Categories and Types of Leadership Essay Example

disciplines such as “Directive Communication” by Arthur F Carmazzi and theories like “The ripple effect” by Sigal Barsade, leadership is a product of awareness and command of the reactions and influences of a group on the individual as well as the individual on the group. A Leader's successful application of directive organizational psychology by modifying specific leadership behaviors towards the group, will yield an Organizational culture that is in essence “inspired”. [edit] The Embodiment of Leadership

Types Of Leadership Structures Leadership Effectiveness Leadership Behaviors Leadership Development Leadership Qualities Individualized Leadership Leadership Theory Market Leadership Effective Style Leadership Skills Transactional Leadership Transformational Leadership Ghenggis Khan Effective Manager Situational Leadership Leadership Relation Leaders Leadership Leadership Styles Management Styles People Managers Most research into leadership mistakenly focused on cognitive and intellectual processes, forgetting the important fact that every cognitive process is an embodied process.

In the book Leading People the Black Belt Way, Timothy Warneka accurately points out that, “Great leadership begins with the body. ” People are living, organic beings, and medical research is increasingly recognizing the truth that mind and body are, in fact, one. While we often speak about mind and body as separate entities, great leaders understand that mind and body are, in reality, two sides of the same coin. Superior leaders recognize further that an awareness of their own physical selves is a critical component of their success.

In a very real way, our toes, stomachs, and shoulders are on equal footing (pardon the pun) with our thoughts and ideas. As with any other tool, however, leaders must be trained to use embodied leadership technology appropriately and effectively. In leadership, as in the

martial arts, your stance is critical to your success. If you have a weak stance, then every way you lead will be fundamentally flawed. For example, if you have a weak stance in your emotional life, then you will have significant difficulties when you attempt to lead other people relationally.

Recalling that we are embodied beings, I do not mean the word stance to be understood only metaphorically. I am also using the word stance in the literal sense, in terms of how leaders actually carry themselves physically when they lead others. Learning embodied stance will deepen your capacity for experiencing your own emotions, and better equip you to cope with the emotions of others, from the lighthearted to the highly conflicted. Your stance, you will learn, has a very literal, not to mention enormous impact on your ultimate success as a leader.

Most research into leadership mistakenly focused on cognitive and intellectual processes, forgetting the important fact that every cognitive process is an embodied process. In the book Leading People the Black Belt Way, Timothy Warneka accurately points out that, “Great leadership begins with the body.

” People are living, organic beings, and medical research is increasingly recognizing the truth that mind and body are, in fact, one. While we often speak about mind and body as separate entities, great leaders understand that mind and body are, in reality, two sides of the same coin.

Superior leaders recognize further that an awareness of their own physical selves is a critical component of their success. In a very real way, our toes, stomachs, and shoulders are on equal footing (pardon the pun) with our thoughts

and ideas.

As with any other tool, however, leaders must be trained to use embodied leadership technology appropriately and effectively. In leadership, as in the martial arts, your stance is critical to your success. If you have a weak stance, then every way you lead will be fundamentally flawed.

For example, if you have a weak stance in your emotional life, then you will have significant difficulties when you attempt to lead other people relationally. Recalling that we are embodied beings, I do not mean the word stance to be understood only metaphorically. I am also using the word stance in the literal sense, in terms of how leaders actually carry themselves physically when they lead others.

Learning embodied stance will deepen your capacity for experiencing your own emotions, and better equip you to cope with the emotions of others, from the lighthearted to the highly conflicted.

Your stance, you will learn, has a very literal, not to mention enormous impact on your ultimate success as a leader. [edit] Leadership associated with positions of authority In On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History, Thomas Carlyle demonstrated the concept of leadership associated with a position of authority. In praising Oliver Cromwell's use of power to bring King Charles I to trial and eventual beheading, he wrote the following: "Let us remark, meanwhile, how indispensable everywhere a King is, in all movements of men. It is strikingly shown, in this very War, what becomes of men when hey cannot find a Chief Man, and their enemies can.

