Effective leader: who is he? What qualities should a modern leader have? Traits of a True Leader

INTRODUCTION

1. Leadership Fundamentals

1.2. Approaches to the Study of Leadership

2. The theory of leadership qualities. Advantages and disadvantages.

2.1. The concept and essence of the theory of leadership qualities.

2.2. Analysis of the theory. Advantages and disadvantages of leadership theory.

CONCLUSION

LIST OF SOURCES USED
APPENDIX 1Leadership Theories

APPENDIX 2 Qualities most often found in leaders

APPENDIX 3 Features of approaches to the study of leadership phenomena.

Introduction

The topic of leadership has recently become increasingly popular, especially in the business environment, which is primarily due to the requirements of objective reality and the increased need for “strong personalities.” Today, the labor market in Russia is becoming more stable and understandable. Gone are the fertile times for “headhunters,” when it was possible to find a highly qualified specialist in an unknown company and lure him away with twice the salary. Therefore, now, in order to both retain and attract employees, the manager needs reliable leadership tools.

Leader - a person who creates an image of an attractive future and brings it to the consciousness of his followers. True leaders are not those who hold high positions or have power, but those who control the hearts and minds of people. Therefore, a leader needs to create force fields around himself, magnets that attract talent, and not just employees trying to take jobs: He is able to change, first of all, his own life, forcing circumstances to work for himself, and not against him.

Leadership is a life position, not a momentary whim. That is why the leader should be a little ahead of everyone else. To effectively perform a leadership role requires special skills and qualities, called in modern business lexicon competencies.

Successful leaders are distinguished by a creative approach to the assigned work, understanding of themselves, their own moods and emotions, as well as the ability to regulate and direct them in the desired direction. They also understand the emotional state of others and are able to establish and maintain relationships with a wide range of people. Another special quality sets leaders apart from the general environment - strong motivation, an unbending desire to achieve their goal.

Effective leadership and effective management (management) are not the same thing. Management in the context of business management, it is the habitual manner of behavior of a leader in relation to subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization.

Leadership - is the art of managing people, the ability to influence individuals and groups of people to motivate them to work towards achieving goals, i.e. the ability to form and clarify your ideas and dreams so that they motivate others to act. Therefore the leader. in modern management theory, he is seen not as a "boss" or "commander", but rather as a person who "creates a world in which others want to live." This approach implies competent management of relationships and interactions within an economic organization or social system in order to advance towards the set goal.

There are many means by which you can influence and lead others. Leadership theory attempts to identify and predict which leadership characteristics are most effective for management and why. Scientists have used three approaches to determine the significant factors of effective leadership: the personality approach, the behavioral approach, and the situational approach.

Chapter 1. Leadership Fundamentals

1.1 Nature and definition of leadership

Organizations that achieve success differ from their counterparts primarily in that they have more dynamic and efficient management . In modern Russian, under the leadership, from the point of view of the owner,This means either an individual (manager) or a group (managerial staff), or a process, i.e. a way of managing an organization with individual characteristics.

Synonyms for the words management and leader are the wordsleadership and leader.

Leadership issues have been of interest to people since ancient times. However, the systematic, focused and widespread study of leadership began only from the time of F. Taylor. A lot of research has been done. However, there is still no complete agreement on what leadership is or how it should be done. be studied.

The nature of leadership can be better understood if it is compared with management itself. Being a manager and being a leader of an organization are not the same thing. Manager in its influence on the work of subordinates and building relationships with them, it primarily uses and relies on official the basis of power and the sources that feed it. Leadership as a specific type of management relationship is based more on the process of social influence, or rather, interactions in the organization. This process is much more complex, requiring a high level of interdependence among its participants. Unlike management itself, leadership presupposes the presence in the organization followers, and not subordinates.

Respectively boss relationship-subordinate", characteristic of the traditional view of management are replaced by relationships.

So, if we take the director of a plant as an example, his position is that of a manager. the position opens the way for him to leadership. The process of influencing people from a position held in an organization is called formal leadership. However, in his influence on people, the director cannot rely only on his position. This becomes clearly evident when it turns out that one of his deputies, who has less formal power, enjoys greater success in managing stressful and conflict situations or in making decisions.

problems vital for the enterprise. This deputy enjoys the support, trust, respect, and perhaps even love of employees for his competence, prudence and good attitude towards people.

Being a manager does not automatically mean being considered a leader in the organization, since leadership is largely characterized by an informal basis. You can hold the first position in an organization, but not be a leader in it. In the above example, the deputy in the organization would rather be considered a leader than his immediate superior - the plant director.

The process of influencing through abilities and skills or other resources needed by people is called informal leadership. The informal nature of the leadership position is largely due to the use of the personal basis of power and the sources that feed it. The ideal for leadership is to use an effective combination of both bases of power.

In the course of studying the problem of leadership, scientists have proposed many different definitions of this concept. According to J. Terry, leadership is the influence on groups of people, encouraging them to achieve a common goal. R. Tanneibaum, I. Weschler and F. Massarik defined leadership as interpersonal interaction, manifested in a certain situation through the communication process and aimed at achieving a specific goal or goals. G. Kunz and S. O'Donnell believe that leadership is associated with influencing people in pursuit of a common goal.

Force and coercion in leadership are often replaced by motivation and inspiration. As a result of the leadership approach, influence is based on people's acceptance of the leader's demands without overt or direct expression of power. A leader's ability to influence people gives him

The basis of leadership is a specific type of management relationship or leadership type. This is a leader-follower relationship. Historically, the leadership type of relationship arose a little earlier than the “boss-subordinate” relationship? appeared and took shape during the first industrial revolution. Starting from childhood, following a leader is perceived quite naturally by us. Are these also the parents in the family? are these the teachers at school? These are also the heroes with whom young people want to associate themselves. The presence of the image of a leader in the individual microcosm of people is as old as the person himself. The majority recognizes the fact that leadership is identified with the presence of relationships associated with the human psyche between the leader and his followers.

