Group items tagged

To many, leaders are not born, but made. It is increasingly accepted, however, that in order to be a good leader, one must have the experience, knowledge, commitment, patience, and most importantly the skill to negotiate and work with others to achieve goals.

Good leaders are thus made, not born

Great man theories assume that the capacity for leadership is inherent, that great leaders are born, not made

the trait theory assumes that people inherit certain qualities or traits make them better suited to leadership.

Contingency theories of leadership focus on particular variables related to the environment that might determine which style of leadership is best suited for a particular work situation.

Situational theory proposes that leaders choose the best course of action based upon situational conditions or circumstances.

Behavioural theories of leadership are based on the belief that great leaders are made, not born.

articipative leadership theories suggest that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the input of others into account.

P

Transactional theories, also known as management theories, focus on the role of supervision, organization and group performance and the exchanges that take place between leaders and followers. These theories base leadership on a system of rewards and punishments (Charry, 2012).

Relationship theories, also known as transformational theories, focus on the connections formed between leaders and followers. In these theories, leadership is the process by which a person engages with others and is able to “create a connection” that results in increased motivationand morality in both followers and leaders. 

This theory states that learned knowledge and acquired skills/abilities are significant factors in the practice of effective leadership. Skills theory by no means refuses to acknowledge the connection between inherited traits and the capacity to lead effectively, but argues that learned skills, a developed style, and acquired knowledge, are the real keys to leadership performance.

Autocratic leadership is an extreme form of transactional leadership, where leaders have complete power over staff. Staff and team members have little opportunity to make suggestions, even if these are in the best interest of the team or organization

Bureaucratic leaders follow rules rigorously, and ensure that their staff also follow procedures precisely.

Charismatic leadership theory describes what to expect from both leaders and followers. Charismatic leadership i

a leadership style that is identifiable bu

may be perceived with less tangibility than other leadership styles

Democratic leaders make the final decisions, but include team members in the decision-making process. They encourage creativity, and team members are often highly engaged in projects and decisions.

Laissez-faire leadership may be the best or the worst of leadership styles (Goodnight, 2011). Laissez-faire, this French phrase for “let it be,” when applied to leadership describes leaders who allow people to work on their own. Laissez-faire leaders abdicate responsibilities and avoid making decisions, they may give teams complete freedom to do their work and set their own deadlines.

This leadership style starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their leader when they accept a job.

3. Start with a sophisticated student-centered culture.

4. Make collaboration as powerful in school as it is in life.

5. Understand that PBL cannot be done alone.

If organizations are to develop a capacity to work with mental models then it will be necessary for people to learn new skills and develop new orientations, and for their to be institutional changes that foster such change. ‘Entrenched mental models… thwart changes that could come from systems thinking’ (ibid.: 203). Moving the organization in the right direction entails working to transcend the sorts of internal politics and game playing that dominate traditional organizations. In other words it means fostering openness (Senge 1990: 273-286). It also involves seeking to distribute business responsibly far more widely while retaining coordination and control. Learning organizations are localized organizations (ibid.: 287-301).

it’s the capacity to hold a share picture of the future we seek to create’ (1990: 9). Such a vision has the power to be uplifting – and to encourage experimentation and innovation. Crucially, it is argued, it can also foster a sense of the long-term, something that is fundamental to the ‘fifth discipline’.

When there is a genuine vision (as opposed to the all-to-familiar ‘vision statement’), people excel and learn, not because they are told to, but because they want to. But many leaders have personal visions that never get translated into shared visions that galvanize an organization… What has been lacking is a discipline for translating vision into shared vision – not a ‘cookbook’ but a set of principles and guiding practices. The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared ‘pictures of the future’ that foster genuine commitment and enrolment rather than compliance. In mastering this discipline, leaders learn the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter how heartfelt. (Senge 1990: 9)

People need to be able to act together. When teams learn together, Peter Senge suggests, not only can there be good results for the organization, members will grow more rapidly than could have occurred otherwise.

In a learning organization, leaders are designers, stewards and teachers. They are responsible for building organizations were people continually expand their capabilities to understand complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared mental models – that is they are responsible for learning…. Learning organizations will remain a ‘good idea’… until people take a stand for building such organizations. Taking this stand is the first leadership act, the start of inspiring (literally ‘to breathe life into’) the vision of the learning organization. (Senge 1990: 340)

In essence, ‘the leaders’ task is designing the learning processes whereby people throughout the organization can deal productively with the critical issues they face, and develop their mastery in the learning disciplines’ (ibid.: 345).

One of the important things to grasp here is that stewardship involves a commitment to, and responsibility for the vision, but it does not mean that the leader owns it. It is not their possession. Leaders are stewards of the vision, their task is to manage it for the benefit of others (hence the subtitle of Block’s book – ‘Choosing service over self-interest’). Leaders learn to see their vision as part of something larger. Purpose stories evolve as they are being told, ‘in fact, they are as a result of being told’ (Senge 1990: 351). Leaders have to learn to listen to other people’s vision and to change their own where necessary. Telling the story in this way allows others to be involved and to help develop a vision that is both individual and shared.

By attending to purpose, leaders can cultivate an understanding of what the organization (and its members) are seeking to become. One of the issues here is that leaders often have strengths in one or two of the areas but are unable, for example, to develop systemic understanding. A key to success is being able to conceptualize insights so that they become public knowledge, ‘open to challenge and further improvement’ (ibid.: 356).

It is about fostering learning, for everyone. Such leaders help people throughout the organization develop systemic understandings. Accepting this responsibility is the antidote to one of the most common downfalls of otherwise gifted teachers – losing their commitment to the truth. (Senge 1990: 356)

s

Student engagement is generally accepted as being connected to academic success, retention, learning, and the student experience.

a performative mode of practice that not only links to students’ changing role and position as regulators of HE