"[1] From this viewpoint, leadership emerges when an entity as "leader" contrives to receive deference from other entities who

become "followers". And as the passage from Carlyle demonstrates, the process of getting deference can become competitive in that the emerging "leader" draws "followers" from the factions of the prior or alternative "leaders". In representative democracies the people retain sovereignty (popular sovereignty) but delegate day-to-day administration and leadership to elected officials.

In the United States, for example, the Constitution provides an example of recycling authority.

In the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the American Founders rejected the idea of a monarch. But they still proposed leadership by people in positions of authority, with the authority split into three powers: in this case the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary. Under the American theory, the authority of the leadership derives from the power of the voters as conveyed through the electoral college. Many individuals share authority, including the many legislators in the Senate and the House of Representatives. 2] [edit] Leadership cycles If a group or an organization wants or expects identifiable leadership, it will require processes for appointing/acquiring and replacing leaders.

Traditional closed groups rely on bloodlines or seniority to select leaders and/or leadership candidates: monarchies, tribal chiefdoms, oligarchies and aristocratic societies rely on (and often define their institutions by) such methods. Competence or perceived competence provides a possible basis for selecting leadership elites from a broader pool of rytewytepotential talent.

Political lobbying may prove necessary in electoral systems, but immediately demonstrated skill and character may secure leadership in smaller groups such as gangs. Many organizations and groups aim to identify, grow, foster and promote what they see as leadership potential or ability - especially among younger members of society. See for example the Scouting movement.

For a specific environment, see leaders hip development. The issues of succession planning or of legitimation become important at times when leadership (particularly individual leadership) might or must change due to term-expiry, accident or senescence. edit] Titles emphasizing authority At certain stages in their development, the hierarchies of social ranks implied different degrees or ranks of leadership in society. Thus a knight led fewer men in general than did a duke; a baronet might in theory control less land than an earl. See peerage for a systematization of this hierarchy, and order of precedence for links to various systems. In the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, several political operators took non-traditional paths to become dominant in their societies.

They or their systems often expressed a belief in strong individual leadership, but existing titles and labels ("King", "Emperor", "President" and so on) often seemed inappropriate, insufficient or downright inaccurate in some circumstances. The formal or informal titles or descriptions they or their flunkies employed express and foster a general veneration for leadership of the inspired and autocratic variety. The definite article when used as part of the title (in languages which use definite articles) emphasizes the existence of a sole "true" leader. [edit] Symbolism of leadership

Main article: Symbols of leadership Various symbolic attributes — often varying according to the cultural milieu — mark out authority-figures and help make them seem special and revered or feared. For examples and discussion, see symbols of leadership.

[edit] Leadership among primates Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson, in Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence present evidence that only humans and chimpanzees, among all the animals

living on earth, share a similar tendency for a cluster of behaviors: violence, territoriality, and competition for uniting behind the one chief male of the land. 3] This position is contentious. Many animals beyond apes are territorial, compete, exhibit violence, and have a social structure controlled by a dominant male (lions, wolves, etc. ) suggesting Wrangham and Peterson's evidence is not empirical. By comparison, bonobos, the second-closest species-relatives of man, do not unite behind the chief male of the land.

The bonobos show deference to an alpha or top-ranking female that, with the support of her coalition of other females, can prove as strong as the strongest male in the land.

Thus, if leadership amounts to getting the greatest number of followers, then among the bonobos, a female almost always exerts the strongest and most effective leadership. However, not all scientists agree on the allegedly "peaceful" nature of the bonobo or its reputation as a "hippie chimp". [4] Some have argued that, since the bonobo pattern inverts the dominant pattern among chimpanzees and men with regard to whether a female can get more followers than a male, humans and chimpanzees both likely inherited gender-bias against women from the ancestors of the chimpanzees; gender- bias features as a genetic condition of men.

And the bias against women having leadership as a position of authority occurs in most cultures in the world. As of 2002, Sweden had the highest percentage of women in the legislature: but only 43%.

And the United States, Andorra, Israel, Sierra Leone, and Ireland tied for 57th place with less than 15% of the legislature women. [5] Admittedly, those percentages significantly outclass the

occurrence of female chimpanzees becoming alpha of the community by getting the most followers, but similar trends exist in manifesting a general gender-bias across cultures against females gaining leadership as a position of authority over followers