ii. the essence of leadership 2017

G-Cube and Young Leaders ProgramsNational Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo, Japan2017

Course Title : Governance and Leadership: Leading a Nation inthe Changing World

Professor : Ginandjar [email protected], www.ginandjar.com

Assistant Professor : Gatot [email protected]

GRIPS_2017 2www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar


ABOUT LEADERSHIPTHE EVOLUTION OF LEADERSHIP DEFINITIONDEFINITION AND COMPONENTSTRAIT VS PROCESS LEADERSHIPASSIGNMENT VS EMERGENT LEADERSHIPLEADERSHIP AND POWERCOURAGE IN LEADERSHIP JUDGEMENT: CORE OF LEADERSHIPGOOD AND BAD LEADERSHIP


PUBLIC VS PRIVATE LEADERSHIPADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIPBUREAUCRACY AND LEADERSHIPLEADERSHIP VS MANAGEMENTLEADERSHIP AND CONFLICTLEADERSHIP IN A DEMOCRACYTYPES OF LEADERSHIP

TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIPTRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP

CONCLUSION


“A PROCESS OF INFLUENCE WHERE A PERSON ORGROUP INFLUENCES OTHERS TO WORK TOWARD ACOMMON GOAL.”

“A DYNAMIC SET UP WITH LEADERS INFLUENCINGFOLLOWERS TO DO SOMETHING.”

“BRINGING PEOPLE TOGETHER TO MAKESOMETHING DIFFERENT.”

Morse & Buss, 2007


LEADERSHIP IS ALL ABOUT:

PROVIDING SOLUTIONS TO COMMONPROBLEMS OR;

OFFERING IDEAS ABOUT HOW TO ACCOMPLISHCOLLECTIVE PURPOSES, AND;

MOBILIZING THE ENERGIES OF OTHERS TOFOLLOW THESE COURSES OF ACTION.

(Keohane, 2010)


WHILE MANY HAVE A GUT-LEVEL GRASP OF WHATLEADERSHIP IS, PUTTING A DEFINITION TO THE TERM HASPROVED TO BE A CHALLENGING ENDEAVOR FOR SCHOLARSAND PRACTITIONERS ALIKE.

MORE THAN A CENTURY HAS LAPSED SINCE LEADERSHIPBECAME A TOPIC OF ACADEMIC INTROSPECTION, ANDDEFINITIONS THAT HAVE EVOLVED HAVE BEEN INFLUENCEDBY MANY FACTOR FROM WORLD AFFAIRS AND POLITICS TOTHE PERSPECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE IN WHICH THE TOPICIS BEING STUDIED.

(Northouse, 2013)


1900-1929

Definitions of leadership appearing in the first threedecades of the 20th century emphasized control andcentralization of power with a common theme ofdomination. For example, at a conference on leadership in1927, leadership was defined as "the ability to impress thewill of the leader on those led and induce obedience,respect, loyalty, and cooperation" (Moore, 1927, p. 124).


1930s

Traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an emergingview of leadership as influence rather than domination. Leadership isalso identified as the interaction of an individual's specificpersonality traits with those of a group, noting that while theattitudes and activities of the many are changed by the one, themany may also influence a leader.

1940s

The group approach came into the forefront with leadership beingdefined as the behavior of an individual while involved in directinggroup activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same time, leadership bypersuasion is distinguished from "drivership" or leadership bycoercion (Copeland, 1942).


1950sThree themes dominated leadership definitions during this decade:• continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what leaders do

in groups;• leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which defined

leadership based on behavior of the leader; and• effectiveness, in which leadership is defined by the ability to influence

overall group effectiveness.1960sAlthough a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw harmonyamongst leadership scholars. The prevailing definition of leadership asbehavior that influences people toward shared goals was underscored bySeeman (I960) who described leadership as "acts by persons which influenceother persons in a shared direction" (p. S3).


1970s

The group focus gave way to the organizational behavior approach,where leadership became viewed as "initiating and maintaininggroups or organizations to accomplish group or organizational goals"(Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns's (1978) definition, however, is the mostimportant concept of leadership to emerge: "Leadership is thereciprocal process of mobilizing by persons with certain motives andvalues, various economic, political, and other resources, in a contextof competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently ormutually held by both leaders and followers" (p. 425).


1980sThis decade exploded with scholarly and popular works on the nature of leadership,bringing the topic to the apex of the academic and public consciousnesses. As a result,the number of definitions for leadership became a prolific stew with several perseveringthemes:• Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still predominantly deliver the

message that leadership is getting followers to do what the leader wants done.• Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership definitions of the 1980s,

influence is examined from every angle. In an effort to distinguish leadership frommanagement, however, scholars insist that leadership is noncoercive influence.

• Traits. Spurred by the national bestseller In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman,1982), the leadership-as-excellence movement brought leader traits back to thespotlight. As a result, many people's understanding of leadership is based on a traitorientation.

• Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a movement defining leadershipas a transformational process, stating that leadership occurs "when one or morepersons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one anotherto higher levels of motivation and morality" (p. 83).


Into the 21st Century

After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing:They can't come up with a common definition for leadership. Debatecontinues as to whether leadership and management are separateprocesses, while others emphasize the trait, skill, or relationalaspects of leadership. Because of such factors as growing globalinfluences and generational differences, leadership will continue tohave different meanings for different people. The bottom line is thatleadership is a complex concept for which a determined definitionmay long be in flux.

SOURCE: Adapted from Leadership for the Twenty-First Century, by J. C. Rose 1991, New York:Praeger


DESPITE THE MULTITUDE OF WAYS IN WHICHLEADERSHIP HAS BEEN CONCEPTUALIZED, THEFOLLOWING COMPONENTS CAN BE IDENTIFIEDAS CENTRAL TO THE PHENOMENON: LEADERSHIP IS A PROCESS, LEADERSHIP INVOLVES INFLUENCE, LEADERSHIP OCCURS IN GROUPS, AND LEADERSHIP INVOLVES COMMON GOALS.

(Northouse, Ibid)


BASED ON ITS COMPONENTS, THEFOLLOWING DEFINITION OFLEADERSHIP EMERGES:→ LEADERSHIP IS A PROCESS WHEREBY

AN INDIVIDUAL INFLUENCES AGROUP OF INDIVIDUALS TO ACHIEVEA COMMON GOAL.


DEFINING LEADERSHIP AS A PROCESS MEANSTHAT IT IS NOT A TRAIT OR CHARACTERISTICTHAT RESIDES IN THE LEADER, BUT RATHER ATRANSACTIONAL EVENT THAT OCCURSBETWEEN THE LEADER AND THE FOLLOWERS.

PROCESS IMPLIES THAT A LEADER AFFECTSAND IS AFFECTED BY FOLLOWERS.


IT EMPHASIZES THAT LEADERSHIP ISNOT A LINEAR, ONE-WAY EVENT, BUTRATHER AN INTERACTIVE EVENT.

WHEN LEADERSHIP IS DEFINED INTHIS MANNER, IT BECOMESAVAILABLE TO EVERYONE. IT IS NOTRESTRICTED TO THE FORMALLYDESIGNATED LEADER IN A GROUP.


