***
“ Leadership is getting someone to do what they
don’t want to do, to achieve what they want to achieve” - Tom Landry
“ The art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it” - Dwight Eisenhower
***
In times of crisis leaders come to the forefront to provide non-leaders (followers) with order and strategy into the group to resolve the situation. However, to be a leader it requires more than just providing orders that followers must follow. It is the relational and social process between followers and leader which creates the role of leadership, (Wallis, Yammarino, & Feyerherm, 2011). In the absence of relationship between follower and leader it is likely that the group will be unsuccessful. This is because leaders should possess the ability to influence followers in achieving a mutual goal, (Kort, 2008). Essentially, it is the shared ethos of the group which helps to promote the status of the leader and the outcome of the group, (Kort, 2008).Offerman et al (1994), found eight different characteristics which followers associated with a leader. These included, sensitivity, dedication, tyranny, charisma, attractiveness, masculinity, intelligence and strength, (see Keller, 1999). The masculinity characteristic is not beneficial in the prevalence of female leaders. However, Rosener, (1997), found that men and women both failed to identify women as leaders, which reveals gender bias in leadership. Further personality characteristics include agreeableness, conscientiousness, extroversion (active and talkative), openness and neuroticism, (Digman, 1990, John, 1990 in Keller 1999). However, the similarity hypothesis identifies that followers prefer leaders who are similar to themselves (for example, traits, attitudes and values), (Keller, 1999). This means that definitions of leadership can be subjective to the individual's belief, values and personal traits.
Although leadership definitions vary there is one common theme that leaders need the ability to influence others. However, to achieve this there needs to be an element of creativity and vision on the leaders part to maximize their potential in influencing others, (Klann, & Cartwright, 2004). This brings it to the debatable discussion into leadership as a form of art. It has been identified as art because leadership does not follow a set of rules and principles which can be applied to every situation, (Klann, & Cartwright, 2004). The varying leadership characteristics have formed a prototype for people to compare others to. It creates this idealistic view of what leaderships should be. Therefore, leadership becomes an art because successful leaders have the ability to draw on certain characteristics dependent on the context and situation of their group goals.
On the other hand, leadership has been discussed as a form of science. This is because leadership can follow predetermined principles which can be applied in all situations. For example, all leaders have to deal with the varying differences of individuals, (Klann, & Cartwright, 2004). However, the main requirement of an individual is to be treated with respect, trust and dignity. Therefore, leadership styles which have strayed away from this notion, such as fascism and slavery, have not had long standing results in the long run. This means that successful leaders should be working in the interest of their followers!
