Leadership : Leadership Behavior And Politics

Bolman & Deal suggest that leaders display leadership behaviors in one of four types of frameworks: Structural, Human Resources, Political and Symbolic (Bolman & Deal, 2008). Unlike the other four frames, the Political frame sees an organization as a jungles, arenas or contests in which individuals and groups compete to achieve their interests in a world of conflicting viewpoints, scarce resources and struggles for power (Bolman & Deal, 2008). Like it or not all businesses and organizations are ran by people in power. Power is best defined as “the potential ability to influence behavior, to change the course of events, to overcome resistance, and to get people to do things they would not otherwise do” (Pfeffer, 1992, p.30). According to the

If there is one word in leadership that gets leaders both excited and worried it is the word “power”. Leaders are excited by the word because it means they have to ability to make decisions and get things done. On the other hand, they are scared by this word because it has a negative connotation and there are many examples of leader who used their power for the wrong purposes. To use power correctly, one needs to examine the positives and negatives of power, as well as find a few ways to use power in a healthy, productive manner.

The contingency theory (Browning, 2007, p. 190) suggests that leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context. This means effective leaders in this era have the ability to distill their complex messages into accessible ones. In other words, an effective leader is aware of his/ her client’s informational needs and values and thus, creates information to suit their needs. Therefore, leaders tend to regulate and control expressive activity in and around the workplace from legal, managerial, and ethical perspectives (Barry B, 2007). This trend tends to work for organizations that try to cover massive change by creating as little impact on their employees as possible without doing anything ethically wrong in their business.

In conclusion, political leaders across the world are often noted for their accomplishments during times of crisis in the minds of the people and within the books written about such events. Although political leaders must have certain skills and abilities in order to fulfill the tasks given to them once they enter office, those skills are simply tools to be used against the challenges faced. How political leaders face the challenges and how the challenge is initially solved, such as how they benefit the people at large by their actions, is what they are remembered the most

A manager needs to understand the interdependency of departments, internal partnerships, and the influence of power and politics to effectively manage across the organization. Effective managers use various political tactics to increase their power within the organization to coordinate and support the work of their peers and subordinates to meet company objectives. Managers regularly acquire and use power. Power-oriented behavior has an impact on managerial career progress, on job performance, on organizational effectiveness, and on the personal lives of employees (Obholzer, 1995). It involves the combined topics of power, influence, authority, and organizational politics. When running an organization, all these

No matter the size of the group, every group has a figure that leads them. Leaders need to have leadership; leadership are the skills that a leader uses to move a group forward. It propels the group to move in the right direction. Presidents are leaders of a country, an enormous group, a group nonetheless. A president has to have a transparent leadership in order for the people of America to trust him, if his leadership skills are lackluster, the people will begin to doubt his ability to move the country forward. In this paper, I will try to explore the type of leadership that is needed for the next president of America, what can be accomplished with great leadership skills and how depending the leadership of the next president, will affect

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 like a weighted coin, with a preference for the head of corruption. In fact, many of today’s greatest leaders seem to have long histories of controversy and questionable decisions. Take, for example, the PR company Bell Pottinger of the United Kingdom, which has recently been exposed for facilitating racism in South Africa, under direction from one of its clients (Cheryl). Exposure of this and other company controversies marked the beginning of the end for Bell Pottinger. Had the leaders of Bell Pottinger properly weighed company risks, prioritized their employees, and set a precedent of rules, corruption could have been prevented.

World leaders such as presidents, prime ministers, and monarchs work with diligence to create impressions of confidence, charisma, and power. They are often followed by throngs of people who help to add to this image of leadership and success as a leader. This map of leadership is the map that many follow as the course to successful leading today.

Leadership is defined in many ways, but what it is in common in each definition is the emphasis on influence over other’s thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and attitudes. According to Spector (2012), power is “the extent to which one person can influence another to do something” (p. 321). This means that that power is what inspires subordinates to follow an employer. There are five sources of power. Expert power is given when there is a perception that the person has knowledge or expertise in an area. Referent

Top leaders should push power downward, across the organization, empowering people at all levels to make decisions (Columbia Business School, 2016). As a

In addition to power established because of organizational hierarchy or role, power is also established based on the level of influence or status one holds in an organization (Anichich, Fast, Halevy, Galinsky, 2016). “Status is the outcome of an evaluation of attributes that produce differences in respect and prominence” (Ketner et al, 2003 p. 266) They co-exists but are not co-dependent on each other. It’s possible to have status without power and power without status (Ketner et al, 2003). Whether one’s control comes through status or positional power, lauding control or significant influence over another inevitably leads to conflict.

Countless times leaders operate on instinct that has grown from what they have seen in the past. What leaders see others do sets the stage for what they may do in the future. A leader of sound character will exhibit that character at all times.” (p. 7-13)

The concept of power is an applicable leadership concept. Leaders use power to decipher whether they have the ability to acquire the commitment or obedience from their workers/officers. Leaders that are educated or trained under the old-paradigm, have low levels of expectations of others around them, and tend to use

As stated by McClelland, everyone has some desire for power, however that need is much stronger in some than in others, and therefore individuals have different motives for achieving power (McClelland et al., 1953). Over the decades, several studies have been published on the topic of power motivation, resulting in mixed findings where some have found power motivation in leaders to have a positive influence on organizational success and others demonstrating a negative impact. Specifically, past research has shown that power motivation is an important factor in predicting business success (McClelland et al., 1953), organizational effectiveness (McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982; McClelland & Burnham, 1976), political leadership (Winter, 1987), and prosocial decision making (Magee & Langner, 2008). On the other hand, previous studies have also found positive correlations between motivation for power and negative work-related behaviors, including aggressive behavior (Winter, 2000), increased threat in conflicts (Magee & Langner, 2008), and increased risk-taking (McClelland & Watson, 1973). To supplement these negative findings, another study found that need for power predicted further negative work-related