LDR 7980 Assignment Essay 1 Agreeing About Leadership

Running head: Agreeing About Leadership

Assignment Essay 1

Agreeing About Leadership

Ardavan A. Shahroodi

Northeastern University

LDR 7980—Master’s Project Capstone

Professor Courtland Booth

Saturday, April 18, 2015


Assignment Essay 1


All human relations are embedded with the quality of complexity. As such,

understanding the multiple aspects of leadership is a particularly complex matter. Frequently,

the quality of leadership is misinterpreted as an application of coercion or management.

However, leadership, similar to all other aspects of existence, may be dissected, analyzed and

taught on the basis of shared and eternal principles that govern human conduct. In reality, the

lack of agreement on the substance and ramifications of leadership are rooted in humanity’s

inability to come to terms and rectify the less sanguine features of our character and conduct.

What Is Leadership?

All humans have a capacity for leadership. However, this capacity must be nurtured,

developed, educated, encouraged and made conscious of itself. Most importantly, potential

leaders need to understand the exercise of leadership as an inherently moral and ethical

endeavor. In the absence of an all-consuming ethical dimension, an act of leadership is at worst

an act of coercion and at best an exercise in management. Leadership is defined as a “process

whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse,

2013, p. 5). Indeed, “without influence, leadership does not exist” (Northouse, 2013, p. 5). The

indispensable value of leadership training is in teaching would be leaders how to influence others

competently, effectively and ethically. In this spirit, the innate value of leadership training is

also in lifting the confidence and morale of fledgling present and future leaders with respect to

their potential to make a positive difference in this world.

The qualities and habits of leadership in their truest form are egalitarian and democratic,


accessible to all through their actions and their intrapersonal and interpersonal postures and

conduct. In essence, all individuals may fulfill the promise of becoming leaders in their lives

through their present or future knowledge and decisions without having ever led something in the

past. Nevertheless, Whetten and Cameron (2011) observe that “most of the time people are not

displaying leadership behaviors. People choose to enter a state of leadership when they choose

to adopt a certain mind-set and implement certain key skills” (p. 538). Here, Quinn (2004) adds,

“understanding that leadership is a temporary, dynamic state brings us to a radical redefinition of

how we think about, enact, and develop leadership. We come to discover that most of the time,

most people…are not leaders. We discover that anyone can be a leader. Most of the time, none

of us are leaders” (as cited in Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 538).

Leadership must also be defined in terms of what it is not and thereby its relationship

with the elements of coercion and power. Here coercion is described as “the use of force to

effect change. To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may

include manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment” (Northouse, 2013, p. 11).

Consequently, it must be emphasized that,

“Leaders who use coercion are interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in

the wants and needs of subordinates. Using coercion runs counter to working with followers to

achieve a common goal” (Northouse, 2013, p. 11).

Leadership is also innately related to the element of power that is the “the capacity to

influence. People have power when they have the ability to effect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and

courses of action” (Northouse, 2013, p. 9). French and Raven (1959) proposed


“Five common and important bases of power: referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and

coercive…Each of these bases of power increases a leader’s capacity to influence the attitudes,

values, or behaviors of others” (as cited in Northouse, 2013, p. 9).

In order to identify and distinguish leadership characteristics, those qualities must be

compared and contrasted with the traits and modalities of management. Here, both leadership

and management are involved with “working with people” (Northouse, 2013, p. 12) and

“effective goal accomplishment” (p. 12). Fayol (1916) envisioned that the “primary functions of

management…were planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling” (as cited in Northouse, 2013,

p. 12) whereas Northouse (2013) observes that,

“The overriding function of management is to provide order and consistency to

organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement.

Management is about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and

constructive change” (p. 13).

Moreover, Bennis and Nanus (1985) maintain that “to manage means to accomplish

activities and master routines, whereas to lead means to influence others and create visions for

change” (as cited in Northouse, 2013, p. 13). Bennis and Nanus (1985) also famously asserted

that “managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (as

cited in Northouse, 2013, p. 13). Additionally, Rost (1991) holds that,

“Leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a

unidirectional authority relationship. Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of

developing mutual purposes. Management is directed toward coordinating activities in order to


get a job done. Leaders and followers work together to create real change, whereas managers

and subordinates join forces to sell goods and services” (as cited in Northouse, 2013, p. 13).