LEADERSHIP INVOLVES INFLUENCE. IT ISCONCERNED WITH HOW THE LEADERAFFECTS FOLLOWERS. INFLUENCE IS THE SINEQUA LION OF LEADERSHIP. WITHOUTINFLUENCE, LEADERSHIP DOES NOT EXIST.


LEADERSHIP OCCURS IN GROUPS.GROUPS ARE THE CONTEXT IN WHICHLEADERSHIP TAKES PLACE. LEADERSHIPINVOLVES INFLUENCING A GROUP OFINDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE A COMMONPURPOSE.


THIS CAN BE A SMALL TASK GROUP, ACOMMUNITY GROUP, OR A LARGEGROUP ENCOMPASSING AN ENTIREORGANIZATION, OR A NATION.

LEADERSHIP IS ABOUT THEINDIVIDUAL INFLUENCING A GROUPOF OTHERS TO ACCOMPLISHCOMMON GOALS. OTHERS (A GROUP)ARE REQUIRED FOR LEADERSHIP TOOCCUR.


LEADERSHIP INCLUDES COMMITMENT TOACHIEVE COMMON GOALS. LEADERS DIRECTTHEIR ENERGIES TOWARD INDIVIDUALS WHOARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE SOMETHINGTOGETHER.


BY COMMON, THE LEADERS AND FOLLOWERSHAVE A MUTUAL PURPOSE. ATTENTION TOCOMMON GOALS GIVES LEADERSHIP AN ETHICALOVERTONE BECAUSE IT STRESSES THE NEED FORLEADERS LO WORK WITH FOLLOWERS TOACHIEVE SELECTED GOALS.

STRESSING MUTUALITY LESSENS THE POSSIBILITYTHAT LEADERS MIGHT ACT TOWARD FOLLOWERSIN WAYS THAT ARE FORCED OR UNETHICAL. ITALSO INCREASES THE POSSIBILITY THAT LEADERSAND FOLLOWERS WILL WORK TOGETHERTOWARD A COMMON GOOD.

(Rost, 1991)GRIPS_2017 23www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

WE HAVE ALL HEARD STATEMENTS SUCH AS"HE IS BORN TO BE A LEADER" OR "SHE IS ANATURAL LEADER." THESE STATEMENTS ARECOMMONLY EXPRESSED BY PEOPLE WHOTAKE A TRAIT PERSPECTIVE TOWARDLEADERSHIP.

(Northouse, Op.Cit.)


THE TRAIT PERSPECTIVE SUGGESTS THATCERTAIN INDIVIDUALS HAVE SPECIAL INNATEOR INBORN CHARACTERISTICS OR QUALITIESTHAT MAKE THEM LEADERS, AND THAT IT ISTHESE QUALITIES THAT DIFFERENTIATE THEMFROM NONLEADERS.


SOME OF THE PERSONAL QUALITIES USEDTO IDENTIFY LEADERS INCLUDE UNIQUEPHYSICAL FACTORS (E.G., HEIGHT),PERSONALITY FEATURES (E.G.,EXTROVERSION), AND OTHERCHARACTERISTICS (E.G., INTELLIGENCE ANDFLUENCY; BRYMAN, 1992).


TO DESCRIBE LEADERSHIP AS A TRAIT IS QUITEDIFFERENT FROM DESCRIBING IT AS APROCESS. THE TRAIT VIEWPOINTCONCEPTUALIZES LEADERSHIP AS A PROPERTYOR SET OF PROPERTIES POSSESSED INVARYING DEGREES BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE(JAGO, 1982). THIS SUGGESTS THAT IT RESIDESIN SELECT PEOPLE AND RESTRICTSLEADERSHIP TO THOSE WHO ARE BELIEVEDTO HAVE SPECIAL, USUALLY INBORN, TALENTS.


THE PROCESS VIEWPOINT SUGGESTS THATLEADERSHIP IS A PHENOMENON THATRESIDES IN THE CONTEXT OF THEINTERACTIONS BETWEEN LEADERS ANDFOLLOWERS AND MAKES LEADERSHIPAVAILABLE TO EVERYONE. AS A PROCESS,LEADERSHIP CAN BE OBSERVED IN LEADERBEHAVIORS (JAGO, 1982), AND CAN BELEARNED.


TRAIT DEFINITION OFLEADERSHIP

Leader

Follower

Leadership

PROCESS DEFINITION OFLEADERSHIP

Leader

Follower

(Interaction)

Leadership• Physical• Intelligence• Extroversion• Fluency• Other Traits

DIFFERENT VIEWS OF LEADERSHIPTRAIT AND PROCESS

SOURCE: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management(pp. 3-8). by J. P. Kotter. 1990. New York: Free Press.


SOME PEOPLE ARE LEADERS BECAUSE OF THEIRFORMAL POSITION IN AN ORGANISATION, WHEREASOTHERS ARE LEADERS BECAUSE OF THE WAY OTHERGROUP MEMBERS RESPOND TO THEM.

THESE TWO COMMON FORMS OF LEADERSHIP ARECALLED ASSIGNED LEADERSHIP AND EMERGENTLEADERSHIP.

(Op.Cit.)


LEADERSHIP THAT IS BASED ON OCCUPYING APOSITION IN AN ORGANIZATION IS ASSIGNEDLEADERSHIP: ROYALTY OR TEAM LEADERS,PLANT MANAGERS, DEPARTMENT HEADS,DIRECTORS, AND ADMINISTRATORS ARE ALLEXAMPLES OF ASSIGNED LEADERSHIP.


YET THE PERSON ASSIGNED TO ALEADERSHIP POSITION DOES NOT ALWAYSBECOME THE REAL LEADER IN APARTICULAR SETTING.


WHEN OTHERS PERCEIVE ANINDIVIDUAL AS THE MOSTINFLUENTIAL MEMBER OF A GROUPOR AN ORGANIZATION, REGARDLESSOF THE INDIVIDUAL'S TITLE, THEPERSON IS EXHIBITING EMERGENTLEADERSHIP.


THE INDIVIDUAL ACQUIRES EMERGENTLEADERSHIP THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE INTHE ORGANIZATION WHO SUPPORT ANDACCEPT THAT INDIVIDUAL'S BEHAVIOR.

THIS TYPE OF LEADERSHIP IS NOT ASSIGNEDBY POSITION; RATHER, IT EMERGES OVER APERIOD THROUGH COMMUNICATION.


IN ADDITION TO COMMUNICATIONBEHAVIORS, RESEARCHERS HAVEFOUND THAT PERSONALITY PLAYS AROLE IN LEADERSHIP EMERGENCE.

FOR EXAMPLE: THE INDIVIDUALSWHO WERE MORE DOMINANT,MORE INTELLIGENT, AND MORECONFIDENT ABOUT THEIR OWNPERFORMANCE (GENERAL SELF-EFFICACY) WERE MORE LIKELY LO BEIDENTIFIED AS LEADERS BY OTHERMEMBERS OF THEIR TASK GROUP.


LEADERSHIP EMERGENCE IS THE DEGREE TOWHICH A PERSON FITS WITH THE IDENTITYOF THE GROUP AS A WHOLE. AS GROUPSDEVELOP OVER TIME, A GROUP PROTOTYPEALSO DEVELOPS.

