Leadership Characteristics, Essay Example

Ordinary as Exceptional: Evolving Into Leadership

The question posed, that of whether an individual with average levels of charisma and personality may aspire to commanding respect as a leader, initially appears to be an inherently contrary supposition. Leadership has long been inextricably associated with a forcefulness of character and the ability to charm multitudes. Moreover, the person not innately imbued with these attributes is also most likely not driven to assume leadership; traits are in place to bring about results of a kind, charisma exists to attract and consequently direct, and lacks thereof point to an intrinsic disinclination to be dominate in a situation, and to lead.

However, several factors render the question far more reasonable than may be at first supposed. The first is, in a sense, timing.  That is to say, the leader identified as such in past eras is by no means the leader often viewed today. It appears that a lengthy history in which truly forceful, engaging individuals led people and nations into disastrous courses, or ultimately betrayed self-interest as their guiding motivations, has created a valid and rationale wariness regarding the blatant evidence of these traits. It is still very much in the nature of mankind to comply with the wishes of a truly dominant, capable person, as it is probable that genuine charisma will never fail to attract followers: “Charismatic leadership typically instills both awe and submission in followers…” (Daft, Lane, 2007,  p. 359).  Nonetheless, and although it may have required many centuries of leadership abuse to alter the thinking, such characteristics no longer seem to automatically generate a servant response. The world, quite simply, has seen too much to blithely accept that the traditional expressions of a leadership personality indicate a worthy leader.

In accordance with this or generated by it, modern thinking reflects a greater awareness of psychologies, which has in turn radically redefined, or “opened up”, the nature of leadership. The dynamic leadership model, historically based upon qualities of aggression, blatant ability, magnetism, and a potent impulse to take command, remains somewhat in place, but the age of transformational leadership has expanded the basic concept to incorporate types once deemed utterly unthinkable. The pathway of logic seems evident; as the accepted model persistently reveals fundamental flaws, then different sets of personality factors, along with actual lacks of leadership aspiration, may be the better course.

Servant leadership best encompasses this reversal of ideology, as it allows the individual with limited powers to charm and assert control to rise to leadership. It is, in a sense, abnegation as statement: effective leading can only occur when a desire to serve is in place, and the lack of an individual agenda to become a leader points to an innately trustworthy ethical core.  Additionally, issues such as charisma and personal powers of attraction are rendered moot, as they should be. When the leader accepts responsibility for the role only because it is evidently the morally correct course to take, and not because stature or power is sought, his or her authority is immeasurably enhanced by the initial reluctance. What happens, plainly, is that the absence of desire and/or need to exercise control encourages trust, and consequently a more dedicated following (Greenleaf, Spears, 2002,  p. 12).

What this translates to is a circumstance wherein the average person need not, in fact, seek to acquire “leadership” characteristics at all.  New concepts, in revolutionizing the way leadership is perceived, have removed the restrictions of traditional and overt characteristics.  It has been recognized that leadership must, first and foremost, be based upon a desire to be of service, and this quality is best manifested in a subdued, consistent manner.  It is, not unexpectedly, a slower road to leadership, as it does not rely upon grandiosity or show, yet this renders it all the more valuable.  “Average”, built upon capability and genuine concern, must be the new “charisma”

A Case Study

An individual of my acquaintance is endowed with more than a few striking characteristics.  He is highly intelligent, and has a talent for assessing all the relevant factors in most given situations.  He is thoughtful, in the sense that he does not express convictions until he is satisfied that all concerns have been addressed.  On a more social note, while essentially a quiet sort of man, he has the ability to set people at ease; they communicate with him freely, sensing an ethical foundation which informs them that their trust is not misplaced.

These are textbook traits of a fine leader, yet my acquaintance is rarely in that role.  It has been offered to him, but he has declined to take it, and my understanding is that one of his assets is, in fact, inhibiting his growth as a leader; that is to say, he so values the need to examine a scenario from all sides that he is reluctant to make decisions about it. Expansive of mind, he sees too much to promote any course, as he sees potential problems in fixing upon any path.  Consequently, his role is typically that of a counselor in his business, and this frustrates him because he believes, ultimately, that he could serve the business better than those currently leading it.

This man must, I believe, grasp fully what transformational leadership means, for it exists within the leader as much as it does for the group.  He must redirect his intelligence to focus on the need to modify his own excesses, and understand that there is such a thing as seeing too expansively, particularly when business is the issue.  In a sense, he must curb his innate consideration.  Necessary transformative change is not merely a matter of ingesting new ideologies and/or patterns of behavior; it calls for “unlearning”, as well (Schein, 2010,  p. 301).  Merely by observing a few, needed parameters regarding his natural impulses to comprehend, this man could be an outstanding example of a true servant-leader.

References

Daft, R. L., & Lane, P. G.  (2007.)  The Leadership Experience. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C.  (2002.)  Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Schein, E. H.  (2010.)  Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.