The concept of leadership and the
promises - and failures - that it has held for humankind over the centuries
is a well-researched area. Burns (1978) asserts that leadership is one of the most
observed, but the least understood phenomena. Goodwin (1998) asserts that there are
as many different leadership styles as there are leaders. Consequently, the theories
of leadership are many and they originate from diverse sources. Various leadership
theorists, in defense of their leadership models,
have suggested various definitions of leadership. Burns (1978: 43-44) asserts that:
"The essence of leadership in any polity is
the recognition of real need, the uncovering and exploiting of contradictions
among values and between values and practice, the realigning of values, the reorganization
of institutions where necessary, and the governance of change." Bennis and
Nanus (1985: 225) describe leaders as individuals who "lead by pulling rather than by
pushing, by inspiring rather than ordering, by
creating challenging, but achievable, expectations and rewarding progress towards them
rather than by manipulating, and by enabling people to use their own initiatives
and experiences rather than by denying or constraining their experiences and actions."
The theories and models of leadership that have been mentioned supra have
in common their focus on the leader as a pedestal personality who is separate
from the people being led. However, as Zaleznik (1996: 2) points out: "Leadership is
not restricted to the occupants of formal positions." Therefore, we must begin
to refocus our leadership lenses to recognize not only the appointed leaders but also
their followers and the nature of the relationship that exists between the two groups. |