When comparing and contrasting managers and leaders, one of the classic reflections has

been that of Zaleznik’s (1977) article titled “Managers and Leaders: Are They Different” (pp.

74-81). Zaleznik (1977) argues that “where managers act to limit choices, leaders develop fresh

approaches to long-standing problems and open issues to new options. To be effective, leaders

must project their ideas into images that excite people and only then develop choices that give

those images substance” (p. 77). Zaleznik (1977) adds that “leaders work from high-risk

position; indeed they are often temperamentally disposed to seek out risk and danger, especially

where the chance of opportunity and reward appears promising” (p. 77).

Zaleznik (1977) also holds that “managers relate to people according to the role they play

in a sequence of events or in a decision-making process, while leaders, who are concerned with

ideas, relate in more intuitive and empathetic ways. The distinction is simply between a

manager’s attention to how things get done and a leader’s to what the event and decisions mean

to participants”. This is one of the important reasons why, Zaleznik (1977) argues, “one often

hears subordinates characterize managers as inscrutable, detached, and manipulative” (p. 78).

On the other hand, Zaleznik (1977) admits that “human relations in leader-dominated structures

often appear turbulent, intense, and at times even disorganized. Such an atmosphere intensifies

individual motivation and often produces unanticipated outcomes” (p. 79).

In one of his most central observations, Zaleznik (1977) contends that,

“Leaders tend to be twice-born personalities, people who feel separate from their

environment. They may work in organizations, but they never belong to them. Their sense of


who they are does not depend on membership, work roles, or other social indicators of identity.

And that perception of identity may form the theoretical basis for explaining why certain

individuals seek opportunities for change” (p. 79).

A number of the elements of the aforementioned observation very much define my own

experience in the Hospitality and Tourism Industries (HTI). As I had an extremely rewarding

and successful experience in the HTI, I was never a part of the inner/upper managerial circles of

those organizations. My career was enriched with numerous commendations from these firms,

however, I moved according to my own principles and conscience emphasizing and promoting

service, empowerment, teamwork, cooperation/collaboration and quality because they were the

right thing to do and because they generated great happiness and enthusiasm among our team

members. I also always remembered from my own studies that expressions of enduring and

transformational leadership must be first and foremost honest, fair and devoted to the welfare of

others.

The Value of Leadership Training: Can You Learn to Lead?

McDonald’s (2015) article inquires if leadership is “something you can actually teach?”

and “whether leadership can be packaged and taught, rather than accumulated through

experience”? In the article, McDonald cites scholars who referring to leadership decry that

“there’s no real definition of it” or that it “is practically anything anyone wants to say it is”. One

scholar holds that in the present environment “leaders are anyone who is so designated”. These

assertions must be responded to on a number of dimensions. Indeed, as an academic subject

matter dedicated to analyzing the state of personal behavior and the conditions of human

relations, leadership may be taught relying “heavily on sociology and psychology in constructing

a scientific approach to the task” (McDonald, 2015).


Present and future leaders may also be taught by emphasizing “role-playing and team-

building exercises to develop leadership experience” (McDonald, 2015). Moreover, “a third

approach involves a deep dive into one’s own values and ideals, with the ultimate goal to be an

authentic enough leader that others will march to the tune you’re playing” (McDonald, 2015). In

reflection, my own experience in Northeastern University’s MS in Leadership Program has

observed the inclusion of “all three approaches, addressing the tangible skills of leadership—the

ability to work in teams, influence others, manage conflict and communicate” (McDonald,

2015). Crucially, the NEU program has allowed me to develop my latent leadership voice, to

reflect deeply on my past leadership experiences and to explore paths for tomorrow’s leadership

challenges. Through this unique educational journey I have come to locate my leadership self.