INDIVIDUALS EMERGE AS LEADERS IN THEGROUP WHEN THEY BECOME MOST LIKETHE GROUP PROTOTYPE. BEING SIMILAR TOTHE PROTOTYPE MAKES LEADERSATTRACTIVE TO THE GROUP AND GIVESTHEM INFLUENCE WITH THE GROUP.


THE CONCEPT OF POWER IS RELATED TOLEADERSHIP BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THEINFLUENCE PROCESS.

POWER IS THE CAPACITY OR POTENTIAL TOINFLUENCE.

PEOPLE HAVE POWER WHEN THEY HAVE THEABILITY TO AFFECT OTHERS' BELIEFS, ATTITUDES,AND COURSES OF ACTION.

(Northouse, Ibid)


MINISTERS, DOCTORS, COACHES, ANDTEACHERS ARE ALL EXAMPLES OF PEOPLEWHO HAVE THE POTENTIAL TOINFLUENCE A GROUP. WHEN THEY DO,THEY ARE USING THEIR POWER, THERESOURCE THEY DRAW ON TO EFFECTCHANGE.


Referent Power Based on followers' identification and liking for the leader. A teacherwho is adored by students has referent power.

Expert Power Based on followers' perceptions of the leader's competence. A tourguide who is knowledgeable about a foreign country has expert power.

Legitimate Power Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge whoadministers sentences in the courtroom exhibits legitimate power.

Reward Power Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. Asupervisor who gives rewards to employees who work hard is usingreward power.

Coercive Power Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coachwho sits players on the bench for being late to practice is using coercivepower.

SOURCE: Adapted from "The Bases of Social Power." by J. R. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962. in D. Cartwright (Ed.),Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (pp. 259-269). New York: Harper & Row.


IN ORGANIZATIONS, THERE ARETWO MAJOR KINDS OF POWER:POSITION POWER AND PERSONALPOWER.


POSITION POWER IS THE POWER A PERSONDERIVES FROM A PARTICULAR OFFICE ORRANK IN A FORMAL ORGANIZATIONALSYSTEM. IT IS THE INFLUENCE CAPACITY ALEADER DERIVES FROM HAVING HIGHERSTATUS THAN THE FOLLOWERS HAVE.

PERSONAL POWER IS THE INFLUENCECAPACITY A LEADER DERIVES FROM BEINGSEEN BY FOLLOWERS AS LIKABLE ANDKNOWLEDGEABLE. WHEN LEADERS ACT INWAYS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO FOLLOWERS,IT GIVES LEADERS POWER.


IN DISCUSSIONS OF LEADERSHIP, IT IS NOTUNUSUAL FOR LEADERS TO BE DESCRIBEDAS WIELDERS OF POWER, AS INDIVIDUALSWHO DOMINATE OTHERS.

IN THESE INSTANCES, POWER ISCONCEPTUALIZED AS A TOOL THATLEADERS USE TO ACHIEVE THEIR OWNENDS.


POWER IS A TOOL NOT ANULTIMATE OBJECTIVE OF GOODLEADERSHIP.


ALL LEADERS ARE ACTUAL ORPOTENTIAL POWER HOLDERS, BUTNOT ALL POWER HOLDERSARE LEADERS.

(Burns, Op.Cit.)


COERCIVE POWER IS ONE OF THE SPECIFICKINDS OF POWER AVAILABLE TO LEADERS.

COERCION INVOLVES THE USE OF FORCE TOEFFECT CHANGE.

TO COERCE MEANS TO INFLUENCE OTHERS TODO SOMETHING AGAINST THEIR WILL ANDMAY INCLUDE MANIPULATING PENALTIESAND REWARDS IN THEIR WORKENVIRONMENT.

COERCIVE PEOPLE ARE NOT USED AS MODELSOF IDEAL LEADERSHIP.

(Northouse, Op.Cit.)GRIPS_2017 45www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

COERCION OFTEN INVOLVES THE USE OFTHREATS, PUNISHMENT, AND NEGATIVEREWARD SCHEDULES.

CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF COERCIVE LEADERSARE ADOLF HITLER IN GERMANY, JOSEPHSTALIN IN USSR, POL POT IN CAMBODIAOR THE KIM DYNASTY IN NORTH KOREA.


LEADERSHIP IS RESERVED FOR THOSEWHO INFLUENCE A GROUP OFINDIVIDUALS TOWARD A COMMONGOAL.

USING COERCION RUNS COUNTER TOWORKING WITH FOLLOWERS TO ACHIEVEA COMMON GOAL.


LEADERS WHO USE COERCION AREINTERESTED IN THEIR OWN GOALSAND SELDOM ARE INTERESTED INTHE WANTS AND NEEDS OFSUBORDINATES.


LEADERS NEED COURAGE TO MAKETOUGH AND UNPOPULAR DECISIONS,STAND UP FOR PRINCIPLES THEYBELIEVE IN, AND FACE THELONELINESS THAT SOMETIMES COMESWITH HOLDING POWER.

(Keohane, Op.Cit.)


COURAGE CAN MEAN CHOOSING THERIGHT COURSE OF ACTION FOR THEORGANIZATION AND STICKING WITH ITRATHER THAN SETTLING FOR THE LESSDIFFICULT COURSE AND STORING UPPROBLEMS FOR THE FUTURE.

OR IT CAN SOMETIMES MEAN RESIGNINGFROM OFFICE TO UNDERSCORE ANIMPORTANT TRUTH THAT OTHER LEADERSARE IGNORING.


COURAGE IS OFTEN SHOWN BYPERSONAL WILLINGNESS TO RISK DANGERIN ORDER TO PERSIST ON A CHOSENCOURSE.

COURAGE CAN ALSO BE DEMONSTRATEDBY STRENGTH IN DEALING WITHDIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND TO STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEENGOAL ACHIEVEMENT AND SACRIFICESTHAT NEED TO BE MADE.


THE MOST VALUABLE ATTRIBUTE LEADERS CANPOSSESS IN ANY CONTEXT IS GOOD JUDGMENT.

THE ESSENCE OF LEADERSHIP IS JUDGMENT. THESINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT LEADERSDO IS MAKE GOOD JUDGMENT CALLS.

JUDGMENT IS THE CORE, THE NUCLEUS OFLEADERSHIP. WITH GOOD JUDGMENT, LITTLE ELSEMATTERS. WITHOUT IT, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS.

(Tichy and Bennis, 2007)


MAKING JUDGMENTS OFTEN INVOLVESREASONING; BUT THERE IS AN INNER COREOF JUDGMENT THAT HAS MORE TO DOWITH A PERSON'S PERSONAL REACTIONSTHAN WITH INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY ORANYTHING THAT COULD BE CONVEYEDTHROUGH TEACHING.

HAVING SAID THAT, THE FACULTY OFJUDGMENT CAN BE REFINED, HONED,IMPROVED BY EXPERIENCE ANDREFLECTION.


MANY STORIES OR HISTORIANS DESCRIBEGREAT LEADERS AS THOSE WHOACCOMPLISHED AMAZING FEATS SUCH ASCREATING, PRESERVING, OR CHANGING ANATION OR INDUSTRY, OR SAVING A GROUP OFPEOPLE FROM EXPLOITATION ORANNIHILATION.

