Leadership And The New Science Reflection

Margaret Wheatley in 2006 Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world discusses management development and education. This book attempts to educate people to be better leaders through a scientific mentality. In this paper I will discuss theories of her book and leadership, I will also discuss and relate these principles into real life experiences, and business realities in relation to her principle theories.

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.

Wheatley (2007) describes the old story of leadership as “a story of dominion and control, and all-encompassing materialism.” It can be explained by analogizing it to a machine; a lifeless object that does not have the capability to think, feel, or make decisions. It, the machine, functions quite like the old story of leadership by where there are

Casse, P. (2014b). The new drivers of leadership. Training Journal, p. 29. Retrieved from academicguides.walden.edu/library

Participating in the course Foundations of Organizational Leadership presented many opportunities to enhance and enrich my perspective on leadership as well as develop my own unique leadership philosophy. By observing the theories, models and cases presented in Northouse, Kouzes and Posner textbooks, I was able to learn through the experience of others what a true leader should represent. While considering the strengths and weaknesses of each theory, I am able to implement a leadership style with an effective approach tailored to many different types of learners. In addition, witnessing both the triumphs and failures of various businesses and leadership styles, helped me confirm my personal stance and aspirations towards becoming a leader. By implementing what I have learned from the course and textbooks, I will address in this paper what specific leadership theories, styles and models have contributed to forming my own leadership philosophy. In addition, I will also define the values, qualities, strengths and weaknesses and ethical considerations that pertain to my stance on leadership. By integrating a faith based approach as the foundation of my leadership style, I hope to implement my new philosophy into my current and future career path.

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,

Meindl, J. R. (1990). On leadership: An alternative to the conventional wisdom. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 159-203.

Richard J. Shavelson and Lisa Towne provided a framework to address any question that poses research. For a DEL student, I found these principles as a solid guideline or in the military, standing operating procedure to follow. As I embarked on a journey of research in leadership theory, these principles are a standard in which I will start (Shavelson and Towne, 2002, p. 52).

Classical organisational theorist defined leadership in terms of achieving a group’s objectives R.C Davies (1942) referred to leadership as “the principle dynamic forces that motivates and coordinates the organisation in the accomplishment of its objectives.” Similarly, Urwick (1953) stated that the leader is “the personification of common purpose not only to all who work under taking, but to everyone outside it.” K. Davies (1962) defined leadership as “the human factor which binds a group together and motivates it towards goals.” Cattell (1951) took the extreme position that leadership is whatever or whoever contributes to the group’s performance. To measure each members Leadership, Cattell noted, removed him or her from the group, one at a time, and observe what happens to the group’s performance. Calder (1977) and Pfeffer (1977) “stated that leadership is mainly influence and is even attributed to participants after the fact.

The principal aspects of leadership are oft debated; to attempt to define what leadership is would most certainly result in broad and varied definitions dependent on who is queried. Nonetheless, in the preeminent

Before this class, I had a very primitive and vague definition of leadership. Not only did I define it as per my views and ideologies, but I also said that each individual has their own definition of leadership. My initial belief was that leadership does not have a clear cut definition, but there were well defined leadership traits which made an individual. I also initially believed that personal traits did not translate into leadership traits with no strong correlation. After going through the various modules this class offered, it is safe to say that I have significantly redefined leadership and underwent a strong personal assessment. This paper talks what I took back from each of the class activities, assignments and how my self-assessment compares to the perception of others.

There has been vast amounts of research done on the topic of leadership, and yet despite this it continues to be ‘‘riddled with paradoxes, inconsistencies, and contradictions’’

This case study is an analysis of leadership as exhibited by Rebecca S. Halstead. The article published at Harvard Business School by Boris Groysberg and Deborah Bell details the traits, motivations and leadership style that Halstead exemplified. Through the analysis of this article I hope to not only document the achievements of Rebecca Halstead but also document and assimilate the leadership lessons imparted by her. An important observation I have made from the progress of time I this course is that study of leadership is synonymous with studying great leaders. The study of science involves experiments & making observations based on results. However, leadership is not an absolute science, there are various approaches. Every leader has a different style & combination of traits. Aspiring leaders & scholars of leadership must find their individual combination to succeed.

Chapter 1: The Nature of Leadership 1. What is the best explanation for so many different definitions of leadership? a. scholarly nitpicking about trivial issues b. disagreement about what should be included in the definition c. little opportunity for rigorous scientific analysis d. leadership is a very old topic with centuries of definitions Answer: b. 2.

Conger, Jay A. (1990). The Dark Side of Leadership, Elsiever Science Publishing Company Inc., New York, USA.