At the most fundamental level, the NEU’s MS in Leadership Program is founded on

verifiable scientific principles in psychology, sociology, social psychology, organizational

behavior, business/leadership strategy, team work, ethics and human resources theory/practice

[my concentration]. In this light, the overwhelming majority of the assigned/reviewed,

discussed, researched and teachable readings/material is extracted from peer-reviewed and

evidenced-based academic journals. Consequently, contrary to a number of unfortunate and

“uninformed” simplifications and unsupported contentions presented in the McDonald (2015)

article, there remains a solid, verifiable and scientifically proven foundation upholding the basic

principles of leadership science that have been taught to present and future aspiring leaders in the

NEU MS Program. Whetten and Cameron (2011) hold that,

“The problem, of course, is that what is known is not always the same as what is

demonstrated. Although we have known about the principles of effective relationships for a very

long time, the history of humankind illustrates that these principles have not always been


practiced. Especially in our current day, what we know and what we demonstrate do not always

match” (p. 4).

In referring to the development of management skills, Whetten and Cameron (2011)

argue that acquiring,

“The skills needed to manage one’s own life as well as relationships with others—is a

ceaseless endeavor. These skills were largely the same a century ago as they are today. The

basic behavioral principles that lie at the foundation of these skills are timeless” (p. 5).

Consequently, whether it is management or leadership, those managers or leaders who

practice their duties and skills adhering to and respectful of “principles of effective relationships”

(Whetten and Cameron, 2011, p. 4) and according to “what we know” (p. 4) of scientifically

proven and verifiable theories must be perpetually aware that “the basic behavioral principles

that lie at the foundation of those skills are timeless” (p. 5). Moreover, those irreplaceable

principles of effective relationships/basic behavioral principles may be taught, learned by all and

indeed timelessly practiced for eternity.

Once that invaluable foundation has been delineated and clarified for aspiring present and

future leaders, they may embark on their journey free of distortions and misinterpretations

thereby strengthening, solidifying and elevating their leadership experience. This is not to argue

that only those who undergo formal training or academic instruction are entitled to assume

leadership responsibilities, rather it is a call to bring attention to the verifiable principles of

effective relationships whose examples are observed in the conduct of all effective leaders.

Crucially, there remain many aspiring present and future leaders who due to limited

personal resources or inadequate organizational capacity may never experience academically


oriented leadership training albeit grow to perform exceptionally in their fields of endeavor.

Nevertheless, the example of those leaders where “experience” (McDonald, 2015) has enriched

their leadership profile does not negate the value of formal leadership education. This type of

academic preparation guarantees the irreplaceable “frameworks or theories” (Whetten and

Cameron, 2011, p. 539) that “help provide stability and order in the midst of constant change” (p.

539). Whetten and Cameron (2011) in their discussion on “leading positive change” (p. 538)

contend that,

“No organization in a postindustrial, hyper turbulent, twenty-first-century environment

will survive without individuals capable of providing both management and leadership. Leading

change and managing stability, establishing vision and accomplishing objectives, breaking the

rules and monitoring conformance, although paradoxical, all are required to be successful” (p.

538).

In such an environment, frameworks that are learned in formal academic training or

through experience for that matter “clarify complex or ambiguous situations” (Whetten and

Cameron, 2011, p. 540) enabling aspiring leaders to understand,

“Complex situations effectively because they can respond to fewer exceptions.

Individuals without frameworks are left to react to every piece of information as a unique event

or an exception” (Whetten and Cameron, 2011, p. 540).

Here frameworks “can help simplify and clarify the unfamiliar” (Whetten and Cameron,

2011, p. 540). Here, leadership too must always be analyzed and interpreted as a,


“Complex phenomenon that operates across multiple levels of analysis…involves

multiple mediating and moderating factors…and takes place over substantial periods of time”

(Dinh et al, 2014, p. 37).

Moreover, the findings of the research of Mumford, Marks et al (2000) observes that

leaders’,

“Skill development depends on learning as people interact with their environment…skill

development can occur over a long period of time and that this process is progressive, moving

from simple aspects of development to more complex, integrated components” (as cited in Day et

al, 2014, p. 67). Lord and Hall (2005) add that,

“Leadership development is predicted on progressive skills development…changes in

information processing and underlying knowledge structures occur as skills are gradually

refined. Thus, through the process of skill development a leader advances novice, intermediate,

and expert skill levels. Each level requires increasingly sophisticated knowledge structures and

information processing capabilities within broadly defined task, emotional, social, and self-

relevant realms” (as cited in Day et al, 2014, p. 67).

Consequently, principles of effective relationships, frameworks and skill development

allow potential leaders to more accurately analyze the complexity of their leadership

environment. This is frequently an arduous endeavor often interrupted by at times

insurmountable challenges, disappointment and lack of support. Such a process may also

involve sacrifice and hardship. Nevertheless, the cumulative nature of all these encounters will

allow leaders to incrementally and dramatically improve their leadership capacity. This is a path

that is available to all who choose to embark on this leadership journey.


Conclusion

The inherent complexity and the multiplicity of the innumerable variables that influence

its application do not in and by themselves support the contention that leadership cannot be

taught. All human relations may be taught. All human relations may be learned. In the

indispensable initial stage, leadership must be compared and contrasted with the application of

coercion, power and management. Frequently, at this very fundamental level, the exercise of

leadership is misinterpreted as the application of those other frequently occurring

aforementioned phenomenon in human relations. Interestingly, all human relations are based on

shared and timeless principles. These are the principles that promote the inherent value of

honesty, integrity, compassion, understanding, forgiveness, fairness and service. Tragically, too

often these noble sentiments are forgotten and human affairs are instead conducted by

temperaments that are ruled by expediency, neglect, indifference, brute force and selfishness.

The challenge at its source has never been an inability to come to term with complexity, rather an

unwillingness to face reality.


References

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. In P. G.

Northouse, Leadership: Theory and practice (sixth ed.) (p. 13). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C. & Jinyu, H. (2014).

Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and

changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly 25, pp. 36-62. Retrieved April 12,

2015 from Northeastern University Libraries Website:

http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.neu.edu/science/article/pii/S1048984313001203.

Fayol, H. (1916). General and industrial management. In P. G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory

and practice (sixth ed.) (p. 12). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

French, J. R., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In P. G. Northouse,

Leadership: Theory and practice (sixth ed.) (p. 9). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management. In P. G.

Northouse, Leadership: Theory and practice (sixth ed.) (p. 13). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership

skills. In D. V. Day, J. W. Fleenor, L. E. Atwater, R. E. Strum, R. A. McKee, Advances

in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The

Leadership Quarterly 25, pp. 63-82. Retrieved April 12, 2015 from Northeastern

http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.neu.edu/science/article/pii/S1048984313001203


University Libraries Website:


McDonald, D. (2015). Can you learn to lead. New York Times. LDR 7980 Master’s Project

Capstone. Retrieved April 12, 2015 from Northeastern University College of

Professional Studies Website: https://nuonline.neu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-8234765-dt-

content-rid-11407115_1/courses/LDR7980.81474.201535/Can%20You%20Learn%20to

%20Lead%20.pdf .

Mumford, M., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2000).

Development of leadership skills: Experience and timing. In D. V. Day, J. W. Fleenor,

L. E. Atwater, R. E. Strum, R. A. McKee, Advances in leader and leadership

development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly

25, pp. 63-82. Retrieved April 12, 2015 from Northeastern University Libraries Website:


Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (sixth ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Quinn, R. E. (2004). Building the bridge as you walk on it. In D. A. Whetten & K. S. Cameron,

Developing management skills (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education,

Inc.

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. In P. G. Northouse, Leadership:

Theory and practice (sixth ed.) (p. 13). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2011). Developing management skills (8th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.


https://nuonline.neu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-8234765-dt-content-rid-11407115_1/courses/LDR7980.81474.201535/Can%20You%20Learn%20to%20Lead%20.pdf





Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and Leaders: Are they different. Best of HBR. Harvard

Business Review. Retrieved from Northeastern University College of Professional

Studies Website: https://nuonline.neu.edu/webapps/portal/execute/tabs/tabAction?

tab_tab_group-id=_21_1

https://nuonline.neu.edu/webapps/portal/execute/tabs/tabAction?tab_tab_group-id=_21_1

https://nuonline.neu.edu/webapps/portal/execute/tabs/tabAction?tab_tab_group-id=_21_1

Documents

LDR 7980 Assignment Essay 1 Agreeing About Leadership