An Authoritative Leader And A Collaborative Leader

Leadership is, and always has been, a vital aspect of social and economic constructs. It is essential to the survival of societies, industries, organizations, and virtually any group of individuals that come together for a common purpose. However, leadership is difficult to define in a single, definitive sense. As such, theories of leadership, what constitutes a great leader, and how leaders are made have evolved constantly throughout history, and still continue to change today in hopes of improving upon our understanding of leadership, its importance, and how it can be most effective in modern organizational cultures.

"There is a difference between being a leader and being a boss. Both are based on authority. A boss demands blind obedience; a leader earns his authority through understanding and trust." Klaus Balkenhol

Leaders are some of the most influential individuals in any society. They have the ability to influence those around them with various leadership styles including coercive, authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, and coaching. Effective leaders consistently adapt to the environment around them to either enhance or correct any situation facing them. Within these leadership styles the most effective style has been considered that of the authoritative style. This style brings individuals together, builds self-confidence, and easily adapts to the environment around it.

We all hope to have, and understand, the characteristics that an amazing leader possesses. There are many great leaders, spread throughout our history. Malcolm X, George Washington, and Martin Luther King Jr. are just a few people who were blessed with what it takes to step up and become true leaders. By example, some of the other fantastic qualities of leadership also make up two remarkable people: Nelson Mandela and Suleiman the Magnificent. They exhibited many leadership-like characteristics, like them being feared yet admired by their people, or people from other countries, or the fact that they were also very intelligent, and tactical.

In the movie when Mandela’s daughter came to visit him, she criticized him on the work he was trying to do as President. His daughter did not understand why he wanted to unite with the white people of the country who were the people who imprisoned him. Instead of trying to change himself and his ways to fit what his daughter wanted, Mandela stood his ground and held his beliefs and simply replied to his daughter “you criticize without understanding.” Mandela never tried to be something he was not and did not let what others had to say influence him and his decisions as a leader. Another example of Mandela being an authentic leader was when he attended the first Rugby game of the season. After he went out on the field and greeted all the players on both teams, he went up to the stands and greeted a few people with a smile. Even though the majority of the crowed as booing him, the main reason why he went up to the stands was to thank one particular fan for representing the new flag of South Africa. Of course at this time Mandela knew that going up into the stands was a very risky act because a lot of people were not happy with him as President. It is obvious that Mandela did not change himself or his kind actions just because of the circumstances. One last key value of being an authentic leader is that the strength of the leader is derived from their past experiences. When Mandela invited François, the

Joseph Raelin (2016), a Northeastern University professor of management and organization development, recently published the article “Rethinking Leadership.” He said, “Leadership is really not about the leaders themselves. It’s about the collective practice among people who work together— accomplishing the choices we make together in our mutual work” (Raelin,

Leadership is the ultimate form of service; it requires leaders to devote much of themselves to deal with the responsibilities that come with the title. They not only serve as normal members, but they must make important decisions with their followers’ interests

In leadership, leaders get his power from his group members. He proceeds in this position at the pleasure of members in his group collectively. The position of leadership exists in most settings regardless of group size. For instance, a leader of national or universal standing has vast influence over an expansive number of individuals while the influence of small group in a company is extremely constrained. Both are leaders in their own right and satisfy our definition of

Leadership is the ability to inspire and focus members on a common goal, whether short term or long term and have the same vision. Leadership is more than telling or ordering, but having members believe and want to follow the same path as you. It’s a commitment to your people built on trust and respect. Many leaders shaped my personal leadership philosophy, to include several negative and positive experiences. Negative experiences from poor leaders and lessons learned on my part have uniquely shaped this vision. Difficult to be a good follower when your leader lacks competency, integrity, and your trust. If a leader takes credit for work other than their own, or forces and ideology onto others, but does not follow it themselves; these negative influences damage the trust and respect required by all leaders. However, positive experiences can also have a career lasting impact. A leader who inspires through personal actions and convictions can change how an entire unit operates without ever saying a word.

Leadership is something that comes natural for some and is a developed skill for others. If we take a look at the role of the leader, we look for certain traits in a person. For example, in grade school, there always seems to be clicks, large and small groups of people that cling together. When we examine these social sub-groups, we often find that there is always one person that leads the group. This person is usually the person that brings the group together. I remember being in social circles with people that I knew I would never be friends with. However, we may have one or two people in common, thus we remain friends. Overtime, we

Sun Tzu’s factor of Moral Influence resonates with me as a leader because he defined the benefits of what some Army leaders call “embracing the suck”. A military team’s strength and morale may compound exponentially after an obstacle is confronted and successfully overcome. It falls on myself and other Army leaders to not shy away from difficult obstacles, lest our unit’s effectiveness

Leadership has been described as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task”...

Throughout my short life, I have come to realize that a leader does not necessarily, although they may, maintain a defined position of leadership. A leader is one who will rise to the challenge even when the odds in opposition. A leader will tackle any barrier that stands in the way of the goal. A leader is willing to be hated and face criticism for doing what is right. Leaders come in all different forms, but a leader is the one who is always willing to make the difficult decisions.

When reflecting throughout America’s history, two people in particular exemplified the essence of true leadership traits, Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela. While others displayed a vast variety of traits, Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Nelson Mandela displayed traits of leadership that stood the test of time, and while today, their traits still influence, as well as affect people in today’s society. Throughout his time as political activist, as well as South Africa’s first African President, Nelson Mandela’s

In such leadership models, leaders work with other people (always their subjects or inferiors) to achieve a common good. Often, the common good might be a competitive advantage in business, brand identity, community support or expansion and growth of the business (Crossman, 2010). Additionally, to these collaborative approaches leaders seek to ensure that their employees are involved in decision making to make a contribution and bring impact in their specific departments (Burns & Peltason, 1966).