Negotiation Skills And The Art Of Keeping Everyone Happy

Leadership and leadership styles

Leadership styles and leadership in general is a crucial issue today when the borders were opened to trade and global interaction. Speaking of groups, organizations and individuals is essential to mention the drivers, the leaders who succeed in their organizations and to guide their subordinates to do so.

The leader as a person has many flaws and virtues that must know, this involves first looking within oneself, to know and then understand others and reflect what you want to achieve what you want with others to achieve success. This analysis lead us to understand and then meet each other and thus improve our performance as leaders we are, whether for personal gain and / or our organization or groups.

The essence of leadership are the followers. In other words, what makes a person a leader is the willingness of people to follow. Also, people tend to follow those who offer ways to satisfy their wants and needs. Leadership and motivation are closely interrelated. If you understand the motivation, you will appreciate better what people want and the reason for their actions.

Conceptual Framework:

The leadership comes from the English word “to lead”, which means lead.
Harold Koontz is the art or process of influencing people to strive voluntarily and enthusiastically in meeting group goals.
According to the Dictionary leadership is defined as the direction, leadership or leadership of a political party, social group or other community. The Dictionary of Behavioral Sciences (1956), defines it as the “qualities of personality and ability to promote the guidance and control of other individuals.”

Other definitions are: – “Leadership is an attempt to interpersonal influence directed through the communication process, the achievement of one or more goals”

Chiavenato, Idalberto (1993), emphasizes the following:

“Leadership is interpersonal influence exercised in a situation, aimed through the process of human communication to the achievement of one or several specific objectives.”

Leadership in social psychology: Refers to the role of personality in the analysis of small groups.

In Sociology: The influence can be exerted on a community.

Rallph M. Stogdill, in his summary of leadership theories and research, notes that “there are almost as many definitions of leadership as people who have tried to define the concept. Here we take the case of managerial leadership as the process of directing the activities of members of a group and to influence them. This definition has four important implications.

First, leadership involves other people, employees or followers. Group members, given their willingness to accept the orders of the leader, help define the leader’s position and allow the lapse of the process of leadership but who would send the qualities of leadership styles would be irrelevant.

Secondly leadership involves an unequal distribution of power between leaders and group members. Group members are not without power, can shape, and indeed they do, the group’s activities in different ways. However, generally, the leader will have more power.

The third aspect of leadership is the ability to use different forms of power to influence the behavior of the followers of different ways. In fact, some leaders have influenced the soldiers to kill and some leaders have influenced employees to make personal sacrifices for the benefit of the company. The power to influence leads to the fourth aspect of leadership styles.
The fourth is a combination of the first three, but recognizes that leadership is about values. James MacGregor Burns argues that the leader who ignores the moral component of leadership will be remembered as a scoundrel or worse. Moral leadership refers to the values ​​and needs to be offered to fans enough information on alternatives so that when it comes time to respond to the proposal of the leadership of a leader, to choose wisely.
Historical framework

Are leaders born or made? This question has prevailed throughout history. It has been a source of discussion and controversy, which has not yet been satisfactorily resolved.

In general, one can interpret and analyze leadership styles from two perspectives:

1) As a leader’s personal qualities
2) As a function within an organization, community or society.

Although initially defined leadership preferably in the first perspective, at present, mainly due to research in the field of organizational theory and administration, tends increasingly to dominate the conception of leadership as a function within organizations and society.

Leadership styles as a personal quality

At the dawn of history the concept of authority was surrounded by a magical aura – religious. An individual to demonstrate their superiority to the community became the leader. The leader was conceived as a being superior to other group members, with special attributes.

It was felt that these special powers or attributes are passed biologically from parent to child or was a gift from the gods, that is, born with them. However, even then, we looked through the transmission of knowledge and skills to create leaders.

Today with the rise of psychology, has tried to substantiate this view from the strong psychological bond we have with our father, the first archetypal figure we have. Psychological studies on leadership argue that we seek in our leaders gave us the assurance that the paternal symbol.

For too long we have tried to define and measure the leadership traits and skills of leaders, however, has not been until now a consensus.

The lists and explanations are very diverse, large and heterogeneous.

These listings reflect only the true characteristics of a leader, the values ​​prevalent in society or the image of the ideal leader.

Although now no longer thought that these are supernatural abilities and skills that make a leader are common to all, if one accepts that these leaders have a greater degree.

The leadership function within the organization

As it strengthens the theory of organizations, especially in this century, the study has gained strength as a function of leadership within organizations.

This perspective emphasizes the characteristics or behavior of the leader, but “circumstances over which groups of people up and organize their activities towards objectives, and how the role of leadership is analyzed in terms of a dynamic relationship.”

According to this perspective, the leader is the result of the needs of a group. Operationally, a group tends to act or speak through one of its members. When everyone tries to do both a result could be confusing or ambiguous.

The need of a leader is evident and real, and this increases as the group’s goals are more complex and extensive. Therefore, to organize and act as a unit, members of a group elect a leader.

Leadership styles: Features

The leader of the group is a tool to achieve their goals and personal skills are valued to the extent that they are useful to the group.

The leader is not the capacity or ability in themselves, but because these features are perceived by the group as necessary to achieve the goal. Therefore, the leader has to be analyzed in terms or function within the group. The leader is different from the other members of a group or society to exert greater influence on the activities and organization of these.

The leader acquires status to get the group or community achieve their goals. Your support is that it gets to the members of your group, community or society, more than anything else.

The leader has to distribute power and responsibility among members of their group. This distribution plays an important role in decision-making and, therefore, also support the group gives. As leadership is a function of group, it is important to analyze not only the characteristics of this but also the context in which the group operates.

It is considered that these characteristics determine who will become the group leader. It has been found that an individual who stands out as a leader in a constitutional organization does not necessarily stand out in a democratic situation, less structured. Depending on whether the situation requires quick and immediate action or permits deliberation and planning, leadership may fall on different people.

In short, “the leader is a product of its features, but their functional relationships with specific individuals in a specific situation.”

Leadership styles

When it has been assigned the responsibility of leadership and authority, is the task of achieving the goals leader working with and through his followers. The leaders have shown many different approaches to how to meet their responsibilities in relation to their followers. The most common approach to analyze the behavior of the leader is to classify the various types of existing leadership styles. Styles vary according to the duties which the leader must play alone, the responsibilities you want to accept his superiors and his philosophical commitment to the realization and fulfillment of the expectations of their subordinates.

Many terms have been used to define leadership styles, but perhaps the most important has been the description of the three basic leadership styles: the autocratic leader, participative leader and the leader of free rein.

Leadership styles: Autocratic

The autocratic leader assumes full responsibility for making decisions, initiates actions, direct, motivate and control the subordinate. The decision and gluttony are centered on the leader. You can consider that only he is competent and capable of making important decisions, you may feel that their subordinates are unable to guide themselves or may have other reasons to take a solid position of strength and control. The reply requested from subordinates is obedience and adherence to its decisions. The autocrat observes the performance levels of their subordinates in the hope of avoiding deviations that may arise with respect to its guidelines.

Leadership styles: Participatory

Participatory-leader: Use the query to practice leadership. Not delegate the right to make final decisions and points to his subordinates specific guidelines but check their ideas and views on many decisions that affect them. To be an effective participative leader, listen and analyze seriously the ideas of their subordinates and accept their contributions whenever possible and practical. The leader cultivates participatory decision-making of their subordinates so that their ideas are increasingly useful and mature.
Also drives his subordinates to increase their capacity for self control and urges them to take more responsibility to guide their own efforts. Is a leader who supports subordinates and assumes a position of dictator. However, the final authority on matters of importance is in their hands.

Leadership styles: Free Rein

The leader who takes the vent system or Liberal leader: With this leadership styles, the leader delegated to his subordinates the authority to make decisions can tell his followers “here is a job to do. I do not care how they do provided it is done right. ” This leader expects subordinates to take responsibility for their own motivation, guidance and control. Except for the stipulation of a minimum number of rules, this style of leadership, provides very little contact and support for fans. Clearly, the subordinate must be highly qualified and able to make this approach has a satisfactory outcome.
Of course, there are varying degrees of leadership among these styles were analyzed only three of the defined positions. At one time, separated by some authors and administrators of these styles of leadership and promoted as a panacea for all monitoring needs. Most emphasized the participatory management, although the autocratic style had several advocates who promoted it as the only effective technique. Occasionally there are developers free rein style which they claim is a style uniquely helpful.
Recent trends emphasize the need for adaptation and flexibility in the use of leadership styles, as opposed to the improvement of one of these styles. “It is believed that the current dynamic society are rare administrators whose thoughts and preferences are completely equal and workers with identical capacities and needs. And almost no two organizations with identical goals and objectives. Because of this, it is generally recommended that the administrator take into account a number of factors to determine what style of leadership is appropriate for each situation.

Considerations

The new millennium has transformed the practices of organizations and thus the skills and characteristics that the new business environment demands leaders. The characteristics I have described in this paper we show that the leader of today must have a very different leader for decades, whose pattern is adjusted more to the control and supervision.

A 21 st Century leaders are required a different preparation to meet the needs of modern organizations. Knowledge of more than one language, college, computer skills and communication skills are some of the aspects to be considered to be successful and competitive leadership styles.

The leader of today must master a myriad of functions, which facilitate interaction with the environment and efficiently direct the destinies of the company. To be strategist, organizer and leader proactive. To organize need to know where you are going, how will you organize and learn at each stage lead.

You should know a little of everything, and know all the aspects that can affect an organization, be prepared to face it and be aware that as time progresses also submitted to it at the road useful tools to overcome any adversity, there are also obstacles that obscure the view. It is then where should demonstrate that it can cope with that and with the team that runs face it, resist it, and learn from it for future experiences.