The early stage of leadership management relationships is characterized by the fact that someone one occupies a central position in the community, and se the rest are located, as it were, on the periphery. Governance is exercised through a centralized authority that dominates the entire community.

With this type of leadership, the follower spends his energy for the benefit of the group/organization headed by the leader, without actually having any personal rights. This type of leadership relationship is called the “master” relationship.-- slave". The leader's power in this case is absolute and can extend to decisions about the life and death of members of the led community. Usually, changing the leader's chosen course of action is no longer within the control of the followers.

The effectiveness of an organization based on this early type of leadership relationship is manifested in its ability to quickly, in a short time, carry out quite difficult tasks in the least favorable conditions. This is achieved by uniting everyone around one leader. However this

at the same time it is also a weakness of this type of relationship. Firstly, this is due to the fact that the implementation of any organizational changes depends on the presence of the leader’s corresponding desires. Secondly, Having achieved the goal, the leader often tries to maintain his power by artificially complicating the situation, which is not always in the interests of other members of the organization. Thirdly, the departure or removal of a leader upsets the organizational situation indefinitely, which in turn leads to a corresponding decrease in effectiveness.

This type of leadership relationship still exists in business and is the most common there. The greatest correspondence of this type of leadership to the external environment is observed in family, trading and farming businesses.

In general, leadership relationships are distinguished by the fact that followers recognize leadership as an integral part of the group/organization only when it has proven its competence and value. A leader derives his power from followers because they recognize him as a leader. To maintain his position, the leader must provide them with the opportunity to satisfy their needs that cannot be achieved otherwise. In response, they satisfy the leader's need to dominate and rise above them, and also provide him with the necessary support in achieving organizational goals.

Failures befall leaders for various reasons, but success comes to leaders largely when they have fairly similar abilities and skills. A study of the work experience of many practicing leaders shows that to be successful they need to have the ability to create an image of the future state of the organization and communicating it to followers. Another characteristic of a successful leader is that hegives followers the corresponding rights and powers to

implementation of the goal expressed in the vision, can admit their weaknesses and attract the necessary resources, including human resources, to eliminate them. A leader becomes attractive to followers due to the ability to see what will ultimately be achieved as a result of his and the followers' efforts. However, this is not any goal or any future state of the organization. To a large extent this is what the followers want (ineffective leadership) or can (effective leadership) have. Additionally, a vision becomes attractive if it is larger or better than the existing reality, i.e. to a certain extent, idealization of the future state is allowed. The vision captures the imagination of followers and motivates them to commit themselves to realizing it to the extent that they share the leader's vision. A vision that inspires followers and makes them believe in the success of the cause.

In conveying the vision to followers in a way that inspires enthusiasm and commitment, a leader can be helped by the use of effective communication. In modern conditions, people can be motivated to action by the fact of their direct conscious participation (through property or process) in decisions and their creative implementation, which involves vesting them with appropriate rights and powers. This means that a leader must have the ability and skill divide your Power with your followers, making them part of the common cause, and not blind executors. In modern conditions, effective leadership is not an iron or firm hand, but a high sensitivity to the needs of followers, which is manifested in the development of employees, in including them in group work, in helping them achieve personal goals.

1.2 Approaches to the Study of Leadership

It is known that to date, more than ten thousand different kinds of research on leadership issues have been conducted. Using two variables or two dimensions(dynamics of behavior and level of situationality), we can distinguish the main groups of leadership.

Behavioral dynamics reflect how a leader is viewed: in statics (analysis of leadership qualities) or in dynamics (analysis of patterns of leadership behavior). In the first case leadership is conceptualized primarily in terms of relatively permanent and sustainable qualities of an individual's character, i.e. It is believed that a leader has certain innate traits that he needs in order to be effective. In contrast, the behavioral approach is based on inferences drawn from researchers' observed patterns of leadership behavior, i.e. the actions of the leader, and not the qualities he inherited.

The second dimension is related to the level or degree to which situationality is adopted as the basis of analysis within a particular approach to the study of leadership. At one pole there are approaches that lead to the idea of ​​universality, at the other - situationality is recognized as critical, decisive for effective leadership.

The combination of two variables ultimately results in four types of approaches to the study of leadership in organizations. First type includes approaches based on the analysis of leadership qualities (leadership theories, theory (<Х» и теория «У» Дугласа МакГрегора), необходимых эффективному лидеру в любом организационном контексте.

Second type considers leadership as a set of patterns of behavior inherent in the leader also in any organizational environment

Third type involves the study of leadership qualities, but depending on the specific situation (concepts of situational leadership: Tannenbaum - Schmidt, Fiedler, Hersey - Blanchard, House Mitchell, Stinson - Johnson, Vroom - Yetton - Yago).

Fourth The type represents a number of new approaches that again study leadership qualities, but in connection with a specific situation (the cause-and-effect approach, or “attributional theory”, the concepts of the transformational leader and the charismatic leader).

Features of approaches to the study of leadership are presented in Table 3

Chapter 2. Advantages and disadvantages of the theory of leadership qualities.

2.1 The concept and essence of the theory of leadership qualities.

The theory of leadership traits was created on the basis of identifying the qualities inherent in ideal leaders - heroes. The essence of this theory is to explain the phenomenon of leadership by outstanding personality traits. As one of the prominent representatives of trait theory, E. Bogardus, writes, “superior intellectual gifts give an individual an outstanding position, which sooner or later leads to leadership.” Leadership theoryqualities or structural theorysets itself the task of identifying the universal personality structure of an effective leader, defining its characteristic traits or characteristics.

Many researchers have tried to determine the set of characteristics that make a person a leader.

These researchers and characteristics are presented in Table. 1

At the same time, in accordance with the level of development of production at the stage under consideration, they placed either physical strength or intellect in first place. Thus, studies of Russian leaders have identified ten main characteristics characteristic of a modern leader:

· ability to form a management team;

· strategic vision for business development;

· ability to manage strategic changes in business development;

· ability to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty;

· factor of self-discipline and organization;

· the ability to delegate authority and control the achievement of the necessary results;

· ability to establish constructive relationships within the team;

· ability to establish and maintain constructive relationships with external parties;

· detailed knowledge of business processes and production specifics of your enterprise or industry;

· the ability to negotiate and convince oneself of the correctness of one’s position.

· In general, there are four groups of leadership qualities: physiological, psychological, intellectual and personal. These qualities and their characteristics are presented in table. 2

In general, the structural approach encountered a number of intractable problems:

· identifying the optimal set of characteristics turned out to be impossible;

· the approach completely ignored the group context in which leadership is exercised;

· the approach could not reveal the cause-and-effect relationship between leadership and individual personal characteristics (whether certain traits characterize the leader or whether successful leadership forms specific traits);

· in the context of this approach, individual traits appear as static formations devoid of development;

· the low correlation of personality traits with behavioral manifestations of leadership, strictly speaking, does not allow us to consider these characteristics as reliable predictors.

The phenomenon of leadership occupies a special place in political psychology due to its brightness and entertaining nature. If for political science the main problem is power, then for political psychology it is the specific expression of this power in the “human factor” of politics. This particular expression has two forms. On the one hand, power in the political-psychological dimension is the ability of the ruling subject (“the top”) to force oneself to obey, that is, some potency of a leader, political institution or regime. On the other hand, power is the readiness of the “lower classes” to obey the “highest”. This is how two sides of the same coin arise: the ability of the “tops” and the readiness of the “bottoms”. What the “specific weight” of each of these components is depends on many circumstances in each particular case.

The phenomenon of leadership the most studied problem of political psychology. It is here that the bulk of research, concepts and attempts at theoretical generalization have been accumulated. When studying this section of political psychology, the most productive is a constant reference to the history of the problem, an in-depth historical excursion into previously conducted research. In research into the phenomenon of leadership, there is still no “final diagnosis” that would allow us to briefly summarize and generalize the achievements, discarding obviously incorrect concepts.

The phenomenon of leadership is the most rewarding topic for political psychologists. Engaging in it ensures the interest of the general public and demand

the politicians themselves. That is, at the same time, it brings a rare combination of fame and money. All of the above explains the increased attention that is being paid to this problem. Taking this into account, let us consider the accumulated scientific data as broadly as possible. Note that each subsequent approach did not cross out the previous ones, but built on top of them. This is how a voluminous, multidimensional understanding of the phenomenon of leadership has developed.

Let us skip, due to pure descriptiveness and lack of serious analysis, the background to the study of the phenomenon of leadership. Attempts to examine it politically and psychologically are the property of the entire written history of mankind. However, until the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the main approaches to the problem were purely descriptive. Analysis became a property of the 20th century. Various theories have closely tried to explain the nature of leadership and identify the factors influencing this phenomenon. In general terms, several groups of such theories can be distinguished.

"Hero" and "Trait Theories". The theories of this group are among the most ancient. Let us briefly mention only some of their origins. As is known, a significant part of political and psychological traits and characteristics are determined by sociocultural circumstances. Thus, the ancient Egyptians attributed to their emperor “powerful expression” in his mouth, “understanding in his heart,” but “his tongue is the tomb of justice.” Homer's Iliad revealed the four qualities of leaders necessary, according to the ancient Greeks: justice (Agamemnon), wisdom (Nestor), cunning (Odysseus) and valor (Achilles). Lists of these or similar qualities are found in a variety of cultures: True, leaders’ behavioral models and “sets” of leadership “traits” have changed more than once over time. Nevertheless, the images of heroes were, are and always will be. In any case, for now there are still supporters of the understanding of history as the creation of “heroes”, great people. This means that the lists of “heroic” traits will also multiply.

In the 20th century, well-known representatives of the “heroic” theory (T. Carlyle, E. Jennings, J. Dowd, etc.) tried to study the qualities that are “hereditary” and “help to attract the masses.” Then, following the “heroic” theory, the “trait theory” tried to answer the question of what properties a leader should have as a special subject of activity. Its supporters (L. Bernard, W. Bingham, O. Ted, S. Kilbourne, etc.) believed that certain psychological qualities and properties (“traits”) make a person a leader. They considered the leader through the prism of a number of factors. Firstly, such factors included his “abilities” - mental, verbal, etc. Secondly, “achievements” - education and physical development. Thirdly, “responsibility” dependence, initiative, perseverance, desire, etc. Fourth, “participation” activity, cooperation, etc. Fifthly, “status” socio-economic status, popularity . Sixth, “situational traits” of personality were considered important.

Disappointment with the structural theory led to the promotion of the concept of a “leader without traits.” Despite its shortcomings, the structural approach invariably arouses the interest of practical management. Even non-ideal tests, built on the achievements of the structural approach, make it possible to carry out professional selection of leaders. The testing is primarily aimed at identifying five characteristics that have consistently demonstrated a high positive correlation with successful leadership:

· intelligence;

· dominance;

· self-confidence;

· high activation (energy) level;

· professional knowledge and skills relevant to the task being performed.

The authors tried to overcome the shortcomings of the structural approachbehavioral leadership theories.This approach considers leadership in the context of the external behavior demonstrated by the leader and attempts to find some stable set of behavioral characteristics that ensure the success of the leader.

The structural approach implies the presence of “ready-made”, static traits of a leader, i.e. a leader must be born. The behavioral approach views leadership not as a given set of personality traits and abilities, but as a form of behavior that can be mastered and that can and should be taught.

2.2Advantages and disadvantages of the theory of leadership qualities.

Trait theory has a number of shortcomings.

First, the list of potentially important leadership qualities turned out to be almost endless. For this reason, it became impossible to create the “only true” image of a leader.

Secondly, for various reasons, such as the failure to find ways to measure many leadership qualities, as well as due to the failure to recognize possible differences depending on the organization or situation, it has not been possible to establish a close connection between the considered qualities and leadership and help in practical identification the last one.

Summarizing what has been said, we can conclude that the approach that studies leadership qualities is undoubtedly interesting, but, unfortunately, has not yet helped practice much.

Extensive case studies have been conducted to test trait theory. They largely refuted this theory, because. it turned out that upon detailed analysis, the individual qualities of a leader almost exactly coincide with the full set of psychological and

social characteristics of personality in general. In addition, in some areas of activity, primarily in the field of entrepreneurship, high intellectual and moral qualities are more of an obstacle to taking a leading position than a condition for success. Over the course of many years, and often throughout their lives, many outstanding abilities of people turn out to be unclaimed and do not find application.Indeed, many famous leaders and leaders have shown and continue to show certain original and strong qualities. However, history also knows other examples: when political leaders are mediocre, dull, not brilliant, gray personalities. It is not without reason that the German writer Lion Feuchtwanger (1884-1958) once noted that “power fills even an empty person with content.” Consequently, not only certain personality traits are important, but also the circumstances corresponding to them.

All this does not mean a complete rejection of the trait theory. It is obvious that in order to occupy a leading position in conditions of political competition, certain psychological and social qualities are really needed. However, their selection varies significantly. Depending on historical eras and characteristics of specific states of the world. Even today, the personal qualities that give a chance for political success differ significantly, for example, in Sweden, Afghanistan, Korea, Ethiopia, etc. In addition, in many, mainly undemocratic states, political leaders often become mediocre, gray individuals who do not have a strong personality.

From the point of view of the situational approach, leadership qualities are relative. One person can show the traits of a leader at a rally, another in everyday political and organizational work, a third in interpersonal communication, etc. In general, leaders are distinguished mainly by their willingness to take responsibility for solving a particular problem, as well as their competence.

The paradox of the “refuted” theory is as follows. Our analysis of publications on leadership reveals a contradictory picture of the attitude of researchers towards the legitimacy of further use of the theory of leadership traits. The overwhelming majority of researchers, either explicitly or implicitly, subscribe to the opinion that the theory of leadership traits has become obsolete. And simultaneously with this recognition (and contrary to it), in subsequent parts of their works they necessarily call certain specific psychological characteristics as “true leadership” traits, thereby actually, and not in words, sharing the ideology of the leadership theory we are analyzing. Thus, the theory of leadership traits in modern psychological science “lives and wins” despite the recognition of its empirical and conceptual inconsistency.

Since leadership researchers have not the slightest reason to count on a massive neurotic fragmentation of consciousness, the reason must rather be sought in the degree of reliability of the empirics that supposedly refutes the theory of leadership traits. Carrying out a search in this direction, another paradox is revealed: almost a hundred years of scientific development of the topic of leadership have not led to the construction of a holistic understanding of the essence of leadership as a social phenomenon, shared by at least the majority of scientists.

Until now, “leadership is like that abominable snowman, whose footprints are everywhere, but he himself is nowhere to be seen.” And this automatically means that the inconsistency of empirical data on leadership traits may be predetermined not by the falsity of the original theoretical premise, but simply by the fact that different researchers, under the general slogan “leadership,” study outwardly similar, but psychologically different social phenomena.

Conclusion.

The first of the four theories, the “leader trait theory,” explains the phenomenon of leadership by outstanding personality traits. According to this theory, any person cannot be a leader.True leaders are not those who hold high positions or have power, but those who control the hearts and minds of people. To effectively perform a leadership role requires special skills and qualities, called in modern business lexiconcompetencies. The study of mental, or intellectual, qualities and their connection with leadership has been carried out by many scientists, and, in general, their results coincide in that the level of these qualities is higher in leaders than in non-leaders.

Summarizing the above, we can say that the essence of the “leader trait theory” is that individuals with special personality traits become leaders.. However, subsequent studies have shown that the correlation between these qualities and leadership is quite small. So, if the average intellectual level of followers is low, then being too smart for a leader means facing many problems. This, apparently, was due to the fact that the success of a leader largely depends on his abilities and ability to solve problems and make the right decisions.

Personal business qualities are largely in the nature of skills and abilities acquired and developed by the leader in performing his functions. Their importance for success increases across the levels of the organizational hierarchy. However, their precise measurement is difficult. It has not yet been proven that these qualities are determinative of effective leadership. For example, the business qualities that make someone a leader in a commercial bank are unlikely to be useful for leadership in a research laboratory or theater.

In general, it was not possible to discover common traits among leaders, or even to understand which qualities are more important. The theory of leadership traits, like the concept of personality traits, has led to progress in describing the phenomenon of leadership. This approach still exists today, but now the focus is not on personal qualities, but on job-related skills.

So, there is still no consensus on what qualities a leader should have. Models of leadership traits say nothing about the importance of any one of them. When approaching leadership only from the point of view of trait theory, many aspects of this process remain unaccounted for, for example, the leader-follower relationship, the environmental conditions in which leadership is exercised, etc. Although there is no doubt that a leader must have several basic traits (for example, competence, honesty, etc.) that can inspire the trust of followers, because the degree of his support from the masses depends on this.

In all likelihood, the traits of a leader should be considered not in isolation from the social context, but in connection with it, and not statically, but dynamically. It should be remembered that performing leadership functions develops the qualities necessary for this, that is, in an individual who plays the role of a leader for a long time, the traits required for this are formed and consolidated (sense of responsibility, self-confidence, etc.). What was a social role becomes part of his “I”.

To clarify and concretize the theory of leadership traits, we postulated a system of mutually agreed upon concepts: social group, crisis group consolidation, hierarchization, role diversity, social dominance, dominance-subordination, leadership-followership, management-execution, leadership, leader, follower.

In our understanding, social dominance is the most important group mechanism for overcoming extreme situations. Historically, three types of leadership have been formed, distinguished by the basis on which the interaction between group members occurs: leadership based on power interactions (dominance), leadership based on common goals (leadership) and leadership based on agreement (management).

Accordingly, true leadership should be interpreted as primacy in stimulating, planning and organizing the activity of a group, based on the unity of significant goals among all its members. Leadership is based on the mutually beneficial use of the individual characteristics of group members, and therefore, in the perception of all group members, the roles of leader and follower are correlated as equally necessary and significant for the effective achievement of a group goal.

List of sources used.

1. Andreeva G.M. Social psychology. M.: Aspect-press, 2009
2. Volkova T.R. Career growth. Handbook of personnel management, 2009, No. 2
3. Kartashov S.A., Odegov Yu.G., Kokorev I.A. Recruiting: Hiring personnel. M.: Exam, 2010.
4. Litvak B. G. Management decisions. M.: Bukva, 2010

5. Adair D. Effective leadership . How to develop and apply a leader. skills / D. Adair D. - M.: Eksmo, 2013. - 318 p.

6. Covey S. R. Leadership , based on principles / S. R. Covey. M.: Alpina Business Books, 2012 - 300 p.

7. Landsberg M. Leadership . Vision, inspiration and energy / M. Landsberg. - M.: EKSMO, 2010. - 215 p.

8. Vasiliev V.K. Paradoxes of the theory of leadership traits.

9. Friedman M. The Art and Science of Leadership Strategy. A new approach to corporate events. management / M. Friedman. M.: GRAND: Fair-Press, 2011. - 271 p.

10 Stepanov D. Monarch: How to become a leader, win and not lose: Strategy, tactics and psychology, universal for all times and peoples / D. Stepanov. - St. Petersburg. : Krylov, 2012. - 190 p. SOUNB;

11.Rue D. Genuine leadership / D. Ruhe. M.: GRAND: Fair-Press, 2009. - 349 p.

12. Rogov E. I. Psychology of the group / Rogov E. I. M.: VLADOS, 2007. - 430 p.

APPENDIX 1

Table 1. Theories of leadership qualities

APPENDIX 2

Table 2. Qualities most often found in leaders

APPENDIX 3

Table 3. Features of approaches to studying the phenomenon of leadership.

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

080200.550000.000 VR

Developed by

Gryadova N.V.

Check

Panfilova O.V.

T. Cont.

N. Cont.

Ilchenko

Approved

Borisova L.V.

“Advantages and disadvantages of the theory of leadership qualities”

Lit.

Sheets

DSTU, department "UMM"

Change

Sheet

Document

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

Change

Sheet

Document no.

Signature

Date

Sheet

One of the first to put forward this thesis was the American scientist and business consultant Jim Collins in his book “From Good to Great. Why some companies make breakthroughs and others don't" (Mann, Ivanov and Ferber, 2010). Based on the results of his six-year study, he argued that the most valuable qualities for a leader are modesty and great determination.

Later, Dusya Vera of the University of Ontario and independent researcher from Texas Antonio Rodriguez-Lopez, based on an extensive literature review and interviews with many managers, identified 13 characteristic traits of a “humble” leader:

• Open to new ways of making decisions
• Wants to learn from others
• Recognizes his limits and his mistakes and wants to correct them
• Takes a pragmatic approach to failure
• Asks for advice
• Helps others develop
• Sincerely wants to serve the cause
• Respects others
• Shares praise and rewards with colleagues
• Calm about success
• Not narcissistic and does not accept flattery
• Doesn't suffer from complacency
• Economical

Strengths of Humble Leaders

Vera and Rodriguez-Lopez argue that humble leaders give a company a competitive advantage because they are able to recognize opportunities, recognize and respond to external threats. Companies run by humble leaders tend to encourage employees to learn, provide better customer service, and adapt effectively to change.

Rob Nielsen and his colleagues at Seattle University believe that a humble leadership style promotes solidarity among subordinates with the leader, greater trust in the leader, increased employee motivation, and greater willingness to sacrifice. According to Collins, another reason humble leaders are successful in the long term is that they place great importance on grooming their successor to ensure the company's future success. In addition, with them the company usually does not face public scandals related to fraud and the like.

Examples? The authors of the book “Leadership Virtues: Challenges for Global Managers” (1) Armenio Rego and Miguel Pina e Cunha tell the story of Anne Mulcahy, who worked for Xerox for many years, even without thinking about taking a leadership position in it. However, she was appointed CEO at a time when the company was almost bankrupt, led it out of a severe crisis and successfully managed a multi-billion dollar business for 8 years. Knowing that she lacked expertise in some financial matters, she did not hesitate to learn from her employees. Anne always avoided publicity, rarely gave interviews, and did not care about fame. And she made sure to prepare a worthy successor for herself - Ursula Burns (2).

And this is just one example. Sam Walton (Wal-Mart), Herb Kelleher (Southwest Airlines), Ingvar Kamprad (IKEA), Mary Kay Ash (Mary Kay Inc.) are just some of the big names on the list of “humble” leaders featured in the book.

1. “The Virtues of Leadership: Contemporary Challenges for Global Managers” (Oxford University Press, 2012)

2. Anne Mulcahy stepped down as CEO in 2009, remaining as chairman of the board.

The most effective leadership style in business is the so-called “transformational leadership”. T

Transformational leaders tend to be honest, they inspire people to be optimistic about the future, they set goals and motivate people to achieve those goals, and they are friendly with their team (a more detailed description of transformational leadership can be found at the end of the article).

However, leadership is a very complex and multifaceted concept. Very often you have to select the required leadership style in accordance with different situations. That's why it's important to know which leadership style will be most relevant to your business. The more you learn about the different types of leadership, the easier it will be for you to run your business.

Let's look at some common leadership styles that you can adopt (the styles are presented in alphabetical order):

1. Autocratic leadership

Autocratic leadership is transformational leadership in its extreme form, in which leaders retain power over other people. Team members and other employees do not have the opportunity to make suggestions, even if those suggestions would be of great benefit to both the team and the company as a whole.

The advantage of autocratic leadership is that it is very effective. Decisions are made quickly and work is completed efficiently.

The disadvantage of such a system is that people do not like to be “under pressure.” Therefore, with this leadership style, the likelihood of frequent employee absenteeism and labor turnover is very high. However, this style will be very effective in situations involving routine work and work that does not require special qualifications. In such situations, the advantages of total control are more noticeable against the background of the disadvantages.

Autocratic leadership is very often resorted to in moments of crisis, when it is necessary to make decisions very quickly, without taking into account disagreements. For example, in the military industry, an autocratic leadership style is very common; Commanders-in-Chief are responsible for their charges and for making difficult decisions, which allows soldiers to focus solely on carrying out orders and assignments.

2. Bureaucratic leadership

Bureaucratic leaders work on paper. They follow the rules flawlessly and make sure that everyone else follows all procedures as expected.

This type of leadership is ideal for those whose work involves serious risks (working with machinery, toxic substances or working at heights) or large sums of money. Also, bureaucratic leadership is well suited for organizations with routine activities (for example, industry).

The disadvantage of this type of leadership is that it is not suitable for organizations that rely on flexibility, creativity or innovation.

Most bureaucratic leaders achieve their desired positions through their ability to adapt and adhere to rules, rather than through their qualifications or experience. This can negatively affect the leader's credibility as team members will no longer value his advice and him as a leader in general.

3. Business leadership

This leadership style occurs when team members agree to obey a specific leader only to complete a specific task. These “deals” typically occur when an organization pays its team for their efforts and quality work. But the leader also has the right to “punish” team members if their performance does not meet the stated standard.

It may seem strange, but business leadership also has its benefits. For example, in this leadership style, all roles and responsibilities are predetermined. In addition, ambitious workers, motivated by some kind of reward, will always be successful and financially prosperous.

The downside to this style is that team members may not like such control. They may feel disadvantaged, which can lead to turnover.

Business leadership is sometimes viewed more as a type of management than a leadership style because it involves short-term interaction between the leader and the team. It is also not suitable for situations where creativity and specific knowledge are encouraged. However, this leadership style has been applied quite successfully in other situations.

4. Democratic/Participatory Leadership

A democratic leader allows his team to actively participate in decision making, but the final decision rests with him. He encourages creativity and his team members are often involved in project work and decision making.

There are many benefits of democratic leadership. The team of such a leader is very satisfied with the working conditions, which increases their productivity, because they have the right to participate in the life of the organization. This leadership style also helps develop certain skills. Team members do not feel pressured from outside or from above, so they strive to work hard, not so much for financial reward, but out of enthusiasm.

Since the whole team is involved in the decision-making process, it takes a little longer, but the result always lives up to expectations. This approach is used in business when teamwork is simply necessary and when the quality of the work performed is important.

The disadvantage of democratic leadership is that in situations where speed of decision-making or work efficiency is important, such leadership can only do harm. For example, during crisis situations, the team spends valuable time considering the opinions of each member. Another disadvantage of this style is that not all team members are able to give reasonable and valuable advice due to their lack of experience.

5. People/relationship-oriented leadership

Leaders in this area are completely focused on organizing, supporting and developing people in the team. This type of leadership is very similar to democratic leadership, which encourages teamwork and creative collaboration, and is inversely related to problem-oriented leadership.

A relationship-oriented leader treats all team members equally. He is friendly and always ready to help, pays attention to each member of the team, which knows that if necessary, the leader can be relied upon.

The advantage of such leadership is that everyone aspires to such a leader, everyone wants to be part of his team. His team members are very productive and are not afraid to take risks because they know that their leader will certainly help them if necessary.

The downside to this type of leadership is that some leaders may become too focused on developing their team and not paying enough attention to project work.

6. Servant Leadership

The term “serving leadership” was coined in the 1970s by Robert Greenleaf. Such leadership presupposes the presence of a leader who is often not even perceived as such. When someone in your organization manages people through routine helping, that person can be described as a “service leader.”

A serving leader always sets a good example for everyone. He is always honest and leads wisely. In some ways, servant leadership is somewhat similar to democratic leadership because the entire team participates in decision making. However, a service leader prefers to stay on the sidelines, not be the center of attention, and allow their team to make their own decisions about their work.

Proponents of servant leadership argue that this is a good way to do business in a world where great emphasis is placed on the merits of the individual, and where a servant leader can achieve power through his virtues, ideas and ethics. This approach helps create a good company culture and leads to improved morale for each team member.

However, some people believe that in a competitive environment, people who practice servant leadership may lag far behind those who choose a different leadership style. Servant leadership takes time to implement adequately and is not suitable for situations where quick decisions need to be made or something needs to be accomplished in a short period of time.

However, servant leadership can be found in areas of life such as politics, as well as in societies where a leader is elected to lead a group, committee, organization, or community.

7. Indifferent Leadership

The name comes from the French Laissez-Faire, which means “to provide freedom of action.” This style requires a leader who allows his team to work as they see fit. This leadership style can also arise naturally when a manager does not have the ability to supervise the performance of his people at an adequate level (besides the performance of his duties).

Indifferent leaders may give their team complete freedom of action, as well as the right to set their own deadlines for completing work. However, if necessary, he can help the team with advice without interfering in their work process.

This type of leadership can be effective when the leader monitors people's work and communicates regularly with his team members. Also, such leadership is effective if individual members of your team are experienced, independent and proactive people.

The main benefit of hands-off leadership is that team members are more satisfied with their work due to their freedom and autonomy, which increases productivity.

The disadvantage of this leadership style may be the disorganization of team members, their inexperience and lack of motivation to work, which can harm the effectiveness of work.

8. Problem-oriented leadership

Problem-oriented leaders are focused on getting the job done, which is similar to autocratic leadership. They actively designate the scope of work, distribute responsibilities, structure the work, plan, organize and control its implementation. Such leaders also perform other tasks, such as setting and maintaining performance standards.

The benefit of problem-oriented leadership is that it ensures that work gets done on time, and it is especially useful when your team members are unable to manage their time efficiently.

However, with problem-oriented leadership, very little attention is paid to the team itself, which entails the same problems as with autocratic leadership: decreased motivation and staff turnover.

Advice:

In practice, most leaders combine problem-oriented and person-oriented leadership.

9. Charismatic leadership

Charismatic leadership is somewhat reminiscent of transformational leadership, since such leaders inspire and energize their team and arouse enthusiasm in their work. This ability to generate desire and enthusiasm is a great advantage.

The difference between charismatic and transformational leadership lies in the role of the leader. Transformational leaders strive to transform their teams and the organization as a whole. A charismatic leader focuses on himself. He may not have the desire to change anything in the team or organization.

The disadvantage of such a leader is that he believes more in himself than in his team. In addition, when such a leader leaves, the entire organization may suffer. A charismatic leader is confident that he always does everything right, even if other employees point out his shortcomings. This overconfidence can be detrimental to both the team and the organization as a whole.

In the eyes of everyone around them, the success of an organization depends entirely on the presence of a charismatic leader. Therefore, charismatic leadership involves greater responsibility and requires long-term cooperation from the leader.

10. Transformational leadership

As discussed earlier in this article, transformational leadership is perfect for running a business.

Transformational leaders expect 100% commitment from each team member, and from themselves in particular, and also motivate their colleagues. With this leadership style, high productivity and involvement of each team member are very common occurrences.

The downside to transformational leadership is that not only does the team need support, but it is also important for the leader to have someone he can rely on.

Therefore, business and transformational leadership are often combined. Business leaders (or managers) ensure that routine work is completed to a high standard, while transformational leaders support employee initiative and add variety to work.

It is also important to resort to other leadership styles when necessary. The choice of style, then, will depend on the people you are working with and the situation as a whole.

• Leadership, Management, Company Management

"The best leader is the one whose existence people hardly know. When the work is done, they say: we did it ourselves."

~ Lao Tzu

Effective leader is a person who directs the behavior of other people towards achieving common goals. The leader exerts influence so that the team achieves the desired results while maintaining standards and demonstrating above-average quality. Moreover, people must do this with desire.

Leadership is a complex interaction that includes:

• participants - and performers;
• the process of exerting influence;
• the result is not only achieving the goal, but also the commitment of people, the ability to work in a team, and improving the corporate culture.

Change management - the basis of the role of a leader in a modern organization

Effective leader needed where change is introduced. If no change is expected, then you can limit yourself to a manager. However, change is all around us, it comes in different forms and types. Some people create changes themselves, while others come to them. In any case, it is necessary to adapt to new conditions.

In modern business, change occurs continuously, unexpectedly and very quickly. The role of the leader in a modern organization increases, more and more effort and experience are required from him. For example, with the development of franchising, a leader must not only manage staff in the office, but also demonstrate effective franchisee management.

Qualities of a modern leader

Effective leader captivates people both in word and deed. Others need to be inspired by their own example, only then will they sincerely strive to break all records. The famous Jack Welch worked for 20 years as CEO of General Electric. He created his own formula and always used it:

1. have a huge supply of energy;
2. energize those around you;
3. have a competitive advantage;
4. always get things done.

Jack Welch's energy was enormous, it energized others, the businessman had an extraordinary spirit of competition and put his plans into action in the best way.

Role, responsibility, task and source of strength of the leader

• The role is that effective leader must find followers.
• The challenge is to make necessary and constructive changes.
• The responsibility is to make changes so that the results meet the goals of everyone involved.
• The source of strength is trust, which is built on the basis of sincere service to your followers.

The emotional task of a leader

According to studies, 2/3 of all knowledge and skills so necessary for a modern leader relate to the emotional sphere. Basics quality of a modern leader is the ability to control people using emotions. Talented leaders know how to manage the mood of the entire team. If you give positive emotions, people will show their best abilities.

Effective leader inspires and resonates with people, resulting in them working with passion and performing at their best. Every leader in the modern world must have emotional competence, which determines the ability to manage not only one’s own emotions, but also the emotions of others.

An effective leader knows how to create competitive advantages

Leader in the modern world is a person who can... The strength of this team is a significant competitive advantage. Effective leader knows how to get people to work together, how to motivate them to achieve the best results.

In addition, a skillful leader knows how to lead individual aspirations to a result that is many times greater than the result of the personal contribution of each team member.

Enterprising Leader

The modern economy is characterized by dynamism, unpredictability, and a competitive environment. The business sphere is changing rapidly, new formats are emerging. Skills in demand franchisee management, naming, etc. Companies require a new type of manager: entrepreneurial leaders. It’s no surprise that entrepreneurial leadership is evolving today. The manager is the owner of his own business, which means he:

takes initiative and energizes people as if they play not just an important, but a critical role in the company;

demonstrates his entrepreneurial talents, is constantly in search of new opportunities, finds and uses them;

takes risks, takes on untested business ideas, sets goals and inspires people to achieve them;

takes responsibility for all failures of his team, learns from mistakes, uses them as experience and moves towards success.