UNDER THAT DESCRIPTION LEADERSHIP AREASSUMED TO BE “GOOD”.


BUT THERE ARE OTHERS WHO ARGUETHAT LEADERS COME IN BOTH GOODAND BAD FLAVORS.

(Barbara Kellerman, 2009 and Jean Lipman-Blumen, 2005)


IN KELLERMAN'S VIEWS, THERE ARE ANUMBER OF WAYS IN WHICHLEADERSHIP CAN BE "BAD." SHEIDENTIFIES CERTAIN BEHAVIOR;INCLUDING INCOMPETENT, RIGID,CALLOUS, INTEMPERATE OR INSULAR,AS WELL AS EVIL OR CORRUPT.


JOSEPH NYE HIGHLIGHTS THEDIFFERENCE BETWEEN TWO MEANINGSOF THE PHRASE "GOOD LEADERSHIP“: A GOOD LEADER MAY BE EITHER

EFFECTIVE OR MORALLY ADMIRABLE,OR BOTH.

IN THIS CONTEXT LEADERS CAN BE“BAD" IN BOTH THESE SENSES—INCOMPETENT OR EVIL.

(Joseph Nye, 2008)


HOWEVER MANY OBSERVERS ASSERTTHAT LEADERS BY DEFINITION DOSOMETHING GOOD FOR OTHER PEOPLE.UNLESS THEY IMPROVE THE SITUATION OFTHE FOLLOWERS, THE "LEADERS" DO NOTDESERVE THE NAME. THIS PERSPECTIVEHAS A LONG AND HONORABLE TRADITION.


LEADERSHIP IS NOT ONLY A DESCRIPTIVETERM BUT A PRESCRIPTIVE ONE, EMBRACINGA MORAL, EVEN A PASSIONATE, DIMENSION.

ON THIS ACCOUNT, WHEN WE CALL FORLEADERSHIP, WE ARE, BY DEFINITION, ASKINGFOR SOMETHING GOOD.

"BAD" LEADERSHIP, IN THIS VIEW, “IMPLIESNO LEADERSHIP.”

THUS IT IS QUITE CLEAR THAT HITLER ANDSTALIN WERE NOT LEADERS, BUT MEREPOWER WIELDERS.

(Burns, Op.Cit.)


PUBLIC LEADERSHIP, INCLUDING BOTH POLITICALLEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP OF NONPROFITORGANIZATIONS, DIFFERS IN SUBTLE BUT SHAREIMPORTANT WAYS FROM LEADERSHIP IN A MODERNBUSINESS CORPORATION.

(Keohane, Op.Cit.)


THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN "PUBLIC"AND "PRIVATE" LEADERSHIP DERIVESPRIMARILY FROM THE ECONOMIC BASISAND PURPOSES OF THE ORGANIZATIONS,ALTHOUGH BOTH ARE SENSITIVE TO THENEEDS AND SITUATIONS OF EMPLOYEES(OR FOLLOWERS).

(Op.Cit.)


BUSINESS LEADERS ARE EXPECTED TOFOCUS PRIMARILY ON THE BOTTOM LINE,MAKING A PROFIT FOR THEORGANIZATION.

LEADERS IN A PUBLIC SETTING AREEXPECTED TO BE PRIMARILY RESPONSIVETO AND SERVE THE COMMUNITY RATHERTHAN AN ANONYMOUS GROUP OFSHAREHOLDERS.

(Op.Cit.)


THE PROCESS OF PROVIDING THERESULTS REQUIRED BY AUTHORIZEDSYSTEMS IN AN EFFICIENT, EFFECTIVE,AND LEGAL MANNER.

(Van Wart, 2008)


THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING/SUPPORTING FOLLOWERS WHOPROVIDE THE RESULTS.

THE PROCESS OF ALIGNING THEORGANIZATION WITH ITSENVIRONMENT, ESPECIALLY THENECESSARY MACRO-LEVEL CHANGES,AND REALIGNING THE CULTURE ASAPPROPRIATE.

(Van Wart, Ibid)


THE KEY ELEMENT TOADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP ISITS SERVICE FOCUS.

(Van Wart, Ibid)


THE STEREOTYPED VIEW OF BUREAURACY IS ONE OF ANINSTITUTION EMBRACED AGAINST CHANGE.

HOWEVER, IF BUREAUCRATS

1) Respond to wider sets of values than the narroworganization norms,

2) If these dynamic forces engage persons' needs andmotives and hence manifest themselves in new powerpatterns and alignments

THEN THE BUREAUCRACY MAY BECOME MORE ASEEDBED FOR CHANGE THAN AN ARENA FOR STASIS.

(Burns, Op.Cit.)GRIPS_2017 66www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

BUREAUCRATIC LEADERSHIP: TO THE EXTENT THAT BUREAUCRACY IS IN

PRACTICE THE SIMPLE APPLICATION FROMTHE TOP DOWN, IT IS NOT LEADERSHIP.

TO THE EXTENT THAT IT EXEMPLIFIESCONFLICT, POWER, VALUES, AND CHANGE INACCORDANCE WITH LEADER-FOLLOWERNEEDS, IT EMBODIES LEADERSHIP.

(Op.Cit.)


TO UNDERSTAND LEADERSHIP, IT ISIMPORTANT TO GRASP THE DIFFERENCEBETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT.


LEADERSHIP IS A PROCESS THAT IS SIMILARTO MANAGEMENT.

IN MANY WAYS LEADERSHIP INVOLVESINFLUENCE, AS DOES MANAGEMENT.

LEADERSHIP ENTAILS WORKING WITHPEOPLE, WHICH MANAGEMENT ENTAILSAS WELL.


LEADERSHIP IS CONCERNED WITHEFFECTIVE GOAL ACCOMPLISHMENT,AND SO IS MANAGEMENT.

IN GENERAL, MANY OF THE FUNCTIONSOF MANAGEMENT ARE ACTIVITIES THATARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DEFINITIONOF LEADERSHIP.

(Northouse, Op.Cit.)


BUT LEADERSHIP IS ALSODIFFERENT FROMMANAGEMENT.


HISTORICALLY, WHEREAS THE STUDY OFLEADERSHIP CAN BE TRACED BACK TOARISTOTLE, MANAGEMENT EMERGEDAROUND THE TURN OF THE 20THCENTURY WITH THE ADVENT OF THEINDUSTRIALIZED SOCIETY.


MANAGEMENT WAS CREATED AS AWAY TO REDUCE CHAOS INORGANIZATIONS, TO MAKE THEMRUN MORE EFFECTIVELY ANDEFFICIENTLY.


THE PRIMARY FUNCTIONS OFMANAGEMENT, AS FIRST IDENTIFIED BYFAYOL (1916), WERE PLANNING,ORGANIZING, STAFFING, ANDCONTROLLING. THESE FUNCTIONS ARESTILL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FIELD OFMANAGEMENT TODAY.


THE MAIN FUNCTION OF MANAGEMENT IS TOPROVIDE ORDER AND CONSISTENCY TOORGANIZATIONS, WHEREAS THE PRIMARYFUNCTION OF LEADERSHIP IS TO PRODUCECHANGE AND MOVEMENT.

MANAGEMENT IS ABOUT SEEKING ORDERAND STABILITY; LEADERSHIP IS ABOUTSEEKING ADAPTIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVECHANGE.


ManagementProduces Order and Consistency

LeadershipProduces Change and Movement

Planning and Budgeting• Establish agendas• Set timetables• Allocate resources

Organizing and Staffing• Provide structure• Make job placements• Establish rules and procedures

Controlling and Problem Solving• Develop incentives• Generate creative solutions• Take corrective action

Establishing Direction• Create a vision• Clarify big picture• Set strategies

Aligning People• Communicate goals• Seek commitment• Build teams and coalitions

Motivating and Inspiring• Inspire and energize• Empower subordinates• Satisfy unmet need

SOURCE: Adapted from A force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management(pp. 3-8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990. New York: Free Press.


"MANAGERS ARE PEOPLE WHO DOTHINGS RIGHT AND LEADERS AREPEOPLE WHO DO THE RIGHTTHING“

(Bennis and Nanus, 1985)


LEADERSHIP FOCUSES ON DOINGTHE RIGHT THINGS; MANAGEMENTFOCUSES ON DOING THINGS RIGHT

(Stephen R. Covey,

in Hesselbein, Goldsmith, Beckhard, 1996


LEADERSHIP IS A MULTIDIRECTIONALINFLUENCE RELATIONSHIP ANDMANAGEMENT IS A UNIDIRECTIONALAUTHORITY RELATIONSHIP.


WHEREAS LEADERSHIP IS CONCERNEDWITH THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPINGMUTUAL PURPOSES, MANAGEMENT ISDIRECTED TOWARD COORDINATINGACTIVITIES IN ORDER TO GET A JOB DONE.LEADERS AND FOLLOWERS WORKTOGETHER TO CREATE REAL CHANGE,WHEREAS MANAGERS AND SUBORDINATESJOIN FORCES TO SELL GOODS ANDSERVICES.

(Rost, Op.Cit)


LEADERS AND MANAGERS THEMSELVES AREDISTINCT, AND THAT THEY ARE BASICALLYDIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE.

MANAGERS ARE REACTIVE AND PREFER TO WORKWITH PEOPLE TO SOLVE PROBLEMS BUT DO SOWITH LOW EMOTIONAL INVOLVEMENT. THEY ACTTO LIMIT CHOICES.

LEADERS, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE EMOTIONALLYACTIVE AND INVOLVED. THEY SEEK TO SHAPE IDEASINSTEAD OF RESPONDING TO THEM AND ACT TOEXPAND THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS TO SOLVE LONG-STANDING PROBLEMS. LEADERS CHANGE THE WAYPEOPLE THINK ABOUT WHAT IS POSSIBLE.

(Zaleznik, 1977)


ALTHOUGH THERE ARE CLEAR DIFFERENCESBETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP,THE TWO CONSTRUCTS OVERLAP. WHENMANAGERS ARE INVOLVED IN INFLUENCING AGROUP TO MEET ITS GOALS, THEY AREINVOLVED IN LEADERSHIP.

WHEN LEADERS ARE INVOLVED IN PLANNING,ORGANIZING, STAFFING, AND CONTROLLING,THEY ARE INVOLVED IN MANAGEMENT.

BOTH PROCESSES INVOLVE INFLUENCING AGROUP OF INDIVIDUALS TOWARD GOALATTAINMENT.


MANAGEMENT IS MORE FORMAL ANDSCIENTIFIC THAN LEADERSHIP.

IT RELIES ON UNIVERSAL SKILLS SUCH ASPLANNING, BUDGETING, AND CONTROLLING.

MANAGEMENT IS AN EXPLICIT SET OF TOOLSAND TECHNIQUES, BASED ON REASONINGAND TESTING, THAT CAN BE USED IN AVARIETY OF SITUATIONS.

(Dubrin, 2001)


LEADERSHIP, IN CONTRAST TO MANAGEMENT,INVOLVES HAVING A VISION OF WHAT THEORGANIZATION CAN BECOME.

LEADERS ARE LIKELY TO TRANSFORM THEIRORGANIZATIONS, WHEREAS MANAGERSMANAGE (OR MAINTAIN) THEIRORGANIZATIONS.

(Ibid)


A LEADER CREATES A VISION TO DIRECT THEORGANIZATION.

THE KEY FUNCTION OF THE MANAGER IS TOIMPLEMENT THE VISION.

THE MANAGER CHOOSES THE MEANS TOACHIEVE THE END THAT THE LEADERFORMULATES.

(Ibid)


EFFECTIVE LEADERS (IDEALLY) HAVE TOBE GOOD MANAGERS THEMSELVES ORBE SUPPORTED BY EFFECTIVEMANAGERS.

(Ibid)

BUT AN EFFECTIVE MANAGER SHOULD(IDEALLY) ALSO BE A GOOD LEADER.

(Stephen R. Covey,

in Hesselbein, Goldsmith, Beckhard, 1996).


PRODUCES CHANGE

PRODUCES PREDICTIABILITY AND ORDER

(Op.cit)


SOURCE: Genevieve Capowski, "Anatomy of a Leader: Where Are the Leaders of Tomorrow?" Management Review, March 1994, p. 12;David Fagiano, "Managers vs. Leaders: A Corporate Fable," Management Review, November 1997, p. 5.

GREAT LEADERS Visionary Passionate Creative Flexible Inspiring Innovative Courageous Imaginative Experimental Independent Shares Knowledge

LEADERVS

MANAGER

GOOD MANAGERS Rational Consulting Persitent Problem Solving Tough-minded Analytical Structured Deliberative Authoritative Stabilizing Centralized

Knowledge

(Op.cit)


LEADER--------------

ENVISIONMOTIVATES

MAKES DECISIONCOMMUNICATES

MANAGER--------------

PLANSORGANIZESCONTROLS

(Allen, 1958)


DISTINCTIONS

FOLLOWERS EMPLOYEES SUBJECTS

LEADERS MANAGER GOVERNMENT|| || ||

(Keohane, Op.Cit)GRIPS_2017 90www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

DNA OR TRAINED?

LEADERS

MANAGERS

DNA TRAINED


NURTURED BY THE ENVIRONMENT DRIVEN BY NECESSITY


WHAT ARE YOU?

MANAGER?

LEADER?

MANAGER-LEADER?

OR JUST AFOLLOWER?



LEADERSHIP IS AS ESSENTIAL IN ADEMOCRACY AS ANY OTHERCOMMUNITY.

ALL COLLECTIVE ACTION REQUIRESLEADERSHIP.

GOOD LEADERSHIP BRINGS SIGNIFICANTBENEFITS TO A DEMOCRACY.

(Keohane, Op.Cit.)


HOW DOES LEADERSHIP WORK IN ADEMOCRACY: PREVENT THE PERPETUATION OF THE SAME

PEOPLE IN POSITIONS OF LEADERSHIP, EMPHASIZE THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF

LEADERS TO OTHER CITIZENS, ENSURE THAT CITIZENS HAVE FREE ACCESS

TO MULTIPLE SOURCES OF INFORMATION, ENLARGE THE EXTENT OF POPULAR

PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNMENT, LIMIT THE ACCUMULATION OF PRIVILEGE.


MOST DEMOCRACIES FACE THEDILEMMA OF ENSURING THAT THEWORK OF LEADERSHIP GETS DONEWITHOUT ALLOWING LEADERS TOACCUMULATE PRIVILEGE ANDPERPETUATE THEIR POWER.


THERE ARE TWO OPPOSITE WAYS INWHICH LEADERSHIP ANDDEMOCRACY CAN BE INFUNDAMENTAL TENSION.


THE FIRST OCCURS WHEN THE EXERCISEOF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY, OR THEINSTITUTIONAL CHECKS AND BALANCESPUT SO MANY CONSTRAINTS ONLEADERSHIP THAT IT IS DIFFICULT ORIMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY LEADER TOACCOMPLISH GOALS BELIEVED TO BEDESIRABLES.

SLOW AND INADEQUATE RESULT.


THE OPPOSITE PROBLEMS WITHLEADERSHIP IN A DEMOCRACY ARISESWHEN LEADERS EXTEND OR ABUSETHEIR POWER.


AS CHURCHILL FAMOUSLY PUT IT,DEMOCRACY IS "THE WORST FORMOF GOVERNMENT EXCEPT ALL THOSEOTHER FORMS THAT HAVE BEENTRIED FROM TIME TO TIME."


STRONG LEADERSHIP ↔ WEAK DEMOCRACYSTRONG DEMOCRACY ↔ WEAK LEADERSHIPWEAK LEADERSHIP ↔ WEAK DEMOCRACYSTRONG DEMOCRACY ↔ STRONG LEADERSHIP

DEMOCRACY

LEADERSHIP

STRONG

STRONGWEAK

WEAK


MARY REID, 2005

CITIZENPARTICIPATORY

ELECTEDREPRESENTATIVES

STRONG

PARTICIPATORYREPRESENTATIVEDEMOCRACY

DOMINANCEBY THE LOUDEST

WEAK STRONG

WEAK

TRADITIONALREPRESENTATIVEDEMOCRACY

DIRECTDEMOCRACY


TWO BASIC TYPES OF LEADERSHIP: THETRANSACTIONAL AND THE TRANSFORMING.

(Burns, Ibid)


OCCURS WHEN ONE PERSON TAKES THEINITIATIVE IN MAKING CONTACT WITHOTHERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN EXCHANGEOF VALUED THINGS.

THE EXCHANGE COULD BE ECONOMIC ORPOLITICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL IN NATURE.

(Ibid)

TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP


SUCH AS: A SWAP OF GOODS OR OF GOOD FOR

MONEY; A TRADING OF VOTES BETWEEN CANDIDATE

AND CITIZEN OR BETWEEN LEGISLATORS; HOSPITALITY TO ANOTHER PERSON IN

EXCHANGE FOR PRAISE OR GRATITUDE ORSUPPORT;

JOBS OR PROMOTION;(Ibid)


OCCURS WHEN ONE OR MORE PERSONSENGAGE WITH OTHERS IN SUCH A WAY THATLEADERS AND FOLLOWERS RAISE ONEANOTHER TO HIGHER LEVELS OFMOTIVATION AND MORALITY.

(Ibid)

TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP


TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP IS DYNAMICLEADERSHIP IN THE SENSE THAT THELEADERS THROW THEMSELVES INTO ARELATIONSHIP WITH FOLLOWERS WHOWILL FEEL "ELEVATED“ BY IT AND OFTENBECOME MORE ACTIVE THEMSELVES,THEREBY CREATING NEW CADRES OFLEADERS.

(Ibid)


TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP ISLEADERSHIP ENGAGED.TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP IS

ABOUT CHANGE(Ibid)



SOCIAL FRAGMENTATION AND ECONOMICDISPARITY

GROWING RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM ANDRESURGENT ETHNIC IDENTITIES

SINGLE-INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS ADVOCATINGNARROW VIEWPOINTS

MEDIA THAT ACCENTUATE CONFLICT ANDINCREASE POLARIZATION


GREATER PARTISANSHIP AND LESSDIALOGUE IN NATIONAL LEGISLATURE

A SOCIETY-WIDE “RISING TIDE” OFPUBLIC CYNICISM, MISTRUST, ANDRUDENESS

OVERALL INSECURITY, UNCERTAINTY,AND FEAR IN RESPONSE TO TERRORISM


LEADERSHIP OVER HUMAN BEINGS ISEXERCISED WHEN PERSONS WITH CERTAINMOTIVES AND PURPOSES MOBILIZE, INCOMPETITION OR CONFLICT WITHOTHERS, INSTITUTIONAL, POLITICAL,PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND OTHER RESOURCESSO AS TO AROUSE, ENGAGE, AND SATISFYTHE MOTIVES OF FOLLOWERS.

(Burns, 1978)


WHETHER THE SETTING IS INTERNATIONAL,POLITICAL, SECURITY OR ECONOMIC NEGOTIATIONS,A CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT, OR ALOCAL SCHOOL BOARD MEETING, WE ARECONNECTED TODAY INTO MORE COMPLEX SYSTEMSTHAN EVER BEFORE.

WE ARE EXPOSED TO MORE CULTURES, MOREIDEOLOGIES, MORE PROFESSIONS AND SKILL SETS,AND THEREFORE TO MORE HUMAN DIFFERENCESTHAN EVER BEFORE. AVOIDING THESE DIFFERENCESIS NOT AN OPTION, BECAUSE THEY ARE A BUILT-INPART OF OUR WAY OF LIFE.

(Gerzon, 2006)


CONFLICT IS EVERYWHERE: FROM ORGANIZATION THAT ARE DIVIDED

ABOUT THEIR STRATEGY AND ROLES TO NATIONS OR COMMUNITIES THAT ARE

DIVIDED BY RACE, ECONOMIC, RELIGION,OR POLITICS.

COUNTRIES THAT ARE TORN APART BYCIVIL STRIFE, OR

ARE IN DIRECT CONFRONTATION WITHEACH OTHER.

THESE CONFLICTS ARE REAL. THEY AREUNAVOIDABLE. AND THEY ARE NOT GOINGAWAY.

(Gerzon, 2006)GRIPS_2017 115www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

LEADING THROUGH CONFLICT INVOLVESFACING DIFFERENCES HONESTLY ANDCREATIVELY, UNDERSTANDING THEIR FULLCOMPLEXITY AND SCOPE, AND ENABLINGTHOSE INVOLVED TO MOVE TOWARDORIGINAL SOLUTIONS.

SUCH LEADERSHIP REQUIRES GOINGBEYOND THE POWERFUL, PRIMORDIALRESPONSES TO DIFFERENCE THAT RESULTIN AN "US VERSUS THEM" MENTALITY.

(ibid)


IT REQUIRES CAPACITIES OF A LEADER,BOTH PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONALSKILLS, THAT TURN SERIOUSCONFLICTS INTO REWARDINGOPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATIONAND INNOVATION.

(Ibid)


THIS MISHANDLING OF CONFLICT IS SOWIDESPREAD THAT IT LIMITS OUR LIVES INMORE WAYS THAN WE RECOGNIZE.

