traits of the leader which are most successful in getting followers to do what he wants
- Many writers don’t even define leadership, they rely completely upon a very old paradigm of leadership that is beginning to conflict with the realities of the modern world
- Very old paradigm of leadership is beginning to conflict with the realities of the modern world
The social construct of leadership
- Rost found out that the word leadership is defined in contradictory ways and that everything the definitions of leaderships are confusing. The reason for this is that old ideas are used to describe new phenomena.
- feudal paradigm: