Inscribed on the entry-wall at the ancient Greek Temple of Apollo at Delphi are the words “know thyself”. Can a leader be truly effective without knowing one’s self? Although it has roots in previous times Authentic Leadership is a concept that began to emerge in its modern form in the 1960s. It wasn’t until 2003 when Bill George wrote about authentic leadership and its connection to ancient Greece that it became a popular leadership concept (Clark, 2014). Bill George is senior fellow at Harvard Business School, where he has taught leadership since 2004. He is the author of four best-selling books: 7 Lessons for Leading in Crisis, True North, Finding Your True North, and Authentic Leadership, as well True North Groups. His newest book, Discover Your True North, was published in August of 2015 along with its companion workbook, The Discover Your True North Fieldbook. He describes authentic leadership as a style of leading that is consistent with the core values and personality of the leader and one who leads from an honest, ethical and practical perspective. It is through the leaders authentic self, and not just the concept of self but more importantly the actions of the leader and how that is perceived by others that determines whether they believe the leader is authentic. It is through honest relationships and ethical actions that help to maximize the efforts of others in achieving the goal (George, 2016).
George argues that there are five characteristics of
Nanook of the North is an interesting film that documents the lifestyle of an Inuit family in Quebec, Canada. Robert J. Flaherty, the writer, producer and director of the film makes sure to film every aspect of the family’s daily struggles and duties. With nearly everything but cold weather in limited supply, it becomes very obvious that every aspect in their lives serves a specific role aimed towards survival; they have no space extraneous luxuries.
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.
The Canadian North, a rugged landscape often glamorized as a land of adventure and promise, hides a dark history. From the early day’s of the gold rush, when the land was first colonised, to the attempted cultural assimilation of the indigenous peoples through residential schools, the people native to the area are still in a struggle of identity and culture, and the resulting effects such as high suicide rates, poverty and drug abuse,. It is through this lens that I will examine the work of Ted Harrison, a prolific English artist who spent the majority of his life living in the Yukon and painting the contemporary society that he saw around him. There is no doubt that his work was highly intertwined with the indigenous culture, and as such his identity brings up questions regarding the appropriation of native american culture. To that end, this essay will look at the context of his biography, the subject matter of his work, and compare it to contemporary Native American artists in order to clarify the nature of his art.
What is leadership, and how do we attain the best and most effective leaders? These are questions that are as old as civilization itself. Bass (1974) wrote that, “from its infancy, the study of history has been the study of leaders” (as cited in Wren, 1995, p. 50). Since the study of history in the West is commonly held to begin with Herodotus of ancient Athens, it is not surprising that we should examine the historical views of leadership through the eyes of two titans of Greek thought: Plato and Aristotle.
The book begins by diving into myths that must leaders believe to be true. The author goes in depth to outline the steps in order to be an effective 360 degree leader, by giving the reader a solid understanding of myths that have been formed. Obviously, these myths need to be dispelled in order to have a leader at any level can break out of their shell and live the 360 model. Each myth builds on the next one.
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,
Three weaknesses of authentic leadership are: lack of trust demonstrated from top to bottom and vice versa, a lack of development due to the infancy of this theory and the pursuit with passion can lead to a blind pursuit. Trust must be given in order to receive it, if managers are not being fully authentic with their employees, the trust and level of commitment expected will never be reciprocated. Although John usually displays this trust to his team, he is only human and at times, as with any other manager or person, people are not trustworthy. For example for years, Big Hospital has preached that everyone is a family, yet, due to certain circumstances, there had to be a lot of layoffs, and whether granted or not, this is looked as being deceitful or not being honest with your employees. The second weakness of authentic leadership can be related to its infancy and its lack of leadership development. Fusco, T. (2016, p.119) argues that the next challenging frontier is to establish genuine leadership development. Often times, leadership seems to simply fit someone’s personality, however, leaders must continue to read and develop oneself to become a better leader, either through experiences or personal training. Big Hospital provides continued training for all its employees, and although some may take it more than others, employees are often encouraged to take training classes. Lastly, the third weakness of this theory is that of a “blind pursuit” or following an idea with
In the Leadership Challenge, 4th edition, it is Kouzes & Posner (2007) intention to present a road map for individuals to follow on their leadership journey. The authors stress that “leadership is not a gene and it’s not an inheritance.” Leadership they assert is “an identifiable set of skills and abilities that are available to all of us” (p. 23). They make clear that the “great person” theory of leadership is “plain wrong.” Leaders are our everyday heroes who do extraordinary things on a regular basis (p. 23).
My father once told me that, “everything we do— be it in academia, at work, social or family life—we are guided by principles, beliefs and values that collectively form our ideology of life.” I believe that every leader, to a certain extent, is shaped through her individual personal experience. Although in some cases, we may not realize to what extent our personal assumptions and beliefs shape our ability to lead or be led.
In brief, authentic leadership is defined as a “leadership that emphasizes building the leader 's legitimacy through honest relationships with followers which value their input and are built on an ethical foundation” (Authentic Leadership, n.d.). As leaders, they create close, trusting bonds with their followers through their transparency and their drive to serve their followers (Northouse, 2016). Practical approaches to authentic leadership are linked to a set of five initial characteristics that individuals need to possess. These include motivation, well developed values, strong relational connections, self-control and passion (Northouse,
Herminia Ibarra’s article in the Harvard Business review titled “The Authenticity Paradox” presents an interesting perspective on leadership. She emphasizes the importance of authenticity as an effective leadership tool, but cautions against an oversimplified understanding of the term. Authenticity is often associated with integrity and being honest and true to oneself, which according to Ibarra, should not be interpreted so rigidly in the workplace as it may “hinder [one’s] growth and limit [one’s] impact” (Ibarra. 55). The author defines an authentic manager as one who, while remaining true to his core values, is able to adapt to various situations, play politics when required; someone who is able to wear different hats and alter their behaviors and actions to the situation that demands it. He is someone who is not afraid to step outside of his comfort zone, is willing to try different ideas, admit his mistakes and move on to the next project or activity. Furthermore, the authentic manager is able to find a proper balance between closeness and detachment with his employee.
Authentic leaders create healthy enterprises for the long term and almost without exception, emerging leaders have solid values and a sense of purpose. We are looking to make a difference, to contribute to a worthwhile cause through our work and to find a reasonable balance between our work and home lives. In addition, to work where we trust the leaders and share a common set of values is essential to the chemistry involved in organizational leadership. “We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully” (Romans 12:6-8, 1984, NIV).
As a graduate student approaching her final semester in school, thoughts regarding my leadership abilities in the soon-to-be “real world” have occupied my mind lately. To further explore and develop my ideas about leadership, I decided to develop my personal leadership theory. So, I asked myself the following questions: What makes a successful leader? How do you recognize a leader when you meet one?, and lastly, what is my theory of leadership? With this last question I thought about what leadership meant to me personally and how I personified it in a role of authority. While I had given thought to how I led, I had rarely taken the time to fully understand what my personal leadership theory entailed. Throughout the length of this paper I will analyze how my leadership skills, traits, values and elements from both Authentic Transformational theories help me to shape my leadership philosophy. In doing so I hope to define the leadership values that influence the way I view and practice leadership.
Herminia Ibarra’s article in the Harvard Business review titled “The Authenticity Paradox” presents an interesting perspective on leadership. She emphasizes the importance of authenticity as an effective leadership tool but cautions against an oversimplified understanding of the term. Authenticity is often associated with integrity and being honest and true to oneself, which according to Ibarra, should not be interpreted as such in the workplace. The author defines an authentic managers as one who, while remaining true to his values, is able to adapt to various situations, is able to balance closeness and distance with his employee. The authentic manager is someone who steps outside of his comfort zone, is willing to try different ideas, admit his mistakes and move on to the next project or activity.
The word ‘leadership’ often times triggers a preconceived image of an ideal leader—typically accompanied by the aura that the effective leader should be at the top of the hierarchy, ready to produce the solutions to complex problems. However, this is not true of leadership, given that effective leadership is not achieved by position but rather through style and situational awareness. Examining leadership requires the consideration of the catalysts for different types of leaders. Popular leader development theories tend to focus on the natural servitude of the leader, his or her capability to manage, and leader behavior.