|← About Fighting Poverty in New York||Youth Gangs →|
Comparison of Two Types of Leadership
Leadership is defined as the social process under which a person can utilize the support of others to achieve a common goal and forms one of the most relevant and important aspect of organizations. The two different styles of leaders this essay seeks to examine are the charismatic and participative styles of leaders. Charismatic style of leadership is composed of a system where the leader assumes the position of role model thereby positively influencing members of his team to follow his footsteps. It is referred to as a style that drives the organization to move forward except in cases where the leader becomes overconfident in his abilities and assumes total control of all the affairs of the organization. This can totally disorient the organization if the leader resigns because employees attach the success or failure of the organization to the leader. In a Democratic Leadership or Participative Leadership, the leader makes the final discussion on an issue but only after soliciting for the views and opinions of others. This style of leadership not only gives the employees the opportunity to feel in control of the affairs of the organization but also gives them the opportunity to develop their skills. While this style of leadership comes with a lot of benefits, it has the disadvantage of reducing the pace at which decisions are made and work performed and is best put to use in instances where team work is required, quality is important than all aspects of the process.
Leadership in Nursing Philosophy
The role leadership plays in nursing practice cannot be overlooked because nursing practice is influenced by forms and styles of leadership. Improving on the general well being of nurses and hospital staff, achieving organizational efficiency and maintaining sustainable competitive advantage over competitors through strategic planning and responsive leadership can help defray the high costs of Medicare incurred by organizations. This is more so when it is borne in mind that factors that translate hamper best practice environment and quality of care revolve around the failure to encompass the effects of external environment of strategic leadership. Nursing practice therefore demands a fully responsive that is has the capacity to influence and sets high standards for emulation.
Transformational style of leadership fits into the philosophy of leadership in nursing. Transformational leadership may be regarded as an inspirational style of leadership, in which the members of an organisation are influenced to move in a set direction through the recognition and satisfaction of their wants, needs, aspirations and values. It encompasses According to Nagelkerk (2006) “it is very much a people focused view of leadership, one in which the leader defines direction, inspires, motivates, challenges and develops those around them”.
In their discussion about the distinctions between authentic transformational leadership and pseudo transformational leadership, Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) note that transformational leadership is only authentic when it is grounded on moral foundations. As such, transformational leadership contains four components: idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration. They argue that, “if the leadership is transformational, its charisma or idealized influence is envisioning, confident, and sets high standards for emulation.” Transformational leadership does not see values as mere personal attributes. This is because transformational leadership is based on a high consistency and commitment to values. As such, ethical transformational leaders are aware of their own values, beliefs, and principles. To build a principled culture, transformational leaders have to use every opportunity to communicate their vision and shape the ethical environment of their schools. Finally, transformational leaders put values as central to their decision making processes.
Leadership and Management
Whereas some leaders and managers see no difference between leadership and management, a great deal of literature posits that increasing organizational complexity calls for greater specialization and delineation of specific functions of leadership and management. The analysis of similarities and differences between leadership and management revolves around the understanding that they serve two distinct and different purposes. Leadership focuses on vision whereas management focuses on the implementation of the vision.
West-Burnham (2008) posits, “A clear way of differentiating the two is to say that leadership promotes new directions while management executes existing directions as efficiently as possible.” This means that management focuses on execution of complex projects, control and is task oriented. Leadership of on the other hand is engaging and focuses on the people. The role of leadership in organizational setting is oriented towards driving change whereas management is oriented towards adapting to the change and does not initiate the change process.