What is leadership definition? Actually leadership definition tells us that an leader has full control over decision making in a group. It is also called authoritarian leadership and was very common in ancient times when monarchs and kings used to lead their nations without their will and consent just by the dint of their power which they never forgot to exercise if someone among masses tried to raise voice against their way of leading people.
Basic qualities of an leader
To learn the leadership definition we should know the basic qualities of an leader. An leader actually does whatsoever he or she feels in the best interest of his or her followers. One can’t doubt the sincerity of such leader despite disliking its very nature because its ultimate aim is also to lead the people to right direction with his or her leadership skills and abilities. Practically speaking such leaders listen to others less and decide by themselves for the achievement of collective goals.
History of leadership
leadership definition also informs us the history of leadership. In medieval times most of the states all across the globe were governed by style when masses didn’t have to worry about state of affairs that was the sole job of king or monarch who had a group of advisors for counseling but not bound to seek their advice or act upon it. For the best decision though most of them used to discuss the matter with advisors to reach the best conclusion of any issue.
Public awareness on leadership
By the passage of time wherever level of awareness grew in masses they started claiming their participation in key decisions of the state. Here from the journey of democracy began. People demanded their input in main decisions like selection of ruler, framing of main policies, forging of key strategies etc.
Democratic leadership more common
In today’s world when democratic leadership is most common in most of the countries, there are still several states in Asia and Africa where style of leadership is applied despite disliking to it by the masses because masses over there don’t have much power to exercise for their rights. Usually army leaders control the governance of such countries where owing to lack of awareness and enlightenment democratic style of leadership could not have brought results.
Read another informative article on: What is leadership?
In organizations, there is no preference of style of leadership. It all depends upon situation. If an organization works on built-in mechanism there is no question of style of leadership and every work is done under set standards. However, in creative type of organizations where most of the work depends upon discussions and debate the democratic way of leading the workers is liked by all.
In purely sole proprietorships of small nature style of leadership can work because whatsoever is to be done is the job of its owner or MD who is solely responsible for the performance of the business.
In organizations where obedience is the sole criteria for good performance, the authoritarian style of leading is considered the most appropriate. Like in law enforcement agencies and military organizations where discipline and obedience help make them perform well it is necessary to lead the staff members without seeking much input from them. In this way lot of decisions might be delayed owing to ifs and buts as well as difference of opinion among them. Such organizations can’t afford delay of any type.
Do you think I fully covered the leadership definition in this post? If I missed any point please share it with me in comments below.Do You Like This Post?