WE LEAD FROM OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE; WELEAD FROM OUR BOX IN THEORGANIZATIONAL CHART; WE SEEEVERYTHING FROM INSIDE THE BORDER OFOUR WORLDVIEWS.

BUT WHEN CONFLICT ERUPTS, THIS KIND OFREACTIVE LEADERSHIP IS IMPOTENT. IT ISTRAPPED INSIDE ITS OWN IDENTITY , LIKE ANANIMAL IN A CAGE.

(Ibid)


FOR EXAMPLE THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS ANDBALANCES AMONG THREE BRANCHES OFGOVERNMENT: JUDICIAL, LEGISLATIVE ANDEXECUTIVE. THE REASONING WAS CLEAR: SINCECONFLICT IS INEVITABLE, WHY DON’T JUST BUILTIT INTO THE MECHANISM OF GOVERNMENT.

SIMILARLY, CONFLICT IS BUILT INTO THE FREEMARKET AS WELL. THE MARKETPLACES IS ASWARM OF COMPETING ENTITIES, EACH SEEKINGITS OWN ADVANTAGE. CAPITALISM BUILDCONFLICT INTO THE ECONOMY WITH THE GOALOF CREATING EVER-HIGHER LEVELS OF EFFICIENCYAND PRODUCTIVITY.

(Ibid)GRIPS_2017 119www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

THE DIVIDED STRUCTURE WITH BUILT-IN CONFLICT IS THE HALLMARK OFPOLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FREEDOM.

LEADERS, WHATEVER THEIRPROFESSION, SHOULD NOT SHUNCONFLICT ; THEY SHOULD CONFRONTIT, EXPLOIT IT, AND ULTIMATELYEMBODY IT.

(Ibid)


LEADERS SHAPE AS WELL AS EXPRESSAND MEDIATE CONFLICT. THEY DO THISLARGELY BY INFLUENCING THEINTENSITY AND SCOPE OF CONFLICT.

WITHIN LIMITS THEY CAN SOFTEN ORSHARPEN THE CLAIMS AND DEMANDOF THEIR FOLLOWERS, AS THEYCALCULATE THEIR OWN POLITICALRESOURCES IN DEALING WITHCOMPETING LEADERS.


MEDIATORS OF INTERNATIONALCONFLICTS: UN AND ITS AGENCIES INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE WTO INTERNATIONAL COURT OF

ARBITRATION INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR

SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENTDISPUTES (ICSID)


THREE FACES OF LEADERSHIP DEMAGOGUE MANAGER MEDIATOR

(ibid)


THE DEMAGOGUE LEADS THROUGH FEAR, THREATS, AND

INTIMIDATIONTURNS OPPONENTS INTO SCAPEGOATS

USES LIES AND PROPAGANDA TODEHUMANIZE THE OTHER

RESORTS TO VIOLENCE TO DOMINATE ORDESTROY THE OTHER

(ibid)


THE MANAGER OPERATES BASED ON AN EXCLUSIVE, LIMITED

DEFINITION OF "US"

DEFINES PURPOSE IN TERMS OF THE SELF-INTEREST OF HIS OR HER OWN GROUP

CANNOT OR WILL NOT DEAL WITH ISSUES,DECISIONS, OR CONFLICTS THAT CROSSBOUNDARIES AND IS PRODUCTIVE ANDEFFECTIVE ONLY ON HOME TURF

(ibid)


THE MANAGER OFTEN APPROACHES PROBLEMSFROM ONE JURISDICTION OR ORGANIZATION,WHEN WHAT IS REQUIRED IS AN APPROACHINVOLVING MANY JURISDICTION ANDORGANIZATION.

TURF BASED LEADERS ARE TRAINED TO THINK INTERMS OF A SEPARATE PROBLEM OR CAUSE,WHEN WHAT IS NEEDED IS AN INTEGRATEDVISION THAT DEALS WITH SYSTEMIC PROBLEMSAND CAUSES

MANAGERIAL LEADERS TEND TO BE INVOLVED INA SINGLE SECTOR, PROFESSION, OR NETWORKEVEN THOUGH DIVERSE COLLABORATIVEENDEAVORS SHOULD BE INVOLVED


THE CRITICAL LIMITATIONS OF MANAGER AS ALEADERSHIP MODEL HAS BECOME APPARENT. INBOTH THE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTORS, THEIRCAPACITY TO LEAD EFFECTIVELY STOPS WHEREDIFFERENCES BEGIN.

MANAGERS HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO STAY ON THEIROWN ETHNIC, CULTURAL, RELIGIOUS, BUREAUCRATIC,OR IDEOLOGICAL TURF. PROBLEMS THAT CROSSBOUNDARIES ARE SIMPLY BEYOND THEIR SCOPE.

SINCE MORE AND MORE LEADERSHIP CHALLENGESCUT ACROSS NUMEROUS BORDERS, THIS LIMITATIONOF THE MANAGER AS LEADER IS BECOMINGINCREASINGLY COSTLY.


THE MEDIATOR STRIVES TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE WHOLE,

NOT JUST A PART

THINKS SYSTEMICALLY AND IS COMMITTEDTO ONGOING LEARNING

BUILDS TRUST BY BUILDING BRIDGES ACROSSTHE DIVIDING LINES

SEEKS INNOVATION AND OPPORTUNITY INORDER TO TRANSFORM CONFLICT

(ibid)


THIS KIND OF LEADERSHIP WILL LEAD TOHARMONY RATHER THAN WAR, JUSTICERATHER THAN OPPRESSION, SUSTAINABILITYRATHER THAN DESTRUCTION, AND RESPECTRATHER THAN DISCRIMINATION.

IN OTHER WORDS, IT WILL LEAD TO A WORLDIN WHICH DIFFERENCES AND CONFLICTS ARERECOGNIZED AS PART OF THE NATURALORDER, AND ARE SEEN AS OPPORTUNITIESFOR LEARNING AND POSITIVETRANSFORMATION IN OUR RELATIONSHIP,ENTERPRISES AND INSTITUTIONS

(Ibid)


MANDELA:My hunger for freedom of my own peoplebecame a hunger for the freedom of allpeople…. I knew as well as I knew anything thatthe oppressor must be liberated just as surelyas the oppressed. A man who takes away[another] man’s freedom is a prisoner ofhatred, and is locked behind the bars of hisprejudice… both are robbed of their humanity.When I walked out of the prison, that was mymission: to liberate the oppressed and theoppressor both.

Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom(Boston : Back Bay Books, 1995)


NELSON MANDELA’S VISION SHIFTEDFROM BEING A CHAMPION FOR BLACKSOUTH AFRICAN’S, TO BEING ACHAMPION FOR ALL SOUTH AFRICANSREGARDLESS OF RACIAL OR TRIBALIDENTITY, TO BEING A CHAMPION FORCROSS-BOUNDARY HARMONYEVERYWHERE.

(Gerzon, 2006)


THIS MODEL OF LEADERSHIP IS ABLE TOTURN CONFLICT INTO A POSITIVE FORCE FORACHIEVING LARGE PURPOSES.

