Readers, this is the first of many blogs that I will submit about corporate leadership. The purpose of this blog (which is an initiative) is to discuss the current leadership model(s), providing insight into their strengths and weaknesses, make projections about it's future in this global economy and offer solutions (alternative leadership models/behaviors).
The impetus for my actions comes from almost 13 years experience working in Corporate America where the roots of my frustrations are derived. My thoughts are that leadership continues to show wrinkles, masking a face or a facade of inclusiveness where the physical manifestations of diversity are paraded to society as a badge of success; however, the truth is that real diversity is a product of the acceptance of cultural and ideological differences.
The challenge for the latter is to produce innovation through unmatched creativity and to do so without stagnation in processes. As more organizations/MNC's (Multinational Corporations) move to teams, away from the traditional group format of functional parts, the more they will rely on diverse teams or cross-functional teams. This fact along with the increase in global competition where many new-comers from emerging economies will help drive the traditional form of leadership out, as the pressure to outperform will lead many to falsify results. As a consequence, companies will desire methods to assess the performance of its leaders against the compensation rendered, for a job supposedly "well done."
So, I invite you to join me in a set of lively conversations about leadership, how it has failed us and how it continues to produce the same coterie of leaders that force everyone who aspires to leadership to just "do what you're told!"
Historically, leadership has been a misunderstood concept where the general perception of an effective leader ranged from poor to the outstanding in perfomance. If the average person were ask to list historical figures of significance that exemplify leadership at its finest, most lists would have a similar composition and would include people like Teddy Roosevelt, Ghandi, Martin L. King, George Washington and Margaret Thatcher. However, when we compose exclusive lists like this, we fail to distinguish between the moral compass of leadership decisions and those behaviors that constitutes effective leadership. As extolled by many, is the ability of a leader to influence the masses where the degree to which this is performed demonstrates one's leadership capacity. Despite the direction, many have been lead to accomplish great things for society and almost equally, very many have toiled to destroy it. Regardless of the ethical consequence(s) of their efforts, leaders have come in various forms and have exhibited a similar capacity to inspire others, willing followers to perform in a specified manner. This ability to modify the behavior of another (in mass), reflects the essence of leadership, in its purest form. The choice to influence people to conduct themselves for the good of society is the ethical dilemma for a leader. Along with authenticity, ethics represents the biggest challenge for today's leaders.
ReplyDeleteMany would argue that leadership has a responsibility to uphold an ethical standard of behavior, one that's suppose to benefit the society (greater good for the many). However, when we examine the historical events of world significance (good or evil), we identify only those in-charge of the movement on both sides. Effective can be affixed to either where the ethics or moral compass of any leader is sadly assessed in retrospect.