Effective leader in entrepreneurship, he is always confident in himself, otherwise he will not be able to think and lead the team to realize the plans of the entire company and for the benefit of each of its employees. Entrepreneurial leadership not only makes the entire company more productive, it also gives more freedom to the leaders themselves. They unleash the power of their organization and, at the same time, show their own creativity.

Each of us is a leader in a certain area: at work, among friends, in the family. For many, being a leader means controlling others. Those who hold this viewpoint one day discover that the more they try to control others, the less influence they have over them. Paradox!
For some, leadership is directly related to power, but they forget that you can be a leader even if you occupy a completely ordinary position. When a man sees that something needs to be done, his ordinary position will not deter him from taking the initiative; he will simply take responsibility and do what he has to do. True leadership has nothing to do with superiority over others, high position or prestige. It is associated with the disclosure and realization of the potential of the people around us. Leadership is not the power of one, but the fruit of the joint work of many people.

Unfortunately, today many men do not want to be leaders because of their own apathy and laziness. They would be more than happy to live their lives quietly and simply, while others are responsible for them. However, society needs leaders. If you have to be a leader, will you be up to the challenge?

Every man who has five qualities, which we will tell you about in our column today, can be a leader.

1. Ability to make decisions

A good leader can think through every task from start to finish. The decision must be made during the calm before the storm, and the coming stress, fear and chaos will confirm your decision. In any situation, there is an opportunity to retreat, a kind of emergency exit, a chance to escape responsibility and choose safety and tranquility. But isn’t victory, a worthy way out of a difficult situation, the best reward? A true leader makes a decision and, having made it once, does not doubt the correctness of his choice. He knows what is right and does not suffer in the grip of indecision, but accepts the challenge with equanimity. A good leader does not panic, does not yell, and does not try to hide his helplessness by feigning frantic activity. Next to such a leader, everyone feels extremely confident; he is like a strong anchor in a storm.

How to learn to make decisions
Don't wait for a crisis situation to force you to act. Think about your goals and develop a plan for how you will respond to a crisis situation, what you are going to do in case of each specific difficulty. Don't wait until the problem grows to enormous proportions and you panic and begin to lose ground. Practice on some everyday tasks and you will see: no panic, no hesitation - you will just remember your plan and follow it.

2. Willingness to take risks

He who doesn't take risks doesn't drink champagne. High achievements come only to those who are willing to take risks. A leader who chooses only the beaten path will never achieve success. The prospect of living without risk is, of course, attractive; this safe haven of security and comfort has often lured many into the trap of apathy and routine. A weak person will always hesitate to take a risk: he is attracted by what he can get as a result, but at the same time paralyzed by the fear of failure. Remember that you can also learn a lesson from failure: without ever failing, a person will not know the limits of his capabilities, his potential, his abilities. Anyone who never has enough courage does not notice that he is taking the biggest risk possible: he risks stopping his development, becoming lazy in his soul and not noticing anything around him that would be worth his efforts.

How to learn to take risks
Fear of risky ventures is common. You can't take big risks if you haven't taken small risks. Therefore, find for yourself in everyday life the opportunity to take risks for minor reasons. It could be as simple as a conversation with a stranger. Think about what scares you: for example, having to speak in public - and do it. If you overcome yourself every day, you will develop the ability to overcome your own fear and understand that it is still worth taking risks. Eventually you will learn to take big risks when your position as a leader requires it.

3. Willingness to share rewards with subordinates

A good leader, highly confident in his own abilities, humbly admits that no success is his own achievement, no matter how great his role. He is deeply grateful to all those whose efforts achieved this great result. A leader understands human nature: all people want recognition, they want to be appreciated. When an organization or just a group of people achieves success, a true leader shows his gratitude to his subordinates. When people see a leader being humble and sharing success with them, they are even more willing to follow him.

How to learn to share success with subordinates
Sharing success is easy. Often, a public thank you or a simple “Thank you” card is enough for a person to understand that he is appreciated. When you thank or praise someone, try to be as specific as possible. This way the person will understand that you are well aware of what exactly he is doing; will feel that they are interested in him.

4. Willingness to take the blame

This is exactly the parameter by which you can distinguish a good leader from a bad one. A true leader is ready for two opposing scenarios at the same time. He is ready to share success with his subordinates and at the same time knows how to behave if things end in failure. If a leader starts looking for someone to blame for a general failure and abdicates all responsibility for it, people will lose trust in him. A true leader takes responsibility for all the consequences of decisions made, including bad ones. Even if the failure is the subordinate's fault, a true leader will think that he did something wrong. He may have given unclear instructions or placed the person in the wrong position. Once the leader has taken responsibility, he begins to take steps to correct the situation.

How to learn to take blame
When you take responsibility for failure, you must be sincere. Admitting your own failure should grow from your confidence that it is you who are primarily responsible for the matter. If you admitted guilt just for show, it will be like a boy, not like a man. Don't pretend to be a martyr or seek approval for taking responsibility. In addition, there is no need to publicly flaunt this responsibility and then in an informal setting tell your subordinates that you took the blame on yourself to save their skins. It will look fake and undermine your credibility.

5. A true leader has strong nerves that help him survive storms and disappointments and start every day with a clean slate, without focusing on his successes and without being depressed by defeats.

Even the strongest leaders in history have had moments of stunning success and brutal defeat. A true leader focuses on what he can change and what he can influence, and the past is not one of those things. If you fail, you will learn from it and then immediately stop worrying - and failure will benefit you. Constantly tormenting over what has already passed will not help you. Moreover, the people who follow you will lose faith in you.

Celebrate victories with your employees and move on. If a leader is fixated on past achievements, this indicates that he is not setting new goals for himself. As we are taught, it is often the arrogance of leaders that causes their decline.

How to stop focusing on the past
Read biographies of great people. As you learn more about the lives of great leaders, you will realize that even they experienced moments of profound failure. You will understand that just one failure does not mean that you are incapable of leading. And the example of famous rulers will show you that a good leader can achieve a lot.