THIS KIND OF LEADER TRANSFORMSCONFLICT FROM A FORCE THAT CAN BEDESTRUCTIVE AND DIVISIVE INTO ONE THATIS HEALING AND CONNECTING.

SINCE HUMAN BEINGS URGENTLY NEED TOMAKE CONFLICT WORK FOR US RATHERTHAN AGAINST US, THOSE WHO CAN LEADTHROUGH CONFLICT HOLD THE KEY.

(Ibid)


THE NEED OF LEADERS WHO HAVESUCH VISION IS EVEN MORE URGENTPRECISELY BECAUSE “DEMOCRACY”AND THE FREE MARKET” ARE BASEDON CONFLICT.

(Ibid)


THE MEDIATORS’ TOOLS: Integral vision: committing ourselves to hold all

sides of the construct, in all their complexity, in ourminds-and in our hearts.

Systems thinking: identifying all (or as many aspossible) of the significant elements related to theconflict situation and understanding therelationships between these elements.

Presence: applying all our mental, emotional, andspiritual resources to witnessing the conflict ofwhich we are now a part.

(ibid)


Inquiry: asking questions that elicit essential informationabout the conflict that is vital to understanding how totransform it.

Conscious conversation: becoming aware of our full range ofchoices about how we speak and listen.

Dialogue: communicating in order to catalyze the humancapacity for bridging and innovation.

Bridging: building partnerships and alliances that cross theborders that divide an organization or a community or acountry.

Innovation: fostering social or entrepreneurial breakthroughsthat create new options for moving through conflicts.

(ibid)



NEGOTIATION IS CHALLENGING, COMPLEX,AND EXCITING, AND REQUIRES A MIXTUREOF KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, EXPERIENCE, ANDINTUITION.

(BENOLIEL AND HUA, 2009, P. 7)


HOWEVER, NEGOTIATING SUCCESSFULLYGOES BEYOND MASTERING TACTICS ANDSTRATEGIES. IT IS ALSO ABOUT: HAVING THE RIGHT ATTITUDE AND

MINDSET; DILIGENT IN YOUR PREPARATION AND

PLANNING; RESILIENT IN THE FACE OF MULTIPLE

CHALLENGES; CREATIVE BY INVENTING MUTUALLY

BENEFICIAL OPTIONS; AND READY TO WALK AWAY FROM POOR DEALS.

(Ibid, P. 7)


NEGOTIATION IS INCREASINGLYRECOGNIZED AS A CORECOMPETENCY.

NEGOTIATION IS A SKILL THAT YOUCAN LEARN AND DEVELOP THROUGHPRACTICE AND EXPERIENCE.

(Ibid, P. 8, 10)


BY FRAMING THE PROCESSCORRECTLY AND BY SEARCHING INADVANCE FOR CREATIVE OPTIONS,YOU WILL BE ABLE TO FINDSOLUTIONS THAT SATISFY THEINTERESTS OF ALL PARTIES.

YOUR SUCCESS IN A NEGOTIATIONDEPENDS LARGELY ON THE QUALITYOF YOUR PREPARATION.

(Ibid, P.8,14)


NEGOTIATOR NEEDS TO BE ABLETO: TOLERATE UNCERTAINTY, DEAL WITH UNEXPECTED

BEHAVIOR, TAKE MEASURED RISKS, ANDMAKE DECISIONS BASED ON

INCOMPLETE INFORMATION.(Ibid, P.11)


NEGOTIATOR NEEDS TO THINKABOUT SOLVING PROBLEMS ANDCREATING OPPORTUNITIES RATHERTHAN WINNING OR LOSING.

IF YOU ARE CONFRONTATIONAL,YOU ARE LIKELY TO HAVE A FIGHTON YOUR HANDS.

(Ibid, P.11)


TRUST IS AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENTOF SUCCESS IN ALL TYPES OFNEGOTIATION WHETHER BUSINESS,DIPLOMATIC, OR LEGAL.

THE ABILITY OF NEGOTIATORS TODEVELOP MUTUAL TRUST IS THEMOST IMPORTANT INGREDIENT OFSUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION, ANDTHAT WITHOUT IT, NEGOTIATIONSFAIL.

(Ibid, P. 36)GRIPS_2017 143www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

FAIRNESS IS AN IMPORTANTCHARACTERISTIC INNEGOTIATION.

(Ibid, P.38)


POWER IS A CENTRAL FACTOR INDETERMINING THE OUTCOMES OFTHE NEGOTIATION PROCESS.

HOWEVER, IT IS EQUALLY VITAL TOKNOW HOW TO NEGOTIATE WHENYOU DO NOT HAVE POWER.

(Ibid, P.42)


EVEN THE MOST POWERFUL PARTYWILL HAVE SOME WEAKNESSES, SOTRY TO DISCOVER THESE AND TARGETTHEM.

EVEN IF YOUR POSITION IS WEAKOVERALL, TRY TO IDENTIFY ANYAREAS OF STRENGTH YOU HAVE ANDUSE THEM AS LEVERAGE.

A SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION PROCESSREQUIRES EFFECTIVE PERSUASION.

(Ibid, P.44,50)



MEDIATION IS A STRUCTURED PROCESSIN WHICH AN IMPARTIAL THIRD PARTYFACILITATES THE RESOLUTION OF ACONFLICT BETWEEN TWO NEGOTIATINGPARTIES.

FOR MEDIATION TO BE SUCCESSFUL,THE PERSON SELECTED TO MEDIATE ADISPUTE MUST BE ACCEPTABLE TOBOTH OF THE PARTIES.

(BENOLIEL AND HUA, 2009, P. 88)


IF YOU ARE ASKED TO MEDIATE ADISPUTE, YOU NEED TO BE CERTAINTHAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO REMAINIMPARTIAL AND NOT LET YOURSELFGET SWEPT UP IN THE EMOTIONALSIDE OF WHAT IS TAKING PLACE.

(Ibid, P.88)


YOUR ROLE WILL REQUIRE YOU TOLOOK AT THE SITUATION FROMTHE PERSPECTIVE OF EACH OF THEDISPUTING PARTIES.

TO FIND AREAS OF COMMONGROUND BETWEEN THEM, ANDUSE THIS INFORMATION TO MAKESOME RECOMMENDATIONS THATWOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO BOTHPARTIES.

(Ibid, P.88)


WIN-WIN SOLUTION

ZERO SUM GAMEII

WINNER TAKES ALLGRIPS_2017 151www.slideshare.net/Ginandjar

PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE MEDIATION ENCOURAGE SELF-DETERMINATION. Ensure that the

disputing parties recognize their differences and know thattheir participation in the mediation process is voluntary andthey are free leave at any time.

REMAIN NEUTRAL. Ensure that you remain neutral and helpto facilitate the mediation process, rather than actively tryingto influence the outcomes of the conflict.

USE AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH. Try to understand theinterests of each of the disputing parties, and help themreach an integrative (win-win) resolution that they wouldboth find acceptable.

KEEP THE GOAL IN MIND Always remember that the aim ofmediation through integrative negotiation is not to achieveabsolute justice, but to develop options and find the mostworkable and satisfactory option.

(Ibid, P.89)


ii. the essence of leadership 2017

